AWOS on Internet

[Skyking]

Pretty cool site. Try it, you'll like it!

http://www1.faa.gov/asos/map/map.htm

Skyking

[John Harper]

They've made an idiosyncratic choice of which airports to
include. They don't include Palo Alto, but they do include
KOYO, whatever that is (not a public use airplane airport,
for sure, and not on the SFO sectional). They include a
handful of non-towered airports, e.g. Columbia, but by
no means all.

Odd.

John

"Skyking" > wrote in message
om...
> Pretty cool site. Try it, you'll like it!
>
> http://www1.faa.gov/asos/map/map.htm
>
> Skyking

[Paul]

http://adds.aviationweather.noaa.gov/projects/adds/metars/index.php

Try this for AWOS

Paul
NC2273H



"

[Skyking]

"Paul" > wrote in message >...
> http://adds.aviationweather.noaa.gov/projects/adds/metars/index.php
>
> Try this for AWOS
>
> Paul
> NC2273H
>
I did and never got any AWOS information.

Thanks anyway,

Skyking

[Skyking]

"John Harper" > wrote in message news:<1072116972.528818@sj-nntpcache-5>...
> They've made an idiosyncratic choice of which airports to
> include. They don't include Palo Alto,

Apparently PAO has ATIS and not AWOS.

but they do include
> KOYO, whatever that is (not a public use airplane airport,
> for sure, and not on the SFO sectional).

Yeah, that's on the map but not in the list.

They include a
> handful of non-towered airports, e.g. Columbia, but by
> no means all.
>
Hey, this is a government thing but it's better than nothing.
Maybe if you search, you can find a place to complain.
If you look at the list, not all of the AWOS sites can be accessed
online.

Oh well,

Skyking

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "John Harper" > said:
>include. They don't include Palo Alto, but they do include
>KOYO, whatever that is (not a public use airplane airport,
>for sure, and not on the SFO sectional). They include a

They've got a bad habit of sticking a "K" on the front of all identifiers
when they plot it on the map. KO70 on the map is really O70 (Jackson). I
can't figure out what K0Y0 on the map is - the only airport that looks
even close to that on AirNav is 069, Petaluma.


--
"The magic of usenet has never been its technology; and, only in part, its
reach. Its magic -- its power -- is based on the very real human connections
that form 'round its threads of conversation... the relationships that are
kindled, flamed and, on occasion, extinguished and mourned." -deCadmus

[Skyking]

(Paul Tomblin) wrote in message >...
> In a previous article, "John Harper" > said:
> >include. They don't include Palo Alto, but they do include
> >KOYO, whatever that is (not a public use airplane airport,
> >for sure, and not on the SFO sectional). They include a
>
> They've got a bad habit of sticking a "K" on the front of all identifiers
> when they plot it on the map. KO70 on the map is really O70 (Jackson). \

I believe that the "K" is only supposed to be used for International
Airports. I wonder how the good old USA got a "K" when Canada got a "C"
and Great Britain got a "G"? When we stay within our boundries, we don't
need a letter to tell us that we are navigating within our own country.

Merry Christmas,

Skyking

[Bill Denton]

As a quick rule of thumb, you append the "K" only to airports, and only to
those whose identifiers contain only letters (no numbers).


"Skyking" > wrote in message
om...
> (Paul Tomblin) wrote in message
>...
> > In a previous article, "John Harper" > said:
> > >include. They don't include Palo Alto, but they do include
> > >KOYO, whatever that is (not a public use airplane airport,
> > >for sure, and not on the SFO sectional). They include a
> >
> > They've got a bad habit of sticking a "K" on the front of all
identifiers
> > when they plot it on the map. KO70 on the map is really O70 (Jackson).
\
>
> I believe that the "K" is only supposed to be used for International
> Airports. I wonder how the good old USA got a "K" when Canada got a "C"
> and Great Britain got a "G"? When we stay within our boundries, we don't
> need a letter to tell us that we are navigating within our own country.
>
> Merry Christmas,
>
> Skyking

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Bill Denton" > said:
>As a quick rule of thumb, you append the "K" only to airports, and only to
>those whose identifiers contain only letters (no numbers).

And only in the lower 48. Alaska and Hawaii (and US territories) don't
have an easy rule like that, but the ICAO ids for those airports start
with a P.

Theoretically only airports that produce weather reports or forecasts, or
that are airports of entry have ICAO ids[1], but in practice GPS
manufacturers (and my waypoint generators on http://navaid.com) do as you
say, and put a K on any airport id in the lower 48 that doesn't have
digits in it.

[1] A lot of airports had to change id to not have any numbers in the id
when we went to METAR/TAF for that reason, and also even now when an
airport gets an AWOS, if it had digits in the ID it will change id. Wings
Field near Philadelphia did that a few years ago.

--
"The magic of usenet has never been its technology; and, only in part, its
reach. Its magic -- its power -- is based on the very real human connections
that form 'round its threads of conversation... the relationships that are
kindled, flamed and, on occasion, extinguished and mourned." -deCadmus

[Kevin Darling]

(Skyking) wrote in message >...
> I believe that the "K" is only supposed to be used for International
> Airports. I wonder how the good old USA got a "K" when Canada got a "C"
> and Great Britain got a "G"? When we stay within our boundries, we don't
> need a letter to tell us that we are navigating within our own country.

The USA (and most countries) got an ICAO airport letter to match that
country's main ITU radio callsign prefix. Since Kxx is allocated for
USA radios, our airports got the "K".

Kevin

[John Harper]

And Britain didn't get G. British airports start with "EG" (not quite
the same thing) and there is no correspondence between IATA
codes (e.g. LHR) and ICAO codes (EGLL). In fact whoever
coded the UK airports seems to have been on the booze. My
favourite... everybody knows that Gatwick is London's second
airport, I guess. So EGGW is... that's right, Luton, until recently
an obscure cargo/charter airport to the north of London (and now
Easyjet's main hub). Gatwick is of course EGKK... obvious,
innit.

The "E" prefix seems to be for north-western Europe, while "L"
is south-eastern... Germany is ED, while France is LF.

I guess things must get slow at ICAO Global HQ.

John

"Kevin Darling" > wrote in message
om...
> (Skyking) wrote in message
>...
> > I believe that the "K" is only supposed to be used for International
> > Airports. I wonder how the good old USA got a "K" when Canada got a "C"
> > and Great Britain got a "G"? When we stay within our boundries, we
don't
> > need a letter to tell us that we are navigating within our own country.
>
> The USA (and most countries) got an ICAO airport letter to match that
> country's main ITU radio callsign prefix. Since Kxx is allocated for
> USA radios, our airports got the "K".
>
> Kevin

[Ron Natalie]

"Skyking" > wrote in message om...

>
> I believe that the "K" is only supposed to be used for International
> Airports.

Not exactly correct. The K prefix is the way US airports are expressed
in the ICAO format. Not all US airports qualify, mut it's not just those that
are international. In order to make things "METAR" compliant, the FAA
went around and reidented everybody who reported surface observations
to the ICAO-compliant format.

> I wonder how the good old USA got a "K" when Canada got a "C"
> and Great Britain got a "G"?

In international radio the US gets K, W, N, and AA-AL. The A and N
date back to the Army and Navy original uses. I'm not sure how we got
K and W. The British and the former parts of the British Empire split
the G's and V's (except Canada gets C's as well).