In some kind of legal proceeding, you might use the reports from FSS or
DUAT to substantiate that the weather is/was what you say, but it's the
actual weather conditions that determine whether your flying is legal.

I agree, and I believe that is the point. I am told the reasons are
anecdotal. Bear in mind that I am passing the standing of the instructors
of my flight school.

Lawyers and pilot advocates look at how the FAA rules and how the FAA
interprets the regulations for those rules.

Based on the history of FAA rulings (the sole interpreter and judge of such
rules, similar to the FCC in authority) lawyers determine that the FAA does
in fact consider the regulation to mean that a pilot is required to check
with FSS or DUATS, give a tail number and use that interaction as proof in a
legal proceeding.

a random example I made up off the top of my head;

You land VFR in less than 3 miles visibility. This alerts an FAA
representative and he spot checks you for an IFR ticket.
You have none. The only recourse you have is the FAA's weather reporting
stations and did you check it.
The local news forecast is of no use because you can't prove you checked it
and it has no legal bearing on the situation even if you could prove it.

So the wording may no be there but that is cold comfort when you have your
license suspended with no recourse.

--
Dave A
Aging Student Pilot

-I can gather all the news I need
on the weather report-
"Dave Butler" wrote in message
news:1117119150.93476@sj-nntpcache-5...
Dave A. wrote:

It is only the FSS or DUATS weather report for that time that determines
if you are legally allowed to be flying based on your restrictions,
whatever they may be.

I'd say it's the fact of the actual weather at the time and place that you
are flying that determines whether you are legally allowed to be flying,
regardless of what FSS or DUAT says.



Dave