CHASER HAMS & SPOTTERS NOT INVOLVED IN FORMAL SKYWARN NETS

[rdale]

You are assuming the AVERAGE chaser spends weeks or months per season chasing storms... I'd say that's FAR more than AVERAGE. But again both of us are going off "numbers" out of our back side, so maybe it's a difference of the word "average" :> Or a difference in the word "chaser"

Again, I have no problem with what you're trying to do. But it'd be SO much easier to accomplish if you dropped the 'attack language' like your closing thought.

"So basically, you mean to say that all chasers after 1996 suck."

If I meant to say that all chasers after 96 suck, don't you think I have the cahunas to say it? When have I bit my tongue to avoid "offending" you? I mean that the number of chasers went up DRAMATICALLY over the past 10 years. And I don't think the bulk of them are "highly experienced vs spotters" as you are trying to claim.

"like saying Gary England isn't light years ahead of you in experience in front of the camera."

Ehhh, let's not go there. Having more experience can lead some to a mindset of complacency, to the thought that "I know all I need to know about this subject, so why bother continuing to learn?" Whether your a TV met, chaser, or spotter -that mentality can rob you of some valuable knowledge.

 

[Shane Adams]

"like saying Gary England isn't light years ahead of you in experience in front of the camera."

Ehhh, let's not go there. Having more experience can lead some to a mindset of complacency, to the thought that "I know all I need to know about this subject, so why bother continuing to learn?" Whether your a TV met, chaser, or spotter -that mentality can rob you of some valuable knowledge.

That's not the case though. It's no different than saying I'm nowhere near the chaser Gene Moore is, which is true. It's nothing bad, it's just a natural process of things. Those who have more experience are more finely-tuned within their field of choice (or hobby or whatever). We all do the best we can, but our best cannot match that of another individual who has 2-3 times our experience.

This same philosophy applies to the chaser/spotter thing across the board.

 

[rdale]

I don't agree that experience is the sole determiner of ability. I think there's more to this than "he's been doing this 30 years and I've only been doing it 10 so he's better." 10 years vs 1 year? Probably. But as I mentioned above, there can be a point where people can allow their experience to put them in a mindset of "I don't need more training."

I've never judged his doppler interpration abilities, never seen him speak at any of the sevwx conferences I've been at, let alone attend one, so for anyone (let alone someone who hasn't seen me) to compare is just not do-able.

So -- once again -- blanket statements don't help. Drop your "most spotters are stupid" line and you'll get more support. I'd say that most (if not all) Skywarn peeps on this forum have a thought process different than your KS foe. But very few are going to join in backing you when in the next breath you slam them/us.

 

[Shane Adams]

Drop your "most spotters are stupid" line and you'll get more support.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said "spotter" and "stupid" in the same sentence, nor did I imply such. You're confusing "stupid" and "inexperienced"...two different things.

I'd say that most (if not all) Skywarn peeps on this forum have a thought process different than your KS foe.

Then where the hell are they?

But very few are going to join in backing you when in the next breath you slam them/us.

Ok, would you rather I blow sunshine up their a**? If I can't be honest with them, then what's the point? If chasers didn't have something to bring to the table that many spotters don't (years of experience with many intercepts/observations), then I wouldn't have bothered with this thread from the beginning.

I don't agree that experience is the sole determiner of ability. I think there's more to this than "he's been doing this 30 years and I've only been doing it 10 so he's better." 10 years vs 1 year? Probably. But as I mentioned above, there can be a point where people can allow their experience to put them in a mindset of "I don't need more training."

I've never judged his doppler interpration abilities, never seen him speak at any of the sevwx conferences I've been at, let alone attend one, so for anyone (let alone someone who hasn't seen me) to compare is just not do-able.

It's not about you or me, that was just an example to further my point. I think I've done my part here. I've started controversy that could possibly (as John and others pointed out before) morph into something positive down the road. But we're gonna have to see the salty, KB5 types get onboard for it to ever work.

 

[rdale]

Here's a method of attacking the situation that I think has a much better chance to succeed...

Instead of trying to 1) compile a list that would be hard to maintain and 2) getting that list to every net controller for Skywarn (even harder) -- how about setting up a team of maybe a handful of Skywarn spotters, chasers, and a NWS rep or two. They'd be an "outreach" group. If you have a problem where a Skywarn net didn't accept your report, or gave you more questions about doubting it than you feel -- then pass the info along to this "team" who would do their best to contact that Skywarn net or specific NCS and reach out to bridge the gap.

That saves a TON of issues I think are impossible to overcome, and while that initial report still got strung up, it's probably the best way to keep it from happening again.