CHASER HAMS & SPOTTERS NOT INVOLVED IN FORMAL SKYWARN NETS

[John Diel]

I think Shane might be on to something here.

At the very least, it's a new attempt at an age old issue. Many HAM/Skywarn/Local Spotter nets are pretty well closed during severe weather operations. This is especially true nearer the large Metro areas where they are generally very tightly controlled. There is a reason for this. That's so the Net Controller can get the information he needs from those that are in a position to send that information without lots of other distracting traffic.

This is basic dispatching. Storm Chasers can be a very valuable resource to the same controllers that won't let them enter "their" net. There's a lot of experience out there Chasing the same storms that spotters are working.

I'm not a HAM Operator though. So possibly my opinion here isn't worth the time to type it. On the other hand I have well over 20 years or Emergency Services (all types) experience and was, in fact, a 911 Dispatch Instructor.

Unfortunately, the "Good Ole Boys" do exist. We just went through a very traumatic upheaval right here in ST due to such a thing (I should say perceived thing). There will be some that resist any kind of change to "their" system. There will be a few that perceive a threat. However, there will be some that are willing to attempt a positive addition to the resources avaiable to them. By getting the NWSFO's on board will certainly lend a certain amount of credibility to those who are making a call in. Most Chasers I know wouldn't make a call into a net unless there was a valid and threatening situation that NEEDED to be called in.

Things like Spotter Net are really becoming a very valuable tool when it's used properly. In close to real time, I can view where a certain chaser is located in relation to a storm and in many cases, I can call his cell phone and get a report of what he is viewing. We certainly couldn't do this a few years ago (APRS not withstanding). In my own ventures, I've had NWSFO's call me and verify things to help verify their warnings they issued. All because I was in the right area.

So this idea CAN work. It may not work every where nor every time, but it's a step in the right direction to help get some credibility out there and be a resource rather than a nuiscance. Right now, in most areas Local EM's view Storm Chasers as a plague. This has been reinforced by the actions of a few. It's high time we try to turn this around and this idea of Shane's is a step in the right direction.

John Diel

 

[Bill Hark]

I think Shane has a good idea and I'll throw in my info:


William T. Hark, M.D.
KV0RTX

I have been chasing since 1997 across the Plains and the Mid-Atlantic and have intercepted numerous tornadoes, supercells and severe storms. I am also a Skywarn Spotter and have received my training from the Sterling and Wakefield, Va National Weather Service Offices.


Bill Hark

 

[Tony Laubach]

Tony Laubach
KW0LFF
Denver, Colorado (NWS Boulder Office)

Storm chaser since May 1997, official NWS spotter since 2000 (J06 - NWS Boulder), HAM operator since Nov. 2002 (formally KC0ONL).

Over 90,000 career chase miles since I started keeping track in 2002; did over 30,000 miles in 2007 running with various research, media, and entertainment projects as well as my own chasing. Have chased in 23 different states since 2002.

Trainings include the Severe Storms and Doppler Radar Conference, TESSA (Super Skywarn), various local trainings, and Meteorology classes at Metro State College of Denver.

 

[Mike Peregrine]

I'd love for this to work ... unfortunately my cynicism is at an all-time-high (which is saying a lot!) ... I think after the last big pow wow on this subject, everyone in here seemed pretty hopeful about Spotter Network (is that option 'toast' now or something - or is this just in addition to SN?)

Anyway - the callsign is KC0TCC ...

Skywarn trained, but figured it out by chasing for the last ten years.

 

[Tim Stoecklein]

Interesting effort Shane, kudos to you for the attempt:

KCØMDC - Spotter for Topeka, Goodland, and Pueblo NWS offices. Trained six years, trainer for three years under TOP.

...the NWS radio ops will take reports from anyone.Greg Higgins

I have found this to be true if the net control is indeed an NWS EMPLOYEE as opposed to a local ham running the net. When local agencies or organizations (ARES/RACES/ARC) are manning the controls things tend to be a bit more restrictive. The process is TOO different across different areas in my opinion. However, I have definitely appreciated the reduction of embelished reports that can come from someone whose training you have no knowledge.

All this aside, I think the NWS offices could benefit from a database from which they could pull a person's credentials. Something similar to QRZ would be simple and quick to use. Since many CWA's assign spotter numbers to their various spotters, they could enter this information into the database to keep it up to date. Type in a callsign, BOOM, they show up if they have attended the necessary training or have been accepted by their CWA as a credible source.

 

[Tim Stoecklein]

Sorry for the double post, but I wanted to address the Spotter Network on a separate post so it didn't get lost in my other babble.

I think the Spotter Network continues to show a great deal of promise, but I think it is can be reinforced by us to make it more valuable. I run APRS in my vehicle most of the time, so I automatically show up on the SN even when I'm not chasing or spotting. I simply list my callsign and mobile phone number so an NWSFO can contact me if they find me on the map to be near a feature or area from which they want ground truth.

I have been called on two separate occassions from my information on SN, and it surprised the hell out of me the first time. The met said he saw me on the SN, and that I was near an area where they wanted some ground truth. He continued by sharing his appreciation for my using SN to display my position and asked that I call back if I saw anything that could be of interest to their office.

While I didn't use ham radio to directly report any information, it helped facilitate the NWS's ability to call on a spotter when they felt the need to seek information. The Spotter Network served to help facilitate those events.

 

[John Wetter]

I agree with Tim. I think Spotter Network is going to supplant a lot of this. It also gives the WFO's a chance to call out to spotters/chasers in the field. I know I called a couple chasers listed on Spotter Network when I was working an event this summer. We've seen that research agencies and WFO's have found it to be a good resource, so I'd encourage people to go that route. A long list of chasers will not get referenced when it's busy... Especially if Net Control is a one person operation.

-John

 

[Dan Robinson]

Why couldn't something be impemented to completely bypass all Skywarn and HAM-facilitated reports? Have someone or some organization (perhaps an established, experienced chaser or spotter) register an 800 number that anyone in the country can call. The person on the end of the line can then relay the info to whatever authority will take the info (media, NWS, EMS, etc). That way every chaser has one number to call no matter where they are, and the person at the end of the line decides who needs to get the info. From what I'm reading, Spotter Network is doing this to some degree - but what if you don't have the equipment for realtime GPS reporting? Can you still be a part of that network without GPS tracking, and make reports via phone?

If certain spotter nets won't cooperate, then there's no reason everyone can't just start going over their heads, eventually making those nets irrelevant for getting severe weather information where it needs to go.

 

[Shane Adams]

If certain spotter nets won't cooperate, then there's no reason everyone can't just start going over their heads, eventually making those nets irrelevant for getting severe weather information where it needs to go.

I'm thinking the same thing. I've had a lot of flack on that other list from HAM types that are only interested in telling me why this idea won't work, and each time it basically comes down to "we're set in our ways and we're not going to change to meet you half way on this." So I'm totally in agreement with that attitude. Right idea, wrong avenue. If the weak link in the warning system doesn't want to work with the rest of us, we simply don't need them. I'd actually like to further expound on this opinion, but I'll bite my tongue.

 

[Dan Robinson]

I'm starting to think, why is HAM radio even necessary now for storm spotting? Communications technology has improved to the point that cell phones are nearly 100% reliable anywhere in the country. In the recent past, HAM radio was the only way to communicate and relay information like this. Back then, I could see its benefit. But times have changed. With the ease, ubiquitousness and reliability of the cell phone, it seems logical to eliminate the bureaucratically tangled, technologically and logistically complicated HAM radio avenue in favor of something that can be utilized on a broader level. I have nothing against HAM radio, but it seems like a more complicated and restrictive way to get things done than it needs to be, when it comes to time-critical severe weather information.

I know that towers can get damaged in a storm, but only in the biggest hurricanes have I ever lost cell service.

 

[rdale]

Because ham radio is free.

Your 800# organization is going to be FAR from free.

 

[Shane Adams]

Because ham radio is free.

Your 800# organization is going to be FAR from free.

Have you ever priced a quality HAM radio set up and installation? And you have to pay to take all the tests required to get the license. It's not exactly free either...plus the point we're all talking about here, that it costs you in time as well while you are jacked around by someone who doesn't know or trust you.

I've been thinking that, perhaps the only way to make a true effort trying to infiltrate the tightly-sealed HAM ranks is, physically be present at local SKYWARN meetings, and hand out a list there. This way the NWS person who gives the class and the HAMs in charge are right there, and they can either accept it or deny it. If they deny it, then game over. I refuse to believe there's some huge logistical problem that makes it impossible to implement this system. If a net controller can take the time to question a report and give the person the run-around, he's got time to look at a list. Get the callsign, get the name, look it up. If you can't hear "My name is Scott Smith" and then look at the "S" section of an alphabetized list, then something's wrong. That shouldn't take more than ten seconds.

Some people have said "just because you give them a list, how do they know it's valid?" and this is another problem that is purely sociological; these "good ole boys" are pretty much shell-shocked by anything not from their own county. They cannot look beyond "this person is not from here, we do not know him" and grasp the concept of "this person says they have been chasing ten years, they probably not only know what they're talking about but know more than the average spotter does." That concept makes perfect sense, but not to someone who's been born and raised into a system of "home grown" everything, where if you don't know the person, you can't trust them....and seeking credentials is a concept they've never learned. Their credentials are "what's that boy's name? Ah, I know his daddy." That's the barrier I doubt any idea, regardless of its potential efficiency and purpose, can crack.

The HAM types that are scoffing this idea simply don't want the boat rocked, regardless of the fact it's an attempt to unite all areas of reporting. But they sure don't mind running chasers into the ground. That's a simple case of ignorance bred by stubborness...something for which there is no cure.

 

[rdale]

I don't think people are 'scoffing' the idea, I think your 'outsiderness' is good but you have no clue how 'the system' works... Many times (possibly ALL THE TIME in smaller areas) the net controller runs Skywarn from his house during an event. For your list to be workable, every NCS will need it. If you can create a list of all (or even most) controllers, that in itself will be remarkable.

 

[Greg Higgins]

Time to fan the flames and as I'm a firefighter, I have all of the protective equipment I need.

I have been a member of this board ever since it started (don't have a clue why it only shows I've been a member since last year though) but rarely post. I would rather learn and educate myself and put in my 2 cents if I can contribute. During all of this time I have noticed that there is a group that advocates an "us against them" attitude (and I am NOT referring to this thread or any other specific thread) no matter what the topic. If their idea doesn't fly, then it is the "other" group that is out to get them. Ever hear the song "Paranoid" by Grand Funk Railroad (showing my age here!)?

In this particular thread, it is obvious that the way RACES SkyWarn nets operate is not understood and nobody wants to educate themselves and learn "why" they just can't pick up a radio and make a report. So time for a little class.

SkyWarn was developed by the NWS back in the early 1970's with the goal of training interested persons how to identify storm structure so that "ground truth" could be passed to the local NWS office as we all know that radar does not "show" everything and the mets wanted confirmation about what they were and were not seeing on radar. Over time, those who attended asked for more detailed and advanced training to increase their knowledge base so that they could be more effective in their reporting. During this time the majority of these spotters were public safety personnel (fire, law enforcement and EMS) who were out in the weather who made their report to their dispatchers who then called the NWS office with the information. Other citizens who had been trained used a phone to call in their reports. The amateur radio community also embraced SkyWarn as part of their community involvement. At what point amateur radios became a part of the equipment of a NWS office is unknown to me. However I have heard stories about NWS folks bringing in scanners to monitor the different spotter groups, be they public safety or amateur radio frequencies. Even do this day you will find scanners in the NWSO.

As part of an anticipated severe weather event, the NWS WCM (or other NWS staff) would notify and brief the local Emergency Managers in the NWS CWA (some of the CWA's are very large and may have 100s' of EM and local officials that need to be briefed / updated). EM and radio operators have had a long standing history of working with each other and probably some more amateur radio spotter groups were introduced in this manner to SkyWarn. Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES) was created under Federal Regulation (Part 97) in the 40's or 50"s (not positive on the date) and operates either under local or state laws. One of those laws mandates that only those radio operators who are "registered" with their local government agency may operate a radio while in RACES mode. It has nothing to do with your status or education. You simply must be a registered and trained radio operator. IT IS ILLEGAL BY LOCAL OR STATE LAWS TO OPERATE ON A RACES FREQUENCY DURING A RACES ACTIVATION! There are some RACES groups (Dallas, TX for example) that has interpreted this to mean that only Dallas County RACES members may use the frequency during a RACES activation while other groups will accept ANY RACES operator (ex.: Tarrant County, TX RACES activation will accept someone who identifies themselves with their local RACES affiliation and ID number).

Another organization is the Amateur Radio Emergency Service (ARES) which is affiliated with the Amateur Radio Relay League (ARRL) and is open to any amateur radio operator. These nets are a less restrictive but may not be utilized except in specific parts of the country.

The amateur radio community has built a system to SUPPORT SkyWarn operations over the years and is a major source of "ground truth" but they utilize only one method to communicate with the local NWS. The NWS has MANY communication avenues available; some offices may have more than others. In our office there are regular phone lines, dedicated severe weather phone lines - recorded, e-mail, internet (WxSpot and NWS IM from the NWS webpage), scanners and amateur radio (VHF, UHF, HF, VoIP - EchoLink and IRLP and APRS). No one is "forcing" you to use one method over another, it is your choice. With that being said, don't bad mouth another group for a system that they built and utilize following mandated rules and laws!

I understand that there is a history of some reports being ignored. Could it be that the report was so unintelligible, inaccurate or obviously flawed as to be worthless? As a radio operator at our NWS during severe weather events, I have heard it all (and there are probably some new ones out there too!)! There have been numerous times when someone has called in a potentially dangerous situation (rotating wall cloud, funnel, etc) that could not be confirmed by other "eyes" or was inconsistent with the current weather conditions. Then there are the folks that are so excited or scared that they can not be understood. And every year after the annual SkyWarn classes we will get tornado reports from EVERY storm! Speaking for only our NWS, we do not keep a list, nor do we want a list, of spotters / chasers in either print or on the internet as we take reports from whomever. We don't know the majority of the people, their background or SkyWarn training. What we do look for is good, factual information. Yes, there are some people that we do pay attention to because we know that we can depend on their report being solid. I would suggest that everyone take the time to visit a NWS office during a severe weather event and just watch and listen the radio operators. This "me, me, me" and "I'm the only one the knows whats' going on" attitude is silly and needs to go away. Folks, we all have the same goal and that is to provide information to the NWS to hopeful save lives and property in a severe weather event.

Instead of making up lists of people (which becomes outdated and a source of dissension when someone thinks they should be on it and are not, I refer you to the CFDG thread) why not be more constructive and post a thread on here (free) or develop a website(cost involved) with a list of all NWS offices with the contact numbers and other means of communication provided. A vast majority of NWS websites also have an amateur radio frequency list available.

As one of our past mets said, "The NWS serve's ALL groups".

I could continue but lets see if the information I have provided can make a difference. The other difference we all need to do is to work together and QUIT WHINING AND *****ING ABOUT HOW OTHERS DO THINGS!

As my grandfather (or was it my wife?) said, "A fox smells its' own hole".


Greg Higgins

 

[rdale]

Greg - while what you say is true, you're missing the fact that outsider reports can be completely ignored by some ham nets because they don't know you. Saying "the NWS serves all" is correct, but "every Skywarn net lets every ham report pass" is not.

Is it a majority? No. Is it a "major" issue? I don't think so. And I don't understand what your grandfather said :> But it's certainly something worth discussing.