Contact Approach

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:43:21 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

EPM has had an AWOS-A for some time now. Why would one be installed at a
field where manual weather observations are being taken? The observers
would still have to determine visibility, cloud cover, temperature,
dewpoint, and wind.

Not being a mindreader, I cannot answer your question about "why"?

Nor do I know when the AWOS was installed, or how that correlates with
"manual weather observations".

However, as one who frequently flies SIAP's into KEPM, I find it quite
useful to have a current altimeter setting, so as to take advantage of the
lower minimums compared with using an altimeter setting from KBHB.

As I previously wrote, when manual observations were being done, the
frequency with which they were disseminated was perhaps one every few
weeks. This was not very useful to me for routine operations.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...

Not being a mindreader, I cannot answer your question about "why"?


No need to. It was a rhetorical question.



Nor do I know when the AWOS was installed, or how that correlates with
"manual weather observations".


The AWOS-A would be redundant and thus a waste of money as the altimeter
setting is part of a manual weather observation.



As I previously wrote, when manual observations were being done, the
frequency with which they were disseminated was perhaps one every few
weeks. This was not very useful to me for routine operations.


A preponderance of evidence indicates certified weather observations were
never taken at EPM.

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 16:13:05 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

A preponderance of evidence indicates certified weather observations were
never taken at EPM.

Incorrect.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...

Incorrect.


How is it incorrect? There is no indication that certified weather
observations were taken at EPM anywhere one would expect such an indication
to be found.

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 21:58:05 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
.. .

Incorrect.


How is it incorrect? There is no indication that certified weather
observations were taken at EPM anywhere one would expect such an indication
to be found.


Yes, there is. Finding it I will as an exercise for you.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...

Yes, there is. Finding it I will as an exercise for you.


I've already completed that exercise.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 06:15:58 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
.. .

Yes, there is. Finding it I will as an exercise for you.


I've already completed that exercise.


Well then, all I can say is that the design of your exercise was obviously
inadequate.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)