TAF Amendment Response Time
Scenariot: NC_CRITERIA    Month: February    Year: 2016    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
Baie Comeau 68 36 7 25 0 12 87% 21
Bathurst 23 22 0 1 0 19 87% 9
Big Trout Lake 58 26 2 30 0 14 78% 3
Blanc Sablon 49 43 3 3 0 12 88% 20
Buttonville 39 33 3 3 0 16 77% 18
Cartwright 28 26 0 2 0 11 100% 12
Chapleau 32 26 0 5 1 13 87% 6
Charlottetown 56 49 2 5 0 12 91% 15
Chibougamau-Chapais 11 8 1 1 1 15 70% 2
Churchill Falls 68 25 3 40 0 14 81% 15
Deer Lake 37 32 1 4 0 14 81% 15
Dorval 40 25 4 11 0 14 78% 23
Dryden 72 41 1 30 0 13 86% 12
Earlton 45 17 1 26 1 11 91% 13
Fredericton 84 37 6 38 3 16 79% 25
Gander 67 60 4 3 0 16 70% 26
Gaspé 19 17 0 2 0 14 89% 13
Gatineau 19 15 1 3 0 24 53% 5
Geraldton 38 33 4 1 0 14 84% 16
Gore Bay 18 14 1 3 0 19 67% 9
Halifax 48 33 9 6 0 16 71% 19
Hamilton 42 34 4 4 0 16 74% 18
Havre St Pierre 76 37 3 36 0 12 91% 18
Îles de la Madeleine 15 12 1 2 0 17 73% 13
Inukjuak 66 33 4 29 0 19 71% 20
Ivujivik 8 7 0 1 0 18 75% 3
Kapuskasing 45 41 2 2 0 14 82% 21
Kenora 30 29 1 0 0 12 87% 16
Kingston 24 18 2 4 0 20 71% 12
Kuujjuaq 21 21 0 0 0 13 86% 7
Kuujjuarapik 45 17 6 22 0 10 96% 21
La Grande IV 31 16 1 12 2 17 79% 5
La Grande Rivière 38 35 2 1 0 13 87% 23
London 49 36 4 9 0 15 84% 22
Marathon 13 12 0 1 0 14 77% 2
Mary's Harbour 53 21 0 31 1 12 85% 22
Mirabel 48 38 1 9 0 18 69% 14
Moncton 37 29 3 5 0 12 95% 13
Mont-Joli 39 36 2 1 0 13 87% 19
Moosonee 48 25 1 22 0 15 88% 6
Muskoka 49 24 0 25 0 12 84% 19
Nain 7 7 0 0 0 12 100% 6
Natashquan 75 38 6 31 0 11 92% 23
North Bay 89 64 3 22 0 14 87% 34
Ottawa 39 27 5 7 0 13 87% 11
Peterborough 29 11 2 15 1 15 79% 12
Pickle Lake 11 9 0 2 0 13 73% 4
Puvirnituq 50 21 3 26 0 17 72% 30
Quaqtaq 4 3 0 1 0 14 50% 6
Quebec City 68 51 5 12 0 18 63% 17
Red Lake 25 19 1 4 1 11 83% 11
Roberval 29 25 1 3 0 17 79% 6
Sable Island 44 20 2 20 2 16 83% 14
Saint John 53 40 4 9 0 14 85% 20
Sarnia 26 15 0 11 0 15 73% 19
Sault Ste Marie 56 49 1 6 0 11 86% 25
Schefferville 104 30 7 67 0 14 84% 18
Sept-Îles 55 43 3 9 0 14 82% 11
Sherbrooke 53 22 4 24 3 13 90% 17
Sioux Lookout 34 29 2 3 0 17 76% 11
St Anthony 81 44 5 32 0 12 83% 27
St Catharines 14 9 2 3 0 15 86% 10
St Hubert 83 33 6 41 3 13 81% 27
St John's 70 49 8 13 0 13 86% 27
Stephenville 50 40 4 6 0 14 84% 25
Sudbury 49 41 0 8 0 15 80% 27
Sydney 55 45 2 8 0 18 75% 15
Tasiujaq 6 6 0 0 0 9 100% 3
Thunder Bay 20 16 2 2 0 16 85% 11
Timmins 47 44 2 1 0 15 79% 21
Toronto City Centre 49 20 3 26 0 13 82% 22
Toronto LBPI 23 15 1 7 0 16 74% 27
Trois rivieres 99 47 3 48 1 16 78% 15
Val-d'Or 47 35 3 9 0 14 83% 25
Wabush 51 33 2 16 0 16 76% 12
Waskaganish 2 2 0 0 0 10 100% 4
Waterloo/Wellington 47 29 3 14 1 18 70% 20
Wawa 17 13 1 2 1 15 81% 7
Wiarton 17 16 0 1 0 19 82% 12
Windsor 32 26 4 2 0 16 75% 13
Yarmouth 49 38 2 9 0 16 86% 12
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 13 11 1 1 0 12 92% 4
Arctic Bay 4 4 0 0 0 9 75% 3
Arviat 68 29 5 34 0 17 79% 13
Baker Lake 19 18 0 1 0 11 89% 14
Bella Bella 19 8 0 11 0 8 95% 5
Brandon 35 31 2 2 0 10 89% 21
Buffalo Narrows 21 19 0 2 0 13 81% 8
Burwash 12 9 2 1 0 17 75% 7
Calgary Intl 14 9 2 3 0 14 79% 22
Cambridge Bay 34 32 0 2 0 9 88% 16
Campbell River 25 20 3 2 0 20 72% 10
Cape Dorset 55 25 4 26 0 17 76% 28
Castlegar 11 11 0 0 0 14 91% 6
Churchill 29 28 0 1 0 8 100% 17
Clyde River 26 15 0 10 1 8 92% 19
Coral Harbour 17 13 4 0 0 13 76% 11
Cranbrook 7 5 0 2 0 10 100% 3
Deline 5 5 0 0 0 11 80% 2
Dauphin 44 33 2 9 0 11 89% 12
Dawson City 6 6 0 0 0 13 83% 4
Dawson Creek 18 14 0 4 0 19 83% 10
Dease Lake 16 11 0 5 0 11 88% 5
Edmonton Intl 9 7 1 1 0 11 89% 12
Edmonton Villeneuve 22 15 2 5 0 11 91% 10
Estevan 18 15 1 1 1 11 94% 9
Eureka 7 7 0 0 0 7 100% 10
Faro 6 5 1 0 0 8 100% 1
Fort Chipewyan 31 21 2 6 2 14 76% 4
Fort Good Hope 4 3 0 1 0 11 75% 5
Fort McMurray 55 31 4 20 0 11 93% 15
Fort McPherson 5 5 0 0 0 7 100% 3
Fort Nelson 22 19 2 1 0 12 86% 4
Fort Simpson 27 25 1 1 0 10 89% 9
Fort Smith 25 21 3 1 0 14 88% 13
Fort St John 15 14 1 0 0 13 73% 8
Gillam 26 22 1 2 1 12 84% 13
Gjoa Haven 93 31 18 34 10 29 59% 29
Grande Prairie 23 21 0 2 0 15 83% 14
Hall Beach 59 37 2 18 2 13 88% 24
Hay River 27 23 0 4 0 15 78% 12
High Level 49 39 1 9 0 12 92% 14
Holman 8 4 1 1 2 39 33% 6
Igloolik 9 5 2 1 1 29 38% 4
Inuvik 25 24 1 0 0 10 88% 14
Iqaluit 29 23 4 2 0 14 86% 11
Island Lake 23 18 2 3 0 10 91% 12
Kamloops 15 13 1 1 0 11 87% 6
Kelowna 42 19 1 22 0 12 81% 16
Key Lake 22 13 1 8 0 17 77% 5
Kugaaruk 2 2 0 0 0 9 100% 13
Kugluktuk 13 11 0 2 0 15 85% 6
La Ronge 22 20 0 2 0 10 91% 5
Lethbridge 16 10 0 6 0 17 81% 19
Lloydminster 50 36 3 11 0 13 80% 20
Lutselk'e 5 5 0 0 0 12 100% 3
Lynn Lake 31 15 2 13 1 11 93% 9
Mackenzie 49 30 1 17 1 13 85% 6
Masset 8 8 0 0 0 14 75% 4
Mayo 10 9 0 1 0 12 90% 3
Medicine Hat 17 13 3 1 0 11 94% 14
Nanaimo 14 11 2 0 1 12 85% 5
Norman Wells 21 17 2 1 1 21 85% 7
North Battleford 49 26 2 21 0 12 88% 24
Norway House 39 22 3 14 0 14 90% 9
Old Crow 4 2 1 0 1 8 100% 1
Pangnirtung 2 2 0 0 0 24 50% 3
Paulatuk 4 4 0 0 0 8 100% 5
Peace River 33 32 0 1 0 13 85% 14
Penticton 14 13 1 0 0 11 93% 6
Pond Inlet 35 13 1 21 0 13 91% 5
Port Hardy 10 9 0 1 0 13 90% 5
Prince Albert 34 27 2 5 0 10 97% 13
Prince George 43 28 1 14 0 13 86% 28
Qikiqtarjuaq 36 19 2 15 0 15 75% 16
Quesnel 26 12 1 12 1 10 88% 19
Rae Lake 10 9 0 1 0 11 90% 5
Rankin Inlet 24 20 2 2 0 14 75% 10
Red Deer 26 23 3 0 0 16 81% 19
Regina 26 21 3 2 0 10 92% 16
Repulse Bay 6 2 0 3 1 23 60% 6
Resolute Bay 30 27 1 2 0 13 83% 12
Sachs Harbour 2 2 0 0 0 8 100% 10
Sandspit 35 18 2 15 0 11 91% 22
Saskatoon 35 31 2 2 0 12 83% 13
Slave Lake 26 18 1 7 0 12 85% 10
Smithers 15 9 0 4 2 11 92% 9
Springbank 16 6 0 2 8 25 75% 7
Stony Rapids 36 19 1 16 0 11 94% 24
Swift Current 63 35 6 22 0 16 73% 25
Taloyoak 24 22 0 2 0 18 83% 12
Terrace 60 52 5 2 1 15 78% 29
Teslin 4 4 0 0 0 10 75% 2
The Pas 38 32 1 4 1 12 89% 4
Thompson 23 20 1 2 0 10 96% 5
Tofino 7 5 0 2 0 15 86% 6
Tuktoyaktuk 12 9 3 0 0 22 75% 12
Vancouver 11 7 0 4 0 8 100% 13
Victoria 22 18 1 3 0 15 73% 7
Victoria Harbour 6 6 0 0 0 10 100% 6
Watson Lake 15 15 0 0 0 15 67% 7
Wekweeti 31 19 1 11 0 11 90% 11
Whitecourt 10 8 0 2 0 13 90% 5
Whitehorse 24 22 0 2 0 12 88% 9
Williams Lake 19 15 0 4 0 9 95% 8
Winnipeg 25 23 1 1 0 10 96% 18
Yellowknife 29 24 3 2 0 17 69% 14
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.