A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

KSFO ATIS: "FG IN GAP W"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 19th 04, 08:24 PM
David Ziemba
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default KSFO ATIS: "FG IN GAP W"

During the summer months, during which the stratus sits off the
Northern California coast threatening to move inland, the KSFO ATIS
frequently contains a comment that reads "FG IN GAP W". Via empirical
observation, I'm assuming that this means that there's fog in the gap
between the hills due west of the airport, south of Mt. San Bruno and
north of the coast range.

I wonder if anyone knows or has a guess regarding why this is mentioned
in the KSFO ATIS. I have two guesses:

First, on the CUIT2 departure, there is a "NOTE: Mt. San Bruno weather
information available on 118.05," and "NOTE: For use by Runways 28L/R
departures when weather conditions permit. Jets 2000' ceiling and three
miles prevailing visibility with five miles to the west and northwest."
This would indicate to me that the CUIT2 may be ill-advised when that
comment exists in the ATIS.

Or, I wonder if this is mentioned just to indicate that VFR traffic
might have some trouble transiting the class B, especially at low
altitudes.

Does anyone know or have other guesses?

- david z.

  #2  
Old July 19th 04, 08:31 PM
Dave Butler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

David Ziemba wrote:
During the summer months, during which the stratus sits off the
Northern California coast threatening to move inland, the KSFO ATIS
frequently contains a comment that reads "FG IN GAP W". Via empirical
observation, I'm assuming that this means that there's fog in the gap
between the hills due west of the airport, south of Mt. San Bruno and
north of the coast range.

I wonder if anyone knows or has a guess regarding why this is mentioned
in the KSFO ATIS. I have two guesses:

First, on the CUIT2 departure, there is a "NOTE: Mt. San Bruno weather
information available on 118.05," and "NOTE: For use by Runways 28L/R
departures when weather conditions permit. Jets 2000' ceiling and three
miles prevailing visibility with five miles to the west and northwest."
This would indicate to me that the CUIT2 may be ill-advised when that
comment exists in the ATIS.

Or, I wonder if this is mentioned just to indicate that VFR traffic
might have some trouble transiting the class B, especially at low
altitudes.

Does anyone know or have other guesses?


Why do you need a special reason? The ATIS reports on the weather. The
phenomenon they are reporting is weather. I don't see that as any different from
what I see around here frequently in the summertime: "towering cu all
quadrants". They report it "because it's there", and it's their job.

Dave

  #3  
Old July 19th 04, 09:06 PM
David Ziemba
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Dave Butler wrote:
David Ziemba wrote:
During the summer months, during which the stratus sits off the
Northern California coast threatening to move inland, the KSFO ATIS
frequently contains a comment that reads "FG IN GAP W". Via empirical
observation, I'm assuming that this means that there's fog in the gap
between the hills due west of the airport, south of Mt. San Bruno and
north of the coast range.

I wonder if anyone knows or has a guess regarding why this is mentioned
in the KSFO ATIS. I have two guesses:

First, on the CUIT2 departure, there is a "NOTE: Mt. San Bruno weather
information available on 118.05," and "NOTE: For use by Runways 28L/R
departures when weather conditions permit. Jets 2000' ceiling and three
miles prevailing visibility with five miles to the west and northwest."
This would indicate to me that the CUIT2 may be ill-advised when that
comment exists in the ATIS.

Or, I wonder if this is mentioned just to indicate that VFR traffic
might have some trouble transiting the class B, especially at low
altitudes.

Does anyone know or have other guesses?


Why do you need a special reason? The ATIS reports on the weather. The
phenomenon they are reporting is weather. I don't see that as any different from
what I see around here frequently in the summertime: "towering cu all
quadrants". They report it "because it's there", and it's their job.


Interesting point, but I see a significant difference between your
example and my question. As an IFR pilot who's adhering to minimum
altitude restrictions, I'd be far more concerned about towering CU
than about fog/stratus (unless the latter were directly over my
departure or destination field, of course .

- david z.

  #4  
Old July 20th 04, 02:13 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

SFO has included that in their ATIS since the Wright Bros started flying.
The gap has been of varying importance over the years for airline
departures and emergency procedures. Because of the unique topography at
the airport, the weather at the gap, when obscured, with the airport being
clear, is considered a significant local condition.

David Ziemba wrote:

During the summer months, during which the stratus sits off the
Northern California coast threatening to move inland, the KSFO ATIS
frequently contains a comment that reads "FG IN GAP W". Via empirical
observation, I'm assuming that this means that there's fog in the gap
between the hills due west of the airport, south of Mt. San Bruno and
north of the coast range.

I wonder if anyone knows or has a guess regarding why this is mentioned
in the KSFO ATIS. I have two guesses:

First, on the CUIT2 departure, there is a "NOTE: Mt. San Bruno weather
information available on 118.05," and "NOTE: For use by Runways 28L/R
departures when weather conditions permit. Jets 2000' ceiling and three
miles prevailing visibility with five miles to the west and northwest."
This would indicate to me that the CUIT2 may be ill-advised when that
comment exists in the ATIS.

Or, I wonder if this is mentioned just to indicate that VFR traffic
might have some trouble transiting the class B, especially at low
altitudes.

Does anyone know or have other guesses?

- david z.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Going for the Visual" O. Sami Saydjari Instrument Flight Rules 101 May 18th 04 05:08 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.