Narrative:

At 44J a preflight WX check, dab radar, pie-FSS, phone to ism- FBO 'dab 8000 ft broken -10. Ism 100 ft scattered improving.' depart 44J XA55 on climb to 2500 ft tune ism- AWOS-3 128.775. Report after XA00 local 'no clouds below 12000 ft.' encountered low broken to overcast 10 mins after takeoff - - ism-AWOS-3 no change. On vector to destination orl approach 'ism 12 O'clock position 8 mi, descend VFR to pattern altitude -- report the field in sight.' when directly over ism-NDB flight conditions were a solid undercast, tops at 1300 ft, bases below IFR minimums -- AWOS unchanged. Check for VFR airport in area -- none available from tampa to melbourne. I was forced to abandon my plans and return to 44J. This AWOS error could have caused a serious fuel problem for a long range flight arriving with minimum required fuel remaining. I fly to ism weekly. More often than not, the AWOS information is different from instructions on ism-unicom 122.72. I have often called for the landing runway and was given 'runway 15 ism' (apparently the runway preferred by management) at times when AWOS has reported surface winds up to 90 degrees different. I am told that the airport management will not permit a runway change to be reported unless the wind velocity increases 10 mph. Under these conditions with unicom landing runway 15 when wind was 130 degrees/10 KTS, would not change to runway 06 if the wind increased to 060 degrees/19 KTS. This produces a 19 mph crosswind component for my aircraft with a maximum crosswind landing component of 17 mph if I follow unicom reported instructions. I have seen aircraft departing and landing on intersecting runways under these conditions. There are many student flight training activities at this airport using cessna 150, 152, 172 aircraft. Solo flight by a low time student under these conditions could be very dangerous. The purpose of AWOS is to report airport flight conditions accurately. The unicom information should report the best possible flight operations -- not those superseded by management policy to the detriment of flight safety. Ism management should be required to monitor AWOS-3 reports and unicom policy should be revised to maximize flight safety procedures at all times.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PA28 USING AWOS VFR OBSERVATION ENRTE ISM FOUND ACTUAL CONDITIONS BELOW IFR LNDG MINIMUMS AND HAD TO RETURN TO 44J. FORECAST WAS FOR VFR CONDITIONS WITH CEILING ABOVE 10000 FT. CONTINUING PROB.

Narrative: AT 44J A PREFLT WX CHK, DAB RADAR, PIE-FSS, PHONE TO ISM- FBO 'DAB 8000 FT BROKEN -10. ISM 100 FT SCATTERED IMPROVING.' DEPART 44J XA55 ON CLB TO 2500 FT TUNE ISM- AWOS-3 128.775. RPT AFTER XA00 LCL 'NO CLOUDS BELOW 12000 FT.' ENCOUNTERED LOW BROKEN TO OVCST 10 MINS AFTER TKOF - - ISM-AWOS-3 NO CHANGE. ON VECTOR TO DEST ORL APCH 'ISM 12 O'CLOCK POS 8 MI, DSND VFR TO PATTERN ALT -- RPT THE FIELD IN SIGHT.' WHEN DIRECTLY OVER ISM-NDB FLT CONDITIONS WERE A SOLID UNDERCAST, TOPS AT 1300 FT, BASES BELOW IFR MINIMUMS -- AWOS UNCHANGED. CHK FOR VFR ARPT IN AREA -- NONE AVAILABLE FROM TAMPA TO MELBOURNE. I WAS FORCED TO ABANDON MY PLANS AND RETURN TO 44J. THIS AWOS ERROR COULD HAVE CAUSED A SERIOUS FUEL PROB FOR A LONG RANGE FLT ARRIVING WITH MINIMUM REQUIRED FUEL REMAINING. I FLY TO ISM WEEKLY. MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, THE AWOS INFO IS DIFFERENT FROM INSTRUCTIONS ON ISM-UNICOM 122.72. I HAVE OFTEN CALLED FOR THE LNDG RWY AND WAS GIVEN 'RWY 15 ISM' (APPARENTLY THE RWY PREFERRED BY MGMNT) AT TIMES WHEN AWOS HAS RPTED SURFACE WINDS UP TO 90 DEGS DIFFERENT. I AM TOLD THAT THE ARPT MGMNT WILL NOT PERMIT A RWY CHANGE TO BE RPTED UNLESS THE WIND VELOCITY INCREASES 10 MPH. UNDER THESE CONDITIONS WITH UNICOM LNDG RWY 15 WHEN WIND WAS 130 DEGS/10 KTS, WOULD NOT CHANGE TO RWY 06 IF THE WIND INCREASED TO 060 DEGS/19 KTS. THIS PRODUCES A 19 MPH XWIND COMPONENT FOR MY ACFT WITH A MAX XWIND LNDG COMPONENT OF 17 MPH IF I FOLLOW UNICOM RPTED INSTRUCTIONS. I HAVE SEEN ACFT DEPARTING AND LNDG ON INTERSECTING RWYS UNDER THESE CONDITIONS. THERE ARE MANY STUDENT FLT TRAINING ACTIVITIES AT THIS ARPT USING CESSNA 150, 152, 172 ACFT. SOLO FLT BY A LOW TIME STUDENT UNDER THESE CONDITIONS COULD BE VERY DANGEROUS. THE PURPOSE OF AWOS IS TO RPT ARPT FLT CONDITIONS ACCURATELY. THE UNICOM INFO SHOULD RPT THE BEST POSSIBLE FLT OPS -- NOT THOSE SUPERSEDED BY MGMNT POLICY TO THE DETRIMENT OF FLT SAFETY. ISM MGMNT SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO MONITOR AWOS-3 RPTS AND UNICOM POLICY SHOULD BE REVISED TO MAXIMIZE FLT SAFETY PROCS AT ALL TIMES.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.