Post by tornado on Apr 16, 2013 13:19:18 GMT -5
Check out this link, the ASOS information is on the right side of the web page:
www.aviationweatherinc.com/ASOS.htm
Old data, but still pertinent!
JUST A FEW SIMPLE "ASOS" FACTS:
OUR ONLY PURPOSE IS TO INFORM AND EDUCATE. PERMISSION IS GRANTED TO PRINT FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY:
THE "ASOS" CONSISTS OF ELECTRONIC SENSORS, COMPUTERS AND A DISPLAY UNIT WHICH PROVIDES AVIATORS WITH LIMITED WEATHER INFORMATION FROM AN AIRPORT.
THE FAA HAS SCHEDULED THE IMMEDIATE REMOVAL OF ALL HUMAN WEATHER OBSERVERS ACROSS RURAL AMERICA, EVEN THOUGH "ASOS" AND ITS NEW SOFTWARE IS FLAWED. AVIATION SAFETY IS AT RISK AND YOU MUST CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE !!
WHY DID KENNEDY, JR. BELIEVE THE WEATHER WAS GOOD ENOUGH TO MAKE THE FLIGHT, IN THE FIRST PLACE ? READ ABOUT WHAT DR. BOB ARNOT, A WELL-KNOWN TELEVISION MEDICAL NEWS CORRESPONDENT AND PILOT OF 20 YEARS (HE WAS FLYING HIS OWN AIRCRAFT 15 TO 30 MINUTES AHEAD OF KENNEDY ON A SIMILAR ROUTE) HAD TO SAY TO THE "LADIES' HOME JOURNAL" MAGAZINE, AUGUST 2000 ISSUE.
THIS SO-CALLED "STAND ALONE' SYSTEM HAS REPLACED HUMAN 'WEATHER OBSERVERS' (METEOROLOGICAL TECHNICIANS) AT EVERY SINGLE LOCATION (AIRPORTS IN 42 STATES AND STILL COUNTING) WITHOUT ANY PUBLIC OR TAXPAYERS KNOWLEDGE. THE FLYING PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW ABOUT AVIATION SAFETY AND THE "ASOS" WEATHER COMPUTER-MACHINE.
THERE IS ONLY ONE "ASOS" UNIT IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA AT A GIVEN AIRPORT AND IT IS PERMANENTLY SITUATED TO BE THE "OFFICIAL" WEATHER FOR THAT AIRPORT (RUNWAY). IT SITS NEXT TO ONLY ONE OF THE MANY RUNWAYS ON THE FIELD AND RUNWAY CHANGES HAPPEN ALL THE TIME.
THIS "ASOS" MACHINE IS NOW LOCATED AT EVERY LOCAL, DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND IT COSTS THE TAXPAYERS $386,000 FOR EACH LOCATION.
ALSO, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS "ASOS" MACHINE COST THE US TAXPAYERS PLENTY OF MONEY DURING THE EARLY YEARS OF OVER $400 MILLION ALREADY. WE NEVER READ ABOUT IT IN THE NEWSPAPERS AND NO ONE (FLYING PUBLIC) REALLY KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT IT TODAY. THE POWERS THAT BE LIKE IT THAT WAY, TOO.
ALSO, FIND OUT WHICH ELECTED OFFICIAL ( STATE SENATOR AND HIS VERY RICH WIFE) OWNS 51 PERCENT CONTROLLING-INTEREST IN THE ACTUAL MANUFACTURER OF THE "ASOS" MACHINE. IS THIS HOW, IT REALLY GOT THROUGH CONGRESS, ONLY DAYS BEFORE THEY WENT ON VACATION, LAST YEAR ?
DID YOU KNOW, THAT IT CANNOT DETECT OVER 40 DIFFERENT WEATHER ELEMENTS AND PRESENTS A VERY REAL SAFETY OF FLIGHT HAZARD TO AVIATION OPS ?
BOTH THE FAA AND THE NWS ACCEPT SHARED RESPONSIBILITY IN COLLECTING SIGNIFICANT WEATHER INFORMATION THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES.
THE FAA'S OWN USERS MANUAL FULLY DOCUMENTS THAT THE "ASOS" CANNOT REPORT ALL HAZARDOUS WEATHER SITUATIONS LISTED AS THREATS TO PUBLIC SAFETY.
THE "ASOS" CANNOT REPORT, AT ALL: TORNADO, FUNNEL CLOUD, WATERSPOUT, HAIL, ICE CRYSTALS, SNOW GRAINS, ICE PELLETS, DRIZZLE, FREEZING DRIZZLE, VOLCANIC ASH, BLOWING OBSTRUCTIONS (SAND, DUST, SPRAY), SMOKE, SNOWFALL (ACCUMULATION RATE) AND SNOW DEPTH (6-HOURLY), HOURLY SNOW INCREASE (SNINCR) IN REMARKS, LIQUID EQUIVALENT OF SNOW ON THE GROUND, CLOUDS ABOVE 12,000 FEET, OPERATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT CLOUDS ABOVE 12,000 FEET IN MOUNTAINOUS AREAS, VIRGA (PRECIPITATION NOT REACHING THE GROUND), DISTANT PRECIPITATION IN MOUNTAINOUS AREAS, AND DISTANT CLOUDS OBSCURING MOUNTAINS, OPERATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT LOCAL VARIATION IN VISIBILITY, MINUTES OF SUNSHINE. THIS WAS TAKEN FROM THAT MANUAL, PAGE 59.
IT IS NOT -DESIGNED- TO REPORT CRITICAL AVIATION SAFETY WEATHER CONDITIONS SUCH AS SNOW DEPTH, THUNDERSTORMS, TORNADO, HAIL, CLOUDS ABOVER 12,000 FEET, CLOUD TYPES, DISTANT PRECIPITATION OR LIGHTNING, AND VARIATIONS IN VISIBILITY CRITICAL TO AVIATION OPERATIONS ON THE AIRPORT.
THE SURFACE VISIBILITY IS NOT ACCURATELY REPORTED, THE DETECTION OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF PRECIPITATION IS NOT ACCURATE, HEAVY SNOW IS NOT REPORTED DURING BLIZZARD CONDITIONS, RAIN IS REPORTED WHEN NONE IS OCCURRING AND TEMPERATURES ARE WELL BELOW FREEZING, HAZE IS REPORTED AS SNOW, DRIZZLE IS REPORTED AS HAZE, UNKNOWN PRECIPITATION IS REPORTED WHEN NONE IS OCCURRING, AND THE FREEZING RAIN SENSOR IS NOT RELIABLE, AT ALL.
COPY OF A LETTER TO CONGRESS FROM THE FAA, IN REFERENCE OF IMPORTANT INFORMATION TO THUNDERSTORM CAPABILITIES AND FREEZING RAIN (AT SELECTED SITES) SAYS, THAT THIS MUST BE AVAILABLE, AND NOT NECESSARILY WORKING. WHY IS THIS NOT EMPHASIZED SOMEWHERE ? WE, THE TAXPAYERS, WOULD HOPE THAT AFTER SPENDING OVER $400 MILLION DOLLARS, CONGRESS WOULD ENFORCE A GUARANTEE FROM THE FAA AND NWS THAT THESE CAPABILITIES WOULD WORK !!
LIGHTNING IS DETECTED BY USE OF 'ALDARS'. 'ALDARS' DETECTS LIGHTNING BY USING TRIANGULATION FROM THREE (3) SITES, NOT NECESSARILY INCLUDING THE SITE OF THE LIGHTNING. IN OTHER WORDS, THIS SO-CALLED "DETECTION" IS NOT GENERATED AT THE OBSERVATION POINT BUT FROM SATELLITE INFORMATION FROM THE THREE (3) 'ALDARS' SITES REMOTE FROM THE OBSERVATION.
THE NEW 'ASOS" 2.6 SOFTWARE IS SEVERELY LIMITED TO ONLY REPORTING CERTAIN SPECIAL CRITERIA LIKE 'GROUND TO CLOUD LIGHTNING'. ANY 'CLOUD TO CLOUD LIGHTNING' IS NOT REPORTED AS A THUNDERSTORM -- BECAUSE "ASOS" CANNOT DETECT IT AT ALL, YET THE FAA CLAIMS "ASOS" REPORTS THUNDERSTORMS.
THE "ASOS" WAS EVALUATED BY THE AIR FORCE OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION CENTER IN KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO FROM SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER 15, 1998 AT THREE (3) US AIRPORTS. THIS EVALUATION WAS ONLY CONCERNED WITH 'VISIBILITY' AND 'CLOUD HEIGHTS'. THE RESULTS OF THE EVALUATION ARE SHOCKING, BUT THE FAA PUT THE MOST FAVORABLE SPIN ON THE RESULTS.
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE 30-DAY EVALUATION PRIOR TO COMMISSIONING AN "ASOS" SYSTEM. THE 30-DAY EVALUATION WAS DONE REMOTELY THROUGH THE "ASOS" SELF-DIAGNOSTICS. NO LOCAL DOCUMENTATION IS ACCEPTED OR INCLUDED IN DETERMINING IF THE "ASOS" DOES INDEED TAKE CONSISTENT QUALITY OBSERVATIONS FOR THAT PARTICULAR SITE. IN THE "ASOS" SELF-DIAGNOSTICS, THREE (3) READINGS IN A ROW MUST BE MISSED BEFORE AN ERROR IS LOGGED. ALOT CAN HAPPEN IN THREE (3) READINGS DURING BAD WEATHER !!
PERTINENT IMPORTANT WEATHER INFORMATION WAS TOTALLY OMITTED OR NOT CONSIDERED IN THE "ASOS' REASSESSMENT THAT WAS CONDUCTED BY THE EXECUTIVE AGENCIES WITH THE ASSISTANCE FROM THE "ASOS" MANUFACTURER.
THE "ASOS" WORKS WHEN WEATHER CONDITIONS ARE GOOD, BUT ITS PERFORMANCE IS LESS THAN SATISFACTORY WHEN THE WEATHER IS POOR OR DETERIORATING VERY FAST OR RAPIDLY !!
WEATHER DATA COLLECTED IN 'GOOD WEATHER" IS EASY AND ROUTINE. BUT WEATHER DATA COLLECTED DURING "BAD WEATHER" MUST BE ACCURATE AND CURRENT, NO MATTER WHETHER THE ELECTRICITY OR DIRT IS BLOWN INTO THE 'ASOS' SENSORS. IF THE "ASOS" CANNOT PERFORM AS WELL OR BETTER THAN HUMAN OBSERVERS ON THE AIRPORT OR IN THE TOWER IN BAD WEATHER, IT IS UNSAFE TO 'STAND ALONE'. THE "ASOS" MUST BE ONLY USED, AS THE TOOL IT WAS INTENDED TO BE. BAD WEATHER IS WHEN WE NEED THIS INFORMATION MOST !!
EXTENSIVE RESEARCH OF GAO REPORTS HAS NOT RESULTED IN ANY REPORTS STATING THE "ASOS" HAS MET THE REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN GAO / AIMD-95-81.
THE "ASOS" IS A NEW AND UNPROVEN TECHNOLOGY WHICH HAS THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF SIGNIFICANT ERRORS DOCUMENTED SINCE AUGUST 28, 1996 AND CONGRESS WAS MISLEAD ABOUT THIS IMPORTANT INFORMATION, LAST YEAR, BEFORE THEY WENT ON VACATION !!.
THE FAA'S OWN 'ASOS" USERS MANUAL HAS MANY DEFICIENCIES WITH THE 'ASOS' SENSORS AND THE "ASOS" SYSTEM AS A WHOLE.
QUESTION: WHY WASN'T THERE AN 'INDEPENDENT BODY' TO CONDUCT A STUDY COMPARING "ASOS" AND HUMAN OBSERVATIONS, WITH A MAJOR FOCUS ON BAD WEATHER SITUATIONS ?
THE MAJORITY OF THE FAA'S OWN REASSESSMENT WAS CONDUCTED IN OVERWHELMINGLY GOOD WEATHER.
OF THE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF 'HOURS 'TESTED' ON THE 'ASOS' MACHINE, WHY WERE ONLY 35.7 TOTAL HOURS TESTED IN BAD WEATHER CONDITIONS ?
THE "ASOS" IS ONLY A GOOD TOOL AND SHOULD NOT 'STAND ALONE' ACCORDING TO AVIATION PROFESSIONALS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
THE FAA'S 'ASOS" USERS MANUAL SAYS, "ON-SITE OBSERVERS PROVIDE AN IMMEDIATE DATA CHECK AND OFTEN CATCH PROBLEMS BEFORE THE OBSERVATION IS TRANSMITTED."
HUMAN OBSERVERS WITHIN THE AVIATION COMMUNITY HAVE PROVIDED ACCURATE WEATHER OBSERVATIONS SINCE THE 'AIRPORTS' WERE CONSTRUCTED OVER 50 YEARS AGO.
www.aviationweatherinc.com/ASOS.htm
Old data, but still pertinent!
JUST A FEW SIMPLE "ASOS" FACTS:
OUR ONLY PURPOSE IS TO INFORM AND EDUCATE. PERMISSION IS GRANTED TO PRINT FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY:
THE "ASOS" CONSISTS OF ELECTRONIC SENSORS, COMPUTERS AND A DISPLAY UNIT WHICH PROVIDES AVIATORS WITH LIMITED WEATHER INFORMATION FROM AN AIRPORT.
THE FAA HAS SCHEDULED THE IMMEDIATE REMOVAL OF ALL HUMAN WEATHER OBSERVERS ACROSS RURAL AMERICA, EVEN THOUGH "ASOS" AND ITS NEW SOFTWARE IS FLAWED. AVIATION SAFETY IS AT RISK AND YOU MUST CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE !!
WHY DID KENNEDY, JR. BELIEVE THE WEATHER WAS GOOD ENOUGH TO MAKE THE FLIGHT, IN THE FIRST PLACE ? READ ABOUT WHAT DR. BOB ARNOT, A WELL-KNOWN TELEVISION MEDICAL NEWS CORRESPONDENT AND PILOT OF 20 YEARS (HE WAS FLYING HIS OWN AIRCRAFT 15 TO 30 MINUTES AHEAD OF KENNEDY ON A SIMILAR ROUTE) HAD TO SAY TO THE "LADIES' HOME JOURNAL" MAGAZINE, AUGUST 2000 ISSUE.
THIS SO-CALLED "STAND ALONE' SYSTEM HAS REPLACED HUMAN 'WEATHER OBSERVERS' (METEOROLOGICAL TECHNICIANS) AT EVERY SINGLE LOCATION (AIRPORTS IN 42 STATES AND STILL COUNTING) WITHOUT ANY PUBLIC OR TAXPAYERS KNOWLEDGE. THE FLYING PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW ABOUT AVIATION SAFETY AND THE "ASOS" WEATHER COMPUTER-MACHINE.
THERE IS ONLY ONE "ASOS" UNIT IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA AT A GIVEN AIRPORT AND IT IS PERMANENTLY SITUATED TO BE THE "OFFICIAL" WEATHER FOR THAT AIRPORT (RUNWAY). IT SITS NEXT TO ONLY ONE OF THE MANY RUNWAYS ON THE FIELD AND RUNWAY CHANGES HAPPEN ALL THE TIME.
THIS "ASOS" MACHINE IS NOW LOCATED AT EVERY LOCAL, DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND IT COSTS THE TAXPAYERS $386,000 FOR EACH LOCATION.
ALSO, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS "ASOS" MACHINE COST THE US TAXPAYERS PLENTY OF MONEY DURING THE EARLY YEARS OF OVER $400 MILLION ALREADY. WE NEVER READ ABOUT IT IN THE NEWSPAPERS AND NO ONE (FLYING PUBLIC) REALLY KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT IT TODAY. THE POWERS THAT BE LIKE IT THAT WAY, TOO.
ALSO, FIND OUT WHICH ELECTED OFFICIAL ( STATE SENATOR AND HIS VERY RICH WIFE) OWNS 51 PERCENT CONTROLLING-INTEREST IN THE ACTUAL MANUFACTURER OF THE "ASOS" MACHINE. IS THIS HOW, IT REALLY GOT THROUGH CONGRESS, ONLY DAYS BEFORE THEY WENT ON VACATION, LAST YEAR ?
DID YOU KNOW, THAT IT CANNOT DETECT OVER 40 DIFFERENT WEATHER ELEMENTS AND PRESENTS A VERY REAL SAFETY OF FLIGHT HAZARD TO AVIATION OPS ?
BOTH THE FAA AND THE NWS ACCEPT SHARED RESPONSIBILITY IN COLLECTING SIGNIFICANT WEATHER INFORMATION THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES.
THE FAA'S OWN USERS MANUAL FULLY DOCUMENTS THAT THE "ASOS" CANNOT REPORT ALL HAZARDOUS WEATHER SITUATIONS LISTED AS THREATS TO PUBLIC SAFETY.
THE "ASOS" CANNOT REPORT, AT ALL: TORNADO, FUNNEL CLOUD, WATERSPOUT, HAIL, ICE CRYSTALS, SNOW GRAINS, ICE PELLETS, DRIZZLE, FREEZING DRIZZLE, VOLCANIC ASH, BLOWING OBSTRUCTIONS (SAND, DUST, SPRAY), SMOKE, SNOWFALL (ACCUMULATION RATE) AND SNOW DEPTH (6-HOURLY), HOURLY SNOW INCREASE (SNINCR) IN REMARKS, LIQUID EQUIVALENT OF SNOW ON THE GROUND, CLOUDS ABOVE 12,000 FEET, OPERATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT CLOUDS ABOVE 12,000 FEET IN MOUNTAINOUS AREAS, VIRGA (PRECIPITATION NOT REACHING THE GROUND), DISTANT PRECIPITATION IN MOUNTAINOUS AREAS, AND DISTANT CLOUDS OBSCURING MOUNTAINS, OPERATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT LOCAL VARIATION IN VISIBILITY, MINUTES OF SUNSHINE. THIS WAS TAKEN FROM THAT MANUAL, PAGE 59.
IT IS NOT -DESIGNED- TO REPORT CRITICAL AVIATION SAFETY WEATHER CONDITIONS SUCH AS SNOW DEPTH, THUNDERSTORMS, TORNADO, HAIL, CLOUDS ABOVER 12,000 FEET, CLOUD TYPES, DISTANT PRECIPITATION OR LIGHTNING, AND VARIATIONS IN VISIBILITY CRITICAL TO AVIATION OPERATIONS ON THE AIRPORT.
THE SURFACE VISIBILITY IS NOT ACCURATELY REPORTED, THE DETECTION OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF PRECIPITATION IS NOT ACCURATE, HEAVY SNOW IS NOT REPORTED DURING BLIZZARD CONDITIONS, RAIN IS REPORTED WHEN NONE IS OCCURRING AND TEMPERATURES ARE WELL BELOW FREEZING, HAZE IS REPORTED AS SNOW, DRIZZLE IS REPORTED AS HAZE, UNKNOWN PRECIPITATION IS REPORTED WHEN NONE IS OCCURRING, AND THE FREEZING RAIN SENSOR IS NOT RELIABLE, AT ALL.
COPY OF A LETTER TO CONGRESS FROM THE FAA, IN REFERENCE OF IMPORTANT INFORMATION TO THUNDERSTORM CAPABILITIES AND FREEZING RAIN (AT SELECTED SITES) SAYS, THAT THIS MUST BE AVAILABLE, AND NOT NECESSARILY WORKING. WHY IS THIS NOT EMPHASIZED SOMEWHERE ? WE, THE TAXPAYERS, WOULD HOPE THAT AFTER SPENDING OVER $400 MILLION DOLLARS, CONGRESS WOULD ENFORCE A GUARANTEE FROM THE FAA AND NWS THAT THESE CAPABILITIES WOULD WORK !!
LIGHTNING IS DETECTED BY USE OF 'ALDARS'. 'ALDARS' DETECTS LIGHTNING BY USING TRIANGULATION FROM THREE (3) SITES, NOT NECESSARILY INCLUDING THE SITE OF THE LIGHTNING. IN OTHER WORDS, THIS SO-CALLED "DETECTION" IS NOT GENERATED AT THE OBSERVATION POINT BUT FROM SATELLITE INFORMATION FROM THE THREE (3) 'ALDARS' SITES REMOTE FROM THE OBSERVATION.
THE NEW 'ASOS" 2.6 SOFTWARE IS SEVERELY LIMITED TO ONLY REPORTING CERTAIN SPECIAL CRITERIA LIKE 'GROUND TO CLOUD LIGHTNING'. ANY 'CLOUD TO CLOUD LIGHTNING' IS NOT REPORTED AS A THUNDERSTORM -- BECAUSE "ASOS" CANNOT DETECT IT AT ALL, YET THE FAA CLAIMS "ASOS" REPORTS THUNDERSTORMS.
THE "ASOS" WAS EVALUATED BY THE AIR FORCE OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION CENTER IN KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO FROM SEPTEMBER 15, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER 15, 1998 AT THREE (3) US AIRPORTS. THIS EVALUATION WAS ONLY CONCERNED WITH 'VISIBILITY' AND 'CLOUD HEIGHTS'. THE RESULTS OF THE EVALUATION ARE SHOCKING, BUT THE FAA PUT THE MOST FAVORABLE SPIN ON THE RESULTS.
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE 30-DAY EVALUATION PRIOR TO COMMISSIONING AN "ASOS" SYSTEM. THE 30-DAY EVALUATION WAS DONE REMOTELY THROUGH THE "ASOS" SELF-DIAGNOSTICS. NO LOCAL DOCUMENTATION IS ACCEPTED OR INCLUDED IN DETERMINING IF THE "ASOS" DOES INDEED TAKE CONSISTENT QUALITY OBSERVATIONS FOR THAT PARTICULAR SITE. IN THE "ASOS" SELF-DIAGNOSTICS, THREE (3) READINGS IN A ROW MUST BE MISSED BEFORE AN ERROR IS LOGGED. ALOT CAN HAPPEN IN THREE (3) READINGS DURING BAD WEATHER !!
PERTINENT IMPORTANT WEATHER INFORMATION WAS TOTALLY OMITTED OR NOT CONSIDERED IN THE "ASOS' REASSESSMENT THAT WAS CONDUCTED BY THE EXECUTIVE AGENCIES WITH THE ASSISTANCE FROM THE "ASOS" MANUFACTURER.
THE "ASOS" WORKS WHEN WEATHER CONDITIONS ARE GOOD, BUT ITS PERFORMANCE IS LESS THAN SATISFACTORY WHEN THE WEATHER IS POOR OR DETERIORATING VERY FAST OR RAPIDLY !!
WEATHER DATA COLLECTED IN 'GOOD WEATHER" IS EASY AND ROUTINE. BUT WEATHER DATA COLLECTED DURING "BAD WEATHER" MUST BE ACCURATE AND CURRENT, NO MATTER WHETHER THE ELECTRICITY OR DIRT IS BLOWN INTO THE 'ASOS' SENSORS. IF THE "ASOS" CANNOT PERFORM AS WELL OR BETTER THAN HUMAN OBSERVERS ON THE AIRPORT OR IN THE TOWER IN BAD WEATHER, IT IS UNSAFE TO 'STAND ALONE'. THE "ASOS" MUST BE ONLY USED, AS THE TOOL IT WAS INTENDED TO BE. BAD WEATHER IS WHEN WE NEED THIS INFORMATION MOST !!
EXTENSIVE RESEARCH OF GAO REPORTS HAS NOT RESULTED IN ANY REPORTS STATING THE "ASOS" HAS MET THE REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN GAO / AIMD-95-81.
THE "ASOS" IS A NEW AND UNPROVEN TECHNOLOGY WHICH HAS THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF SIGNIFICANT ERRORS DOCUMENTED SINCE AUGUST 28, 1996 AND CONGRESS WAS MISLEAD ABOUT THIS IMPORTANT INFORMATION, LAST YEAR, BEFORE THEY WENT ON VACATION !!.
THE FAA'S OWN 'ASOS" USERS MANUAL HAS MANY DEFICIENCIES WITH THE 'ASOS' SENSORS AND THE "ASOS" SYSTEM AS A WHOLE.
QUESTION: WHY WASN'T THERE AN 'INDEPENDENT BODY' TO CONDUCT A STUDY COMPARING "ASOS" AND HUMAN OBSERVATIONS, WITH A MAJOR FOCUS ON BAD WEATHER SITUATIONS ?
THE MAJORITY OF THE FAA'S OWN REASSESSMENT WAS CONDUCTED IN OVERWHELMINGLY GOOD WEATHER.
OF THE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF 'HOURS 'TESTED' ON THE 'ASOS' MACHINE, WHY WERE ONLY 35.7 TOTAL HOURS TESTED IN BAD WEATHER CONDITIONS ?
THE "ASOS" IS ONLY A GOOD TOOL AND SHOULD NOT 'STAND ALONE' ACCORDING TO AVIATION PROFESSIONALS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
THE FAA'S 'ASOS" USERS MANUAL SAYS, "ON-SITE OBSERVERS PROVIDE AN IMMEDIATE DATA CHECK AND OFTEN CATCH PROBLEMS BEFORE THE OBSERVATION IS TRANSMITTED."
HUMAN OBSERVERS WITHIN THE AVIATION COMMUNITY HAVE PROVIDED ACCURATE WEATHER OBSERVATIONS SINCE THE 'AIRPORTS' WERE CONSTRUCTED OVER 50 YEARS AGO.