"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:GJhof.1362$Jr1.200@trnddc01...
Gary Drescher wrote:

So according to the AIM, forecast icing is not tantamount to known icing.
Rather, only a PIREP of icing (or a pilot's own observation in flight)
constitutes known icing.

Here's the punch line from one of Yodice's columns in AOPA Pilot. Emphasis
added.

"The NTSB precedents are clear. Relevant pireps *and forecasts* constitute
'known icing conditions' into which a flight is prohibited unless the
aircraft is specifically certificated by the FAA for flight into known
icing conditions."

Right, but the NTSB precedents cited are not recent (some are more than
thirty years old), whereas the FAA's current definition of "known icing
conditions"--which I quoted from the latest AIM--explicitly contradicts
those precedents.

--Gary