The TAF is designed for aircrafts taking off and landing at an aerodrome and provides a forecast of expected weather conditions within five nautical miles of an aerodrome.

Forbes was one of 53 sites across Australia to lose funding for a TAF, and the local closure was recommended because the Forbes Aerodrome directs less than 10,000 passengers and 4,000 aircraft movements per year.

According to the BOM, the cancellation of a TAF service does not mean the aerodrome cannot operate. 

The TAF is also separate to the automatic weather station, so Forbes’ rainfall and daily temperature readings will remain in place. 

Regional director with the BOM Barry Hanstrum said the loss of a TAF will not affect Forbes’ aircraft traffic.

“Ceasing TAF services at the Forbes Airport will not prevent flights to this aerodrome,” he said. 

“Pilots flying to destinations without a TAF are required to carry sufficient fuel to allow them to divert to an aerodrome with a TAF in the event poor weather conditions prevent them from landing. The closest aerodrome to Forbes with a TAF service is Parkes Airport.” 

While the BOM does not believe the loss of a TAF at Forbes will be felt, at a recent council meeting, Forbes Shire Council members moved to oppose the BOM’s recommendation.

At the December meeting, it was noted that it would be unlikely that council would be successful in retaining the TAF service through the BOM, however it was advised that the service may be requested on a contractual, cost recovery basis.

Early estimates suggest it would cost the council between $10,000 and $15,000 per year to maintain the TAF. 

Speaking at the meeting, Cr Chris Roylance said the Forbes TAF is an important service to preserve. 

“We should not accept the TAF being taken off Forbes,” Cr Roylance said. 

“I still think we need a TAF for Forbes and I think we need to fight for it.”  

Cr Roylance said later he was concerned how the loss of a TAF would affect flying training schools at the Forbes aerodrome and more importantly air ambulance services such as the Royal Flying Doctors Service. 

At the meeting in December, council moved to investigate the costs of maintaining a TAF and would discuss the findings in February.