The Terminal Aerodrome Forecast (TAF) is one of the most prominent and widely accepted forecasting tools for flight planning. The reliability of this instrument is crucial for its practical applicability, and its quality may further affect the overall air transport safety and economic efficiency. The presented study seeks to objectify the assessment of the success rate of TAFs in the full breadth of their scope, unlike alternative approaches that typically analyze one selected element. It aspires to submit a complex survey on TAF realization in the context of ANNEX 3 (a regulation for Meteorological Service for International Air Navigation issued by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)) defined methodology and to provoke a discussion on the clarification and completion of ANNEX 3. Moreover, the adherence of TAFs to ICAO ANNEX 3 (20th Edition) is examined and presented on the example of reports issued in the Czech Republic. The study evaluates the accuracy of TAF forecast verified by Aerodrome Routine Meteorological Report (METAR) and Special Meteorological Report (SPECI), whose quality was assessed first. The required accuracy of TAFs was achieved for most evaluated stations. A discrepancy in terms of formal structure between actually issued reports and the ANNEX 3 defined form was revealed in over 90% of reports. The study identifies ambiguities and contradictions contained in ANNEX 3 that lead to loose interpretations of its stipulations and complicate the objectification of TAF evaluation.

中文翻译：

---

根据国际民航组织附件3规定评估TAF，METAR和SPECI报告

终端机场预报（TAF）是飞行计划中最著名，最广为接受的预报工具之一。该仪器的可靠性对其实用性至关重要，其质量可能进一步影响整体航空运输的安全性和经济效率。提出的研究旨在客观地评估TAF在其整个范围内的成功率，这与通常分析一个选定要素的替代方法不同。它希望在附件3（国际民用航空组织（ICAO）发布的《国际空中航行气象服务条例》）的背景下提交一份关于TAF实现的复杂调查，并引起有关澄清和完成TAF的讨论。附件3.此外，在捷克共和国发布的报告示例中，研究并介绍了TAF对ICAO附件3（第20版）的遵守情况。这项研究评估了由机场常规气象报告（METAR）和特殊气象报告（SPECI）验证的TAF预报的准确性，后者的质量首先得到评估。大多数评估站都达到了要求的TAF精度。超过90％的报告显示，实际发布的报告与附件3定义的形式在形式结构上存在差异。该研究确定了附件3中包含的歧义和矛盾之处，从而导致对其规定的宽松解释，并使TAF评估的客观化变得复杂。这项研究评估了由机场常规气象报告（METAR）和特殊气象报告（SPECI）验证的TAF预报的准确性，后者的质量首先得到评估。大多数评估站都达到了要求的TAF精度。超过90％的报告显示，实际发布的报告与附件3定义的形式在形式结构上存在差异。该研究确定了附件3中包含的歧义和矛盾之处，从而导致对其规定的宽松解释，并使TAF评估的客观化变得复杂。这项研究评估了由机场常规气象报告（METAR）和特殊气象报告（SPECI）验证的TAF预报的准确性，后者的质量首先得到评估。大多数评估站都达到了要求的TAF精度。超过90％的报告显示，实际发布的报告与附件3定义的形式在形式结构上存在差异。该研究确定了附件3中包含的歧义和矛盾之处，从而导致对其规定的宽松解释，并使TAF评估的客观化变得复杂。超过90％的报告显示，实际发布的报告与附件3定义的形式在形式结构上存在差异。该研究确定了附件3中包含的歧义和矛盾之处，从而导致对其规定的宽松解释，并使TAF评估的客观化变得复杂。超过90％的报告显示，实际发布的报告与附件3定义的形式在形式结构上存在差异。该研究确定了附件3中包含的歧义和矛盾之处，从而导致对其规定的宽松解释，并使TAF评估的客观化变得复杂。