"Jon O'Rourke" wrote in message
...
"Phil Layton" wrote in message
...
We were doing quite well this morning with a steady flow rate matching
the actual landing rate. However this afternoon we had to change runways
twice as the front just nudged enough E to bring us 'Westerlies' for an
hour. This can be seen from the METARs:
EGLL 081750Z 12009KT 9999 FEW033 BKN044 07/06 Q0967
EGLL 081720Z 11006KT 080V150 9999 BKN042 08/06 Q0966
EGLL 081650Z 12006KT 090V230 9999 FEW034 BKN042 09/06 Q0966
EGLL 081620Z 22006KT 190V280 9999 FEW021 SCT034 09/05 Q0966
EGLL 081550Z 21007KT 9999 FEW034 SCT041 09/05 Q0966
EGLL 081520Z 15008KT 9999 FEW026 SCT036 09/06 Q0965
EGLL 081450Z 15009KT 9999 FEW009 SCT018 BKN030 08/06 Q0965
EGLL 081420Z 13012KT 9999 FEW010 SCT017 BKN025 08/06 Q0965
EGLL 081350Z 13012KT 9999 FEW009 BKN015 07/05 Q0965 TEMPO BKN012
Holding delays went up as a result.

Not predicted on the TAF, Jon, but I guess it might have deserved a
Prob10 in the days we used to have them!

Phil

Not guilty m'lord on this occasion !

From a TAF perspective it all depends on the the extent of the change in
terms of degrees and also the speed before and after the change. However,
in this case it a change to 130° to 210° would be valid in the TAF as it
was a swing of 60° or more

Correction :-

That should read from rather than to, i.e. "However, in this case it a
change *from* 130° to 210° would be valid in the TAF as it was a
swing of 60°"

Jon.