TAF Amendment Response Time
Scenariot: NC_CRITERIA    Month: April    Year: 2017    Target: ≥ 90%
Canadian Meteorological Aviation Centre/East (Montreal)
Station Number of observations not covered by current TAF Number responded to by an amended TAF Number responded to by next regular TAF Number where weather changed back to match TAF Number where weather and TAF remained inconsistent Average response time in minutes Percentage of TAF responses within 20 minutes Number of proactive amendments
Attawapiskat 17 11 0 4 2 11 87% 8
Baie Comeau 47 31 3 13 0 12 89% 13
Bathurst 30 26 0 4 0 14 87% 25
Big Trout Lake 37 18 3 16 0 14 78% 14
Blanc Sablon 32 30 2 0 0 17 75% 17
Buttonville 31 22 2 6 1 22 67% 25
Cartwright 24 22 1 1 0 19 75% 6
Chapleau 9 5 1 3 0 22 78% 6
Charlottetown 24 14 2 5 3 16 81% 11
Chibougamau-Chapais 20 16 0 4 0 11 85% 8
Churchill Falls 49 18 3 27 1 15 81% 10
Deer Lake 23 19 0 4 0 21 83% 9
Dorval 14 11 2 1 0 14 86% 14
Dryden 23 14 1 8 0 12 78% 14
Earlton 9 8 0 1 0 13 89% 6
Fort Severn 20 13 0 7 0 11 95% 7
Fredericton 63 27 0 34 2 14 84% 22
Gander 52 37 6 7 2 15 84% 24
Gaspé 36 33 1 2 0 17 78% 19
Gatineau 11 10 0 0 1 22 80% 9
Geraldton 50 39 3 5 3 19 81% 13
Gore Bay 14 7 0 7 0 18 79% 12
Halifax 31 20 2 9 0 18 81% 17
Hamilton 38 23 5 9 1 25 70% 42
Havre St Pierre 32 19 3 10 0 12 91% 15
Îles de la Madeleine 18 17 0 1 0 12 83% 12
Inukjuak 80 39 2 38 1 14 85% 22
Ivujivik 5 5 0 0 0 23 60% 8
Kapuskasing 35 30 1 4 0 15 89% 10
Kenora 16 14 1 1 0 19 81% 5
Kingston 13 10 1 2 0 17 69% 8
Kuujjuaq 28 25 1 1 1 12 89% 19
Kuujjuarapik 48 27 3 14 4 12 84% 20
La Grande IV 26 13 0 13 0 10 88% 11
La Grande Rivière 33 24 3 6 0 17 82% 20
London 38 30 2 5 1 17 73% 29
Marathon 7 7 0 0 0 15 86% 5
Mary's Harbour 23 14 0 8 1 9 95% 6
Mirabel 29 21 2 4 2 16 74% 15
Moncton 37 32 2 3 0 16 70% 10
Mont-Joli 28 23 1 4 0 19 68% 16
Moosonee 36 21 2 13 0 15 75% 15
Muskoka 32 14 0 17 1 14 77% 18
Muskrat Dam 18 8 0 9 1 11 88% 7
Nain 5 4 0 1 0 24 80% 4
Natashquan 54 31 4 19 0 14 81% 20
North Bay 41 30 2 8 1 17 68% 19
Ottawa 25 15 5 5 0 22 64% 16
Peterborough 14 8 1 3 2 19 83% 16
Pickle Lake 9 7 0 2 0 19 56% 2
Puvirnituq 73 38 4 28 3 20 61% 9
Quaqtaq 8 7 0 1 0 9 100% 6
Quebec City 43 33 4 6 0 17 79% 17
Red Lake 13 12 0 1 0 11 92% 4
Roberval 27 19 1 6 1 17 85% 17
Sable Island 26 15 1 8 2 11 83% 21
Saint John 41 37 1 2 1 14 82% 21
Sandy Lake 8 4 0 3 1 16 86% 4
Sarnia 22 13 0 9 0 17 73% 17
Sault Ste Marie 37 29 2 6 0 16 81% 18
Schefferville 43 22 1 20 0 14 86% 11
Sept-Îles 51 36 2 8 5 12 85% 18
Sherbrooke 20 10 1 9 0 15 70% 10
Sioux Lookout 19 16 0 3 0 18 68% 7
St Anthony 44 22 6 15 1 18 74% 15
St Catharines 8 6 1 1 0 21 88% 12
St Hubert 50 22 4 24 0 16 76% 17
St John's 60 54 2 4 0 15 83% 27
Stephenville 19 18 0 1 0 24 53% 15
Sudbury 32 28 1 2 1 18 71% 12
Sydney 29 27 2 0 0 16 86% 15
Tasiujaq 1 1 0 0 0 12 100% 3
Thunder Bay 27 24 0 1 2 14 92% 15
Timmins 31 24 1 6 0 17 81% 13
Toronto City Centre 22 16 1 4 1 18 62% 21
Toronto LBPI 14 11 2 1 0 15 86% 36
Trois rivieres 41 20 0 19 2 15 77% 10
Val-d'Or 49 38 3 8 0 16 84% 20
Wabush 24 12 2 10 0 22 75% 7
Waskaganish 3 3 0 0 0 10 100% 1
Waterloo/Wellington 31 14 2 15 0 17 81% 33
Wawa 5 5 0 0 0 13 80% 6
Wiarton 12 12 0 0 0 21 58% 8
Windsor 14 9 1 0 4 14 70% 25
Yarmouth 37 28 5 3 1 21 67% 17
Canadian Meteorological Aviation Centre/West (Edmonton)
Station Number of observations not covered by current TAF Number responded to by an amended TAF Number responded to by next regular TAF Number where weather changed back to match TAF Number where weather and TAF remained inconsistent Average response time in minutes Percentage of TAF responses within 20 minutes Number of proactive amendments
Abbotsford 22 14 3 5 0 16 73% 6
Arctic Bay 1 1 0 0 0 16 100% 1
Arviat 38 22 4 11 1 18 78% 13
Baker Lake 28 17 2 7 2 25 58% 16
Bella Bella 30 9 0 21 0 11 93% 10
Brandon 14 10 2 2 0 11 93% 5
Buffalo Narrows 13 10 1 1 1 16 67% 5
Burwash 12 7 0 5 0 17 67% 7
Calgary Intl 35 26 6 3 0 12 83% 31
Cambridge Bay 27 23 2 2 0 16 85% 22
Campbell River 18 12 1 5 0 21 61% 2
Cape Dorset 63 29 6 26 2 18 72% 21
Castlegar 8 6 1 1 0 15 75% 5
Churchill 31 29 0 2 0 13 87% 9
Clyde River 45 31 1 11 2 15 74% 16
Coral Harbour 27 19 1 5 2 24 68% 10
Cranbrook 5 3 1 1 0 16 80% 8
Deline 6 4 0 2 0 8 83% 5
Dauphin 24 10 2 12 0 16 79% 7
Dawson City 3 3 0 0 0 2 100% 1
Dawson Creek 17 5 1 10 1 11 88% 3
Dease Lake 8 2 0 5 1 10 86% 2
Edmonton Intl 47 35 6 6 0 11 91% 26
Edmonton Villeneuve 64 41 6 17 0 12 83% 18
Estevan 8 8 0 0 0 12 88% 5
Eureka 6 5 0 0 1 14 80% 2
Faro 2 1 0 0 1 18 100% 1
Fort Chipewyan 21 8 1 12 0 14 90% 3
Fort Good Hope 8 7 1 0 0 14 75% 5
Fort McMurray 28 17 1 9 1 13 81% 5
Fort McPherson 1 0 0 1 0 71 0% 9
Fort Nelson 17 14 1 2 0 14 82% 3
Fort Simpson 9 7 2 0 0 12 78% 7
Fort Smith 5 2 0 2 1 30 75% 0
Fort St John 16 14 1 1 0 14 81% 5
Gillam 22 19 2 1 0 19 77% 7
Gjoa Haven 45 27 5 13 0 16 64% 27
Grande Prairie 25 24 0 1 0 17 76% 13
Hall Beach 67 47 9 11 0 16 67% 12
Hay River 4 3 0 1 0 17 75% 2
High Level 11 8 0 2 1 15 90% 2
Holman 7 6 0 0 1 14 83% 2
Igloolik 11 8 0 3 0 11 91% 10
Inuvik 19 16 1 2 0 13 74% 10
Iqaluit 33 29 1 2 1 15 72% 11
Island Lake 15 13 2 0 0 15 80% 12
Kamloops 2 1 0 1 0 31 50% 4
Kelowna 22 11 0 11 0 12 86% 4
Key Lake 4 3 0 1 0 17 75% 3
Kugaaruk 4 3 1 0 0 7 100% 14
Kugluktuk 25 12 8 3 2 31 65% 22
La Ronge 9 9 0 0 0 11 89% 3
Lethbridge 32 26 2 4 0 10 91% 15
Lloydminster 46 32 4 9 1 14 84% 20
Lutselk'e 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A 8
Lynn Lake 12 9 1 2 0 11 100% 7
Mackenzie 17 8 2 6 1 16 69% 1
Masset 16 9 0 6 1 13 80% 3
Mayo 5 5 0 0 0 10 80% 3
Medicine Hat 19 15 1 3 0 10 89% 18
Nanaimo 13 11 0 1 1 9 92% 2
Norman Wells 7 7 0 0 0 10 86% 3
North Battleford 28 16 1 11 0 11 86% 18
Norway House 36 20 1 12 3 10 91% 6
Old Crow 4 3 1 0 0 16 75% 7
Pangnirtung 2 2 0 0 0 38 50% 1
Paulatuk 3 1 1 1 0 32 67% 13
Peace River 20 19 1 0 0 10 85% 10
Penticton 6 6 0 0 0 10 100% 10
Pond Inlet 34 19 1 14 0 18 79% 7
Port Hardy 9 6 1 2 0 27 56% 8
Prince Albert 21 18 1 2 0 15 86% 5
Prince George 29 18 1 9 1 12 86% 11
Qikiqtarjuaq 44 25 2 15 2 13 88% 11
Quesnel 23 12 0 11 0 9 100% 14
Rae Lake 3 2 0 1 0 18 67% 0
Rankin Inlet 42 34 3 4 1 22 68% 17
Red Deer 37 32 3 1 1 11 89% 15
Regina 14 13 1 0 0 12 93% 11
Repulse Bay 18 11 0 3 4 15 79% 4
Resolute Bay 18 14 1 3 0 15 78% 14
Sachs Harbour 5 5 0 0 0 7 100% 8
Sandspit 45 19 2 24 0 13 80% 11
Saskatoon 13 11 0 2 0 10 92% 7
Slave Lake 40 26 2 12 0 14 90% 20
Smithers 3 1 0 1 1 6 100% 1
Springbank 49 30 2 15 2 9 96% 14
Stony Rapids 3 3 0 0 0 15 67% 5
Swift Current 34 21 2 11 0 9 94% 19
Taloyoak 25 23 1 1 0 19 64% 15
Terrace 9 9 0 0 0 21 44% 13
Teslin 2 1 0 1 0 19 100% 1
The Pas 29 24 5 0 0 9 93% 8
Thompson 16 14 1 1 0 16 88% 4
Tofino 9 5 0 4 0 15 89% 12
Tuktoyaktuk 15 13 2 0 0 19 60% 13
Vancouver 11 7 2 2 0 12 91% 8
Victoria 8 7 0 0 1 25 57% 4
Victoria Harbour 6 5 0 1 0 17 83% 0
Watson Lake 5 5 0 0 0 10 100% 1
Wekweeti 7 6 0 1 0 10 71% 8
Whitecourt 15 13 0 2 0 14 80% 6
Whitehorse 1 1 0 0 0 21 0% 1
Williams Lake 30 26 1 3 0 15 87% 9
Winnipeg 19 15 1 3 0 10 95% 7
Yellowknife 7 7 0 0 0 17 71% 6
Note: tThe Scenario indicates the amendment criteria that is used in calculating the amendment response time.   The scenario “NC_CRITERIA” uses all the MANAIR (Standards Document) amendment criteria defined in section 2.9 Amended TAFs with the exception of the 2500/6 ceiling and visibility threshold (when actual conditions are better than forecast), Obscurations, and Wind.