How does Windy treat that?
There should be a “big L” on windy screen toward your destination
Not always for local winds, if you are flying midday along the beach and the wind is from the left then the sea is on the…? no need to be vigilant just enjoy the sea breeze 
Mooney_Driver wrote:
When I do aviation teaching in my field (teaching meteorologists about flying for their briefing qualifications) or anyone else about meteorology, the “I don’t need to know that” mantra is one I react to quite abrubtly. Even after 20 years of meteo and almost 40 in aviation I have found that “too much knowledge” is something which does not exist.
Who has not understood that will always be doing symptom chasing rather than understanding why things are happening the way they do.
The aviation world is certainly not free from symptoms of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Yes you are flying from a big “H” to a big “L” and that’s fine as long as you know what it means for the safety of your flight.
@aquila
I was introduced to Orbifly by a pleasant French gentleman on Belle Ile. https://www.orbifly.com/member/metmap.php
I find it useful for on the day weather information. It correlates local METAR and TAF reports and presents them in three hour intervals up to 12 hours henceforth.
So if planning to depart Lydd (EGMD the last UK out post for Immigration/Customs) to Carcassonne (LFMK) today 03022022 at 13.00 one might chose the eastern route in red, thus avoiding the poor weather west of the Massif Central. Ones alternates, green dots, ringed in red. Also plenty of green dot options on route.
Just another tool to add to the above list.
METAR
TAF 3hr
TAF 6hr
@ Mooney_driver I would be interested in an English version of Karls’s book.
Sitting here looking out of the window, that is probably pretty accurate for western France, as far as it goes.
Airborne_Again wrote:
The aviation world is certainly not free from symptoms of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
I don’t know if that does it justice. I think particularly in aviation there is a lot of misgivings about the theoretical exams because some of them really are overloaded with insignificant stuff and because for many practically inclined people, they represent by their sheer mass of material a massive hurdle towards the goal of flying.
Consequently, lots of ATO’s promote “teaching to the test” with binge learning and forgetting after. In some subjects there may be not that much damage to it, in others however, it prevents proper introduction. It also depends a lot who teaches a subject. Many of us recall subjects in school which you hated, not because of the subject per se but of who taught it and how. The same goes for aviation.
I was lucky to get taught meteorology really by people who knew, even then. But even more so that my introduction to the professional side of things was done by no other than Karl Heinz Hack himself on his last assignment before retiring. Before that, I had another very capable met teacher, a guy whose day job was at CERN and who taught high level meteorology at Crossair. (I also was lucky to do navigation with the one and only Harry Hoffmann, which I regard as the highest privilege).
People like that won’t teach to the test even though they know what tests require and will make sure you do that. But they will make sure you know why you need this stuff too. And therein lies the difference to people who think once they have had the test they can forget about all that.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
People like that won’t teach to the test even though they know what tests require and will make sure you do that. But they will make sure you know why you need this stuff too.
Couldn’t agree more – that’s the sign of a good teacher – someone that teaches what you need to know while also inspiring you to learn more. Imagine what our world would be like if all teachers were like this…
Mooney_Driver wrote:
I think particularly in aviation there is a lot of misgivings about the theoretical exams because some of them really are overloaded with insignificant stuff and because for many practically inclined people, they represent by their sheer mass of material a massive hurdle towards the goal of flying.
You’re right of course, but we have also seen here that people who object to PBN training frequently don’t even know what that training actually includes. I.e. they don’t know what they don’t know about PBN.
eurogaguest1980 wrote:
Couldn’t agree more – that’s the sign of a good teacher – someone that teaches what you need to know while also inspiring you to learn more. Imagine what our world would be like if all teachers were like this…
It’s not only that unfortunately but also the way that a lot of theory courses are set up to get the applicants to the exam in record time and most preparation is learning answers to questions by heart. From a pedagogical point of view that is horrible. And with distance learning and only very few short sessions to drill the applicants to know the questions, you can have the best of teachers but if you don’t give them time to teach, what can they do.
This kind of “learning” system was quite adequately described by Tom Sharpe (RIP) in his novel “Vintage Stuff” where an applicant is drilled to his O levels by a former teacher turned dog trainer, involving chok drops, situps and taped questions for the dislectic. Apart from occasional barks during the exams this method appears to have achieved it’s result but did not really result in the graduates being fit for anything much but apportation of sticks and, if anatomically possible, tail wagging.
Airborne_Again wrote:
You’re right of course, but we have also seen here that people who object to PBN training frequently don’t even know what that training actually includes. I.e. they don’t know what they don’t know about PBN.
There is a certain amount of resistance whenever something new came up. Think of Language proficiency, where many applicants were blissfully unaware of how good their skills really are and vigorously defended their “one wall free” English… PBN is no different. I suppose the way to teach that would be to take someone along on a flight and show them. By then they’ll probably want it so badly they don’t care how much they have to digest to get it.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
What is even more depressing is that some people won’t get the GAFOR information because in the case of Germany or Switzerland it is only available via a paywall
Unless we are talking about something different than DWD GAFOR this is not true for Germany.
