Open ollyau opened 9 years ago
Was reviewing AC 00-45G as well as the AIM while adding additional integration tests and it appears my previous conclusion was incorrect:
AIM 7−1−31. International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Weather Formats (page 7−1−63) notes the following:
4. Modifier (As Required). “AUTO” identifies a METAR/SPECI report as an automated weather report with no human intervention. If “AUTO” is shown in the body of the report, the type of sensor equipment used at the station will be encoded in the remarks section of the report. The absence of “AUTO” indicates that a report was made manually by an observer or that an automated report had human augmentation/backup. The modifier “COR” indicates a corrected report that is sent out to replace an earlier report with an error.
NOTE− There are two types of automated stations, AO1 for automated weather reporting stations without a precipitation discriminator, and AO2 for automated stations with a precipitation discriminator. (A precipitation discriminator can determine the difference between liquid and frozen/freezing precipitation). This information appears in the remarks section of an automated report.
AC 00-45G 3.1.4 METAR/SPECI Examples (Page 3-29) also denotes report modifier omitted as "Either a manual or an augmented observation".
Although the modifier_type::none
is applicable, the comment next to the enum entry is incorrect.
From AC 00-45G page 3-6:
This suggests that the report modifier is optional and METARs lacking report modifiers have been reviewed by people (and that METARs reviewed by people and were found to be wrong, then corrected get COR). The current code defaults to
modifier_type::automatic
, which seems to conflict with what AC 00-45G implies for METARs without report modifers.Can we add a new
modifier_type
(maybemodifier_type::reviewed
ormodifier_type::none
?) and make that the default?