Corky Scott wrote:

Jim, to me this is kind of the point regarding this subject and the
FAA's insistance on it being a part of the written examination. How
does knowing this information help the average pilot in his task of
flying safely from one point to another.

I agree the lapse rate stuff and implications for stability/instability
aren't of much practical value while flying. The main things are being
able to look at the sky and make some assessment of whether flying is a
good idea, and knowing what aspects of meteorological data might
warrant alarm. For example:

o Lenticulars over the mountains = won't be flying in the mountains
today (high winds).
o Smog over Denver = inversion, might be some bumps at the inversion
but no reason not to go flying.
o Temperature-dewpoint spread dropping toward zero = uh-oh, fog might
form. Don't stray too far.
o Low clouds forming east of the Rockies = upslope, bad weather moving
in. Maybe IMC soon.

Most pilots know these things, which I think are more important for
safe flying than some of the more esoteric aspects of atmospheric
science. And layman-level understanding of local meteorological warning
signs (I've given a few for the Denver area above) is really money in
the bank.

Jim Rosinski