AccuWeather wants to shut down free data

[rdale]

"But from my perspective, I'm not aware of any movement within the NWS to restrict these data to the public and private sector, rather that the infrastructure to do it hasn't yet been developed."

You are correct - it's more of a communication issue than outright restriction. However when it comes to NIDS, the new hi-res VIL and some of the other products that just became available should be available on the NWS NIDS service but are not being provided. Unsure about that one.

- Rob

 

[Mike Smith]

Greg,

The private sector made requests of the NWS to release the results of the new algorithm when the newest WSR-88D build was announced. The NWS turned us down and has turned down subsequent requests. They say they are not "required" to do so.

This is the crux of the matter: Should the NWS be devoting its finite resources on creating, gathering and distributing data or should it be spending its resources competing with the private sector?

I believe the community should come out strongly in favor of the NWS being required to release 100% of its data in real time. The deadline for comments is today.

Mike

 

[Glen Romine]

Mike et al.,

I don't see how your argument is consistent though - because you are asking for the NWS to release 100% of its "raw" data - yet you are also asking for processed data such as model output, radar algorithms, etc.... So is it only offensive to the private sector when this information is made available in a graphical form that the public might be able to understand? Taxpayers pay for the collection and processing of the data - I don't see where it is unreasonable for that data to be made available to the general public in a form that they are able to readily use. Where is the private sector contribution here? Again, value add - contribute something to the data to make a product that your customer can readily use. Fortunately, the academic community will continue to distribute products anyway.

As for the algorithm availability, if you choose to allow the NWS to process data in your system, I agree with you that these should be made available once the infrastructure is in place to do so, but the implementation of potentially life-saving changes shouldn't be delayed until the such an infrastructure is in place. Otherwise, develop your own algorithms, and then you have something you can market!

My 2 cents, Glen

 

[Mike Smith]

Glen,

I don't see the inconsistency. The output of the TDA algorithm (which is data) is simply an azimuth and range and the fact that a detection has been made. It should be released to anyone that wishes to use it.

If a an individual, organization or private sector company wants to make some sort of animation, or add value in some other way, fine.

The TDA output is "infrastructure."

The NWS should make all data available in real time. But, it should not be in the "value added" or specialized product business.

Mike

 

[Glen Romine]

Originally posted by Mike Smith
The output of the TDA algorithm (which is data) .....

The TDA output is \"infrastructure.\"

The NWS should make all data available in real time. But, it should not be in the \"value added\" or specialized product business.

Mike

The TDA algorithm is derived data, not raw, and infrastructure is buildings, personnel, and equipment, not data. I agree with you completely that the NWS should make data available in real time as is practical for the benefit of the public and for life-saving and property saving decisions - but the latter is partially met by making available data products which are interpretable by the general public (i.e. not data in a compressed file format). I think the air quality industry is a model example of how success can still be achieved using a combination of NWS data their own data and processing to create a truly unique and valuable product. Where is this segment standing in the fair weather argument?

Glen

 

[Mike Smith]

Glen,

Thanks for the comment. I think we are much more in agreement than it might appear. Yes, there should absolutely be products for the public at large from the derived data (the TDA output), in this case a tornado warning. That tornado warning should be clear, timely, easy-to-understand, and effective.

I, and I believe virtually all of my colleagues in the commercial weather industry (to stay on the TDA example), favor:

-- NWS issuing a tornado warning (a "derived product") from the TDA (and whatever other data they wish to use) for the public at large.

-- The data from which they create the tornado warning being made available on a timely basis.

However, value-added or tailored products from the TDA should not be done by the NWS.

With regard to the air pollution subset of commercial meteorology, I believe they overwhelmingly favor the CWSA position. The National Council of Industrial Meteorologists (which has a large air pollution membership) is strongly on board with strengthening the 1991 policy and not adopting the proposed new policy.

Finally, I would like to make a suggestion to the StormTrack community. Two years ago, I published an article, "Five Myths of Commercial Meteorology" in the Bulletin of the AMS. That article is available on the AMS website and it is also available on the WeatherData® website at: weatherdata.com/services/news_5myths.php . Regardless of where you might stand on this issue, I believe there is some valuable historical and factual information that might give these discussions some needed background and context.

Thanks, Glen, for your thoughts and comments. Thanks, also, to the larger StormTrack community. This is an important issue and I hope you will make your comments known before the close of the comment period later this afternoon.

Mike

 

[rdale]

"So is it only offensive to the private sector when this information is made available in a graphical form that the public might be able to understand?"

The new NIDS products (hi-res VIL and echo tops) are not available in raw or graphic form to the public or commercial sectors. All they need to do is to add that to the NWSTG ftp server that contains NIDS products as the data is being transmitted. They will not.

- Rob

 

[Greg Stumpf]

Originally posted by rdale
The new NIDS products (hi-res VIL and echo tops) are not available in raw or graphic form to the public or commercial sectors. All they need to do is to add that to the NWSTG ftp server that contains NIDS products as the data is being transmitted. They will not.

Hmmm...those two specific products (HRVIL and EET) might fall into a "special" category. Apparently, those two products were developed by an academic institution (who will remain nameless) who retains special IP rights to them. I believe that the licensing agreement states that the products cannot be disseminated for use by private industry unless those private companies also pay licensing fees for them (BTW - NSSL has never done this with the IP they've transferred to the ROC).

This sounds somewhat ugly, and I'm offering my best guess based on what I know about those two specific products. For the absolute answer, however, you should contact the WSR-88D Radar Operations Center (ROC).

As for other radar products that may not be available yet...anyone can obtain the source code to operational algorithms simply through the Freedom of Information Act. If you can't obtain a specific real-time product, you can still get the raw Level-II radar data, and run the same source code on it and distribute the product yourself. I know a few private met companies that already have the ORPG code (sans HRVIL and EET) and are implementing them on their own systems.


greg

 

[rdale]

Talked to the ROC and they say the software that compresses this product won't be installed til September. The final list of changes has not been submitted, so "some progress, but no guarantees the products will be added."