1

IWXXM implementation feedbackICAO Meteorological Information Exchange Model (IWXXM) Implementation Workshop

Paris, France, 05–06 November 2019Ján Kőrösi, Boris Burger, Ján Osuský

2

● The IWXXM 3.0 solves issues found in previous versions:○ NSC, NCD, //////, SIGMET vertical extent level definition, VA/TC SIGMET

multilocation, point base location SIGMET, …● The TT-AvXML working on following issues:

○ How CRS should be used/understand in IWXXM.○ How National extensions should be published.○ Relaxing the maximum limit of certain features

■ ww, w’w’, NsNsNshshshs, rvr, TREND, TXTFTF/YFYFGFGFZ TNTFTF/YFYFGFGFZ, SIGMET VA Clouds, SIGMET TC Centers

○ Collectives from different IWXXM versions.

Current Status

3

● We asked our customer why they need TAC and get response from Croatia Control, SHMU, BoM, ARSO.

● TAC is currently used in these situations:○ Flight Documentation○ Visual monitoring of METAR/TAF at MWOs○ En-route communication between pilots and ATCs○ VOLMET & D-VOLMET○ Flight Planning○ Disaster/Backup Use Case○ … other use cases you know about?

IWXXM Human-readable representation

4

Flight Documentation by Annex 3 Appendix 8-2

5

Flight Documentation

ICAO Annex 3 Chapter 9, Section 9.3Appendix 8

6

Visual monitoring of METAR & TAF

Due to compactness of TAC METAR/TAF many

reports can fit on screen/paper

Colour coded by severity (visibility and BKN/OVC

cloud base)

7

Visual monitoring of METAR vs TAF

Alternative visual monitoring with decoded values

Disadvantage compared to TAF: PROBnn TEMPO change groups difficult

to express

Red if obs is worse than fcst, green if reality is better than forecast

8

Meteogram comparison of METAR and TAF

Covers “best/worst” change groups, but only for a single aerodrome

METAR

Worst case in TAF

Best case in TAF

9

TAF visualisation in Slovenia

Colours distinguish between wind, visibility,

weather and clouds.

10

The data presentation should be standardized:● End-users are currently familiar with one common presentation.● Users should be able to consume meteorological data fast, without “changing

of logic” whenever they consume data from a different provider.● There is a concern that not standardising any form of data presentation will

ultimately cause fragmentation in how data is represented by states or wider regions of the world, making the data harder to consume by end-users.

Value of standardising data presentation

11

The end users prefer graphical products for SIGMET, AIRMET and advisories.

Graphical presentation of SIGMET/AIRMET being more important than TAC

https://met.crocontrol.hrhttp://www.bom.gov.au/aviation/

warnings/graphical-sigmet/

12

Call for met. data use cases

1. IWXXM covers ICAO Annex 3 data formats, but does notaddress how end users work with the data.

2. Annex 3 specifies products meteorologists should issue,but does not explain how the products are used in realworld.

3. ICAO might not know, how your organisation uses e.g.METAR & TAF internally, and how data is consumed byend-users (air traffic control, pilots, airlines, briefingsystems, flight planning systems).

13

Aviation community should document how the data isused in practice and share examples/requirements withWG-MIE, TT-AvXML or the MET Panel.

Call for met. data use cases

14

1. Pilots/airlines operating international flights will be confused by getting differently presented met. information from each state.

2. It will take more time for end users to understand the met. information if it is presented differently in each state.

Risks of not standardising products

15

IWXXM evolved quite quickly• 1.0 was released October 2013, followed by 1.1, 2.0, 2.1

and finally 3.0 in November 2019 (~5 versions in 6 years)

IWXXM releases vs Lifecycle Management

• End users (met services) struggle to keep pace with it– Alignment of IWXXM releases with Amendments to Annex 3– Time buffers needed by software developers but even more

by met services to deploy system changes (IWXXM 1.0 seen circulating in 2017 - after 2.1 release)

• We should struggle to make formats good enough for next 5 years

16