Amateur storm chasers cause headaches for emergency spotters

[Jay Farlow]

For those who are interested, North Texas Section Emergency Manager Morris provided me a PDF copy of his section's new policy that prohibits closed nets. You can get the verbatim version in its entirety via my blog: http://w9lw.farlowconsulting.com/2016/04/19/texas-ares-official-bans-closed-nets/. Mr. Morris said it might be some time before the policy appears on the section's own website. He responded very promptly to my email inquiry. The North Texas section is lucky to have someone like him on its leadership staff.

Yesterday, I sent email to Mr. Byars (the district emergency coordinator quoted in the newspaper article) to ask, point blank, "Will the W5US repeater comply during future severe weather nets and end its policy of becoming a closed repeater during such nets?" No reply yet but it's been less than 24 hours. Up to this point, Mr. Byars has been fairly responsive to my email. By the way, the FCC database lists him as the contact for repeater licensee Wichita Falls Repeater Club.

 

[rdale]

If you don't want to listen to the entire hour - just go to the 70 minute mark. It summarizes the whole case very well. There are idiots in every field. Stupid chasers. Stupid spotters. Stupid Skywarn controllers. Stupid broadcast mets. Stupid NWS Mets. But in all of those fields, they are a small (very very small) minority. Picking a fight and fanning flames every time your feelings get hurt just means you spend a lot of time fanning flames. The hit count on this article's website went THROUGH THE ROOF and they don't give a damn what the reality is. Money is reality - and they got a LOT more money regardless of what "actually" happened. Same thing with AccuWeather's 90 day forecasts.

So we can rant for another 6 pages when the next article comes out, complain that "the end of storm chasing is near" as has been cried about for years, and get upset every time someone writes an article that makes us sad. Or let it die, and let the Wichita writer get back to the latest news in herbicides and his 300 reader count.

 

[Dan Robinson]

I've started this thread here so we can move the discussion away from the news piece and more toward something constructive:

http://stormtrack.org/community/threads/spotter-nets-how-can-chasers-help.29100/

 

[Nick Copeland]

ROFL! Such ignorance but hey, it's just an opinion.

Seriously @TJ Whitt ? You should know me better than that. I am not the only one that feels that way about ARRL. There are many HAM elders who have been aound 30-40yrs+ who echo the same comments. Do this survey at work when you're at HRO and ask people what they think of ARRL. I think your findings will be shocking. Then tell me if it was an ignorant comment.

How much do they charge for a study book you don't need? How much do they charge or an app with information you don't need that contains information you can find for free? Then add a membership fee. For what? Plus their bogus insurance they offer. In 14 yrs of being a radio operator I have never once ever need ARRL for anything nor ever visit their site. They take advantage of new people looking to get into he hobby and rape them with this and that to make a dollar off the innocent. Ask Pinky N5WYT next time he is in HRO, hell ask Dee, he will even tell you. Firefighters stick together.

Hmmmm, a quick search for repeaters in Texas show open, closed, and private repeaters.

RepeaterBook??? That DB is so outdated it is ridiclous. It still shows our repeater using a tone we haven't used in 5 years and have requested it to be updated several times.I said "You will be hard pressed to find a hard set rule by the FCC that states a "closed" repeater is allowed." Not a list of public run repeater search directories that set their own terminology.

Searching on a site for repeaters and their status means nothing. open, means it is online, closed means it is offline and private repeaters are out of the amateur band.

Outside of directed nets, closed repeaters are not allowed. With the exception of the control operator taking action against a rougue station may close the repeater to prevent further nuisances.

 

[TJ Whitt]

Seriously @TJ Whitt ? You should know me better than that. I am not the only one that feels that way about ARRL. There are many HAM elders who have been aound 30-40yrs+ who echo the same comments. Do this survey at work when you're at HRO and ask people what they think of ARRL. I think your findings will be shocking. Then tell me if it was an ignorant comment.

How much do they charge for a study book you don't need? How much do they charge or an app with information you don't need that contains information you can find for free? Then add a membership fee. For what? Plus their bogus insurance they offer. In 14 yrs of being a radio operator I have never once ever need ARRL for anything nor ever visit their site. They take advantage of new people looking to get into he hobby and rape them with this and that to make a dollar off the innocent. Ask Pinky N5WYT next time he is in HRO, hell ask Dee, he will even tell you. Firefighters stick together.

There are also many hams who know that the ARRL is not as bad as some say it is. But, hey, it's just an opinion. We all have them.

 

[Derek S Baker]

A few points to consider:

1. I was following Daniel's stream that afternoon. The comments he made to storm chasers Jeremy Holmes, Charles Peek, and others prior to the start of the circulated video indicated that his primary goal was to inform NWS that he & some chasers had an optimal view, that no tornado had been/was visible, and that the tornado warning could be cancelled.

2. Although Daniel was quite confident that there was no tornado, he got a consensus from the other chasers, then proceeded to phone NWS. I would think that the reason he phoned rather than use another means was that to request that a tornado warning be cancelled would almost surely result in NWS asking Daniel some questions & Daniel providing an explanation to NWS to justify his recommendation. If Daniel had taken the time to filling in a Spotter Network report form, it would have lead to NWS phoning Daniel to discuss his observations. This makes total sense because cancelling a tornado warning is a risky decision from the viewpoint of an NWS meteorologist. (Cancelling a tornado warning could have grave consequences if there still was a tornado or if a tornadic storm was briefly cycling & ready to produce another tornado.)

3. I asked Daniel about filling in Spotter Network reports. He explained that he has nothing against filing reports via the SN form, however he has not gotten into the habit of doing so because he does his spotting operations on his own. Since he is driving his vehicle to catch-up or move ahead of storms, his hands are occupied with steering, tweaking camera angles, & using one of several forms of communication between spotters, chasers, net controllers, etc. To fill in a report would require him to 30s to 60s to type in the report & have his vision focused on a computer/cell phone screen, neither of which would be a safe practice. Of course, as all spotters, chasers, net controllers, etc know, during severe weather, 30 to 60s is a long time during which the situation for the observer & members of the public can change significantly, so Daniel tends not to file Spotter Network report online during 'the action'.

4. Naturally, if a spotter/chaser is one of several people in a spotter or chaser vehicle, completing a Spotter Network report online is a great way to communicate with NWS & spotters/chasers in the field, but in Daniel's case, with all the stuff he has to bring from Australia & all the radio gear/electronics he uses, he doesn't have room in his vehicle for another person.

I hope this addresses some of the previous posts in a helpful manner.

Agreed - I was joking about SpotterNetwork sponsoring a date hotline. My point is that his comment at the end about the "best practice" being a phone call to the NWS, had he submitted his "null report" via SN then everyone would have seen it at that location at the same time.

 

[Justin Reed]

RepeaterBook??? That DB is so outdated it is ridiclous. It still shows our repeater using a tone we haven't used in 5 years and have requested it to be updated several times.

Nick,
I am the Kansas Administrator for Repeaterbook, and an assistant admin for Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Missouri. If you have a listing that is incorrect in these states, I can edit it directly. If it's in another state, I can work directly with the site owner to make sure it gets updated. I'll make it happen. Please PM me any changes you have.

I can also attest that Kansas is at least 99% accurate, and you'll not find a more up-to-date database for repeaters anywhere.

Justin
NV8Q

 

[Randy Jennings]

Sounds like Wichita County officials, ARRL, and the Wichita County ARES/Skywarn group in question got together to discuss this and the Times Record News wrote a new story about this today (although it was a different reporter). Parts of the story make no sense, as the reporter clearly doesn't understand some things, so it is hard to truly tell what the outcome was. It sounds like it will be an open net from now on. Emergency Management magazine/blog picked up the story: http://www.emergencymgmt.com/disast...-hash-out-rules-for-emergency-situations.html

 

[Bryan Melland]

Update, May 17 2016 Wichita Falls Skywarn, policy change closed no more !! Link: http://www.timesrecordnews.com/news/local/county-ham-radio-operators-hash-out-rules-for-emergency-situations-32f7850e-fc9c-759f-e053-0100007f3-379713151.html