Chasers obtaining useful data?

[Warren Faidley]

Great discussion, but we are drifting away from the original questions. It's not about the contributions of chasers in reference to good deeds, spotting, unforeseen contributions in the future, promotion of safety, etc. The question remains: specifically what life saving data are toy rockets and other contraptions gathering, why are there no solid scientific objectives and why is this data never presented in a scientific format for peers to review? In fairness to them, I think it's a good discussion to have and finally be able to say with confidence it's either a BS label or it's legit.

W.

 

[rdale]

Well Reed was the first to openly make that claim with his radar and said he would be presenting talks and papers soon after deploying. It's been years and we aren't even seeing any basic data. That should answer your question

 

[Warren Faidley]

Well Reed was the first to openly make that claim with his radar and said he would be presenting talks and papers soon after deploying. It's been years and we aren't even seeing any basic data. That should answer your question

Yes, thanks. I had forgot about that quote.

W.

 

[Brian Hartmann]

As others have mentioned, ground-truth and verification are what I consider to be the largest contributions made by the general chasing community to research. A researcher who utilizes storm report data in conjunction with other more empirical data sets can glean some benefit from the growth in the number of eyes (and cameras) that might be on any specific storm system. Also, I would imagine that some of their video, not unlike your photos, Warren, have contributed to a more expansive data set of visual data on the various aspects/stages of tornado/supercell dynamics.

To answer your other primary query, I don't know if anybody has done a good bibliography of published research where chaser contributions are cited, though it would be valuable.

Brian

 

[Mike Johnston]

What I think would be really beneficial is if NSSL could harness the power of crowdsourcing somehow with chasers. mPING is a really good example of how NSSL is already doing this with various meteorological reports (http://mping.nssl.noaa.gov). If an engineer could somehow develop a relatively cheap, small, meteorological instrumentation that chasers could put on the top of their vehicles that would automatically relay information to an NSSL database for future analysis. Of course this is a pie in the sky dream, but given how many chasers are at various points around a supercell thunderstorm in the plains, there is a potential treasure trove of meteorological data that could be had.

Yes, Logan, I've often wondered the same thing myself. Especially w/ today's GPS technology, why not start building a database of simple surface observations close to the storms? Seems like even with modest participation by chasers, NSSL could obtain a lot of information at a relatively cheap cost - information that could supplement that gained through the big coordinated projects like VORTEX. I doubt much, if any, intervention would be required on the part of the observer. But, maybe I'm oversimplifying considerations like quality of measurements, calibration of instruments, etc.

Also, you used to hear quite a bit about the use of photogrammetry in tornado research, but hardly hear anything about it anymore. Has it pretty much exhausted its usefulness? If anything, it seems like the sheer volume of photographs taken by chasers these days would be making a contribution in this area.

After all, it's usually not the individual observer that is going to be doing the hard core research and publishing the scientific papers, but taking advantage of a great number of field observations must have some value.

 

[dixiealleyspotter]

Sorry if I steered this thread off topic but I want to provide my source... It is also a very interesting read. It does briefly discuss the idea of organized evacuations with the use of future Rapid Refresh Ensemble Models that are in development now.

I am social media illiterate to the point I cant even figure out how to upload a profile picture so forgive me for not providing a link. Here is crude cut/paste from the article by Jim Ladue. If you google his name you will find the whole article.

"Then there's FACETS, a project at NSSL to take the output to the next step where gridded probabilistic guidance by hazard can help inform people while they manage their risk. It'll take a lot of work to realize what form this output will take. But whatever form it takes, certainly institutions responsible for moving large numbers of people could use this guidance to begin preparations well before any legacy warning gets issued."

Warren will be happy to see that this article gets this thread back on track because it moves on to discuss what this thread is about.... the usefulness of localized in-situ data collected in tornadic circulations. Here is another cut/paste....

" in-situ measurements are showing it. This profile was taken during the Goshen, WY tornado during VORTEX2. The Tornado Intercept Vehicle sampled wind speeds at 3.5 m AGL (3 sec gust in red) considerably higher than the DOW radar beam at 30 m AGL (yellow)."

And finally....

"Not all the time do winds increase going from 10 to 3m. We still need a lot more data to determine what tornado behaviors are associated with a reverse wind profile, and also strong vertical flow near ground level observed when tornadoes exhibit strong corner flow. This information is critical. Assets like mobile radar and in-situ probes, whether by the TIV or by smaller probes, will need to sample tornado environments numerous times in order to acquire data from a variety of tornado behaviors in a variety of terrain. I encourage those chasers willing to put armored vehicles in harms way to go the extra inch it would take to outfit their vehicles with research quality, and well sited, anemometers. The latter may sound controversial but if their bent on doing this, they could at least help provide the data to answer these questions. After the money spent on armoring vehicles, adding a research quality anemometer should be pretty trivial. Then we can produce more accurate models of building performance in tornado environments."

 

[rdale]

Thanks Dixie, but I think you misunderstood. That's referring to hospitals, outdoor facilities, large manufacturing plants, etc. Not evacuating cities. Now back to the topic

 

[Mark Blue]

The question remains: specifically what life saving data are toy rockets and other contraptions gathering, why are there no solid scientific objectives and why is this data never presented in a scientific format for peers to review? In fairness to them, I think it's a good discussion to have and finally be able to say with confidence it's either a BS label or it's legit.

W.

IIRC, and based only on what I remember from the Storm Chasers show on Discovery, Dr. Wurman gave Reed a pretty hard time over the phone about not letting other scientists know what his specific research plans were for the radar he installed on the Dominator. Who knows how contentious that phone call really was as it was a reality show after all, but I could understand why he's kept his research under wraps over the last 3 or 4 years if it did go down the way it was portrayed. He was just getting started and already he was getting the third degree about his plans.

It seems like those rocket probes were taking basic atmospheric readings like pressure, temperature, wind data, dewpoint, and GPS location. There were probably a couple more, but I can't imagine basic data such as that solving the tornado riddle. I could see it feeding into larger research efforts in the future, but I doubt Reed and company will be willing to share when the time eventually arrives.

 

[Warren Faidley]

Sorry if I steered this thread off topic but I want to provide my source... It is also a very interesting read. It does briefly discuss the idea of organized evacuations with the use of future Rapid Refresh Ensemble Models that are in development now.

I am social media illiterate to the point I cant even figure out how to upload a profile picture so forgive me for not providing a link. Here is crude cut/paste from the article by Jim Ladue. If you google his name you will find the whole article.

"Then there's FACETS, a project at NSSL to take the output to the next step where gridded probabilistic guidance by hazard can help inform people while they manage their risk. It'll take a lot of work to realize what form this output will take. But whatever form it takes, certainly institutions responsible for moving large numbers of people could use this guidance to begin preparations well before any legacy warning gets issued."

Warren will be happy to see that this article gets this thread back on track because it moves on to discuss what this thread is about.... the usefulness of localized in-situ data collected in tornadic circulations. Here is another cut/paste....

" in-situ measurements are showing it. This profile was taken during the Goshen, WY tornado during VORTEX2. The Tornado Intercept Vehicle sampled wind speeds at 3.5 m AGL (3 sec gust in red) considerably higher than the DOW radar beam at 30 m AGL (yellow)."

And finally....

"Not all the time do winds increase going from 10 to 3m. We still need a lot more data to determine what tornado behaviors are associated with a reverse wind profile, and also strong vertical flow near ground level observed when tornadoes exhibit strong corner flow. This information is critical. Assets like mobile radar and in-situ probes, whether by the TIV or by smaller probes, will need to sample tornado environments numerous times in order to acquire data from a variety of tornado behaviors in a variety of terrain. I encourage those chasers willing to put armored vehicles in harms way to go the extra inch it would take to outfit their vehicles with research quality, and well sited, anemometers. The latter may sound controversial but if their bent on doing this, they could at least help provide the data to answer these questions. After the money spent on armoring vehicles, adding a research quality anemometer should be pretty trivial. Then we can produce more accurate models of building performance in tornado environments."

Yes, but this statement applies to anyone out chasing, including TIV's or any chaser, spotter or person who is willing to use quality anemometers on their chase vehicle, remote probes or their homes. The fact that you use "instruments " does not make you a researcher, but rather, a private weather watcher who contributes data to a larger pool of information. Show me a peer-reviewed scientific paper that's accepted by a major scientific publication by one of the so-called researcher chasers -- based completely on their "chasing" research and I'll stand corrected.

Like you noted, my photos are used for scientific research, most recently by Josh Wurman for fixing specific radar-related events during the El Reno tornado. I think it's wonderful that I'm able to contribute, but I'm not running to the keyboard to promote my lightly armored Xterra on Facebook as a "research vehicle" or promoting myself as a "Photographic Researcher" who needs special treatment by law enforcement and the media because lives depend on it.

The interesting thing about all this is that the offender(s) could easily drop the "researcher" label tomorrow and cut out the sensationalized and often incorrect forecasts and they would gain a world of respect for being what they truly are, chasers making apps, tee shirts, productions and other chasing-related services and products for profit while contributing some limited data as weather watchers or spotters. I don't see anything wrong with that? Sean Casey is a good example. He's shot some excellent footage and made fine productions without ever claiming to be anything beyond his actual occupation.

W.

Edit: I think this answers the original question... thanks everyone.

 

[Stan Rose]

Yes, but this statement applies to anyone out chasing, including TIV's or any chaser, spotter or person who is willing to use quality anemometers on their chase vehicle, remote probes or their homes. The fact that you use "instruments " does not make you a researcher, but rather, a private weather watcher who contributes data to a larger pool of information. Show me a peer-reviewed scientific paper that's accepted by a major scientific publication by one of the so-called researcher chasers -- based completely on their "chasing" research and I'll stand corrected.

Like you noted, my photos are used for scientific research, most recently by Josh Wurman for fixing specific radar-related events during the El Reno tornado. I think it's wonderful that I'm able to contribute, but I'm not running to the keyboard to promote my lightly armored Xterra on Facebook as a "research vehicle" or promoting myself as a "Photographic Researcher" who needs special treatment by law enforcement and the media because lives depend on it.

The interesting thing about all this is that the offender(s) could easily drop the "researcher" label tomorrow and cut out the sensationalized and often incorrect forecasts and they would gain a world of respect for being what they truly are, chasers making apps, tee shirts, productions and other chasing-related services and products for profit while contributing some limited data as weather watchers or spotters. I don't see anything wrong with that? Sean Casey is a good example. He's shot some excellent footage and made fine productions without ever claiming to be anything beyond his actual occupation.

W.

Edit: I think this answers the original question... thanks everyone.

Glad your question was answered...mine wasn't. In fact, since Sean is apparently out of the equation, and Tim (RIP), the only other name mentioned was Reed. If it's all about him, why not ask him? Id bet he'd be happy to respond.

 

[Warren Faidley]

Glad your question was answered...mine wasn't. In fact, since Sean is apparently out of the equation, and Tim (RIP), the only other name mentioned was Reed. If it's all about him, why not ask him? Id bet he'd be happy to respond.

In fairness, Mr. Timmer is not the only chaser who has used such tactics and he won't be the last. I've seen it done with hurricane chasing and most recently with other armored vehicle personnel. Chasers are free to decide what they think about any specific chaser(s) and the tactics they use, good or bad. In reality, it's just an opinion. My original question was about the scientific merit -- posed to those in this group who have advanced meteorological knowledge. This exact question has been asked numerous times on news programs, Facebook and other social media -- directly to the chaser(s) in question and they have either dodged the question or used some crafty response that still implies it's life saving work. In addition, I believe ST is an open forum so any chaser is welcomed to join and reply. However, you have to ask yourself why the biggest names in chasing never join any discussion on ST or contribute anything back to chasing community in general.... but that's for another discussion.

W.

 

[calvinkaskey]

There is probably a lot of visual data that can be seen and taught a lot better to meteorologists. Every meteorology major should be required to go on tornado hunts to know what is what. Seems like I know more just from reading, watching video and going out in the field.

 

[rdale]

Calvin, many met majors go into areas where storm chasing in the field would not be a benefit.

 

[John Hudson]

Well Reed was the first to openly make that claim with his radar and said he would be presenting talks and papers soon after deploying. It's been years and we aren't even seeing any basic data. That should answer your question

I have to say that I mostly agree with this point of view. Don't get me wrong, I admire Reed Timmer as a forecaster, and he gets great video. No argument there at all. He is out there living his dream and having a good time with it, and I have to say there are probably many on this board (myself included) who would love to be in his shoes.

What I do take exception to however, are the claims that it is all done in the name of science. Reed Timmer is in the business of selling dramatic video, end of story. He is an exceptional marketer, and boatloads of toy rockets, quadcopter drones or any other toys thrown into tornadoes add to the drama of good footage, but the likelihood of these endeavors ever contributing to our understanding of severe weather is very remote.

The personal motivations that draw chasers out to the plains every year are as varied as the chasers themselves, but I have always believed in being on the level. I love science, sure, but that's not why I chase. I chase for the awesomeness of the storm, and the thrill of seeing what the atmosphere is capable of when it gets attitude.

My belief is that the "key" to unlocking the mystery of the tornado (if there really is such a thing) is currently hidden in the mountains of data that have already been gleaned from field efforts like VORTEX and others like it. All that is needed is for someone out there to put the pieces of the puzzle together.

John
VE4 JTH

 

[Jeff Hawkins]

From Warren's original post:
"How much real and useful scientific data is obtained by chasers using high-speed cameras, probes and rockets. And, is such data going to eventually "save lives" as some chasers claim? ... And lastly, why is this life-saving information that chasers gather never published in peer-reviewed scientific publications, the hallmark of where you would expect such research to be presented?"

I'm a late-comer to this thread, and there are multiple previous comments that speak to my thoughts, but I want to comment about Warren's original post. Warren, you have a way with exposing hypocrisy. Things I've thought about while following threads about storm chasing equipment, "discoveries" from using such equipment, used to justify why those people are there chasing storms, and just what in blazes those findings have to do with legitimate science, you have got a way of just laying bare! While I really do wish to not be critical of those who have tried to use scientific equipment to probe and analyze severe phenomena, I've wondered what their motives and their passion are. Is it all about science for these people as they claim? Or is it just an excuse to cleanse their guilty consciences? Or to make money? I really doubt the last one, despite appearances. Thanks for posting your original question, it's important and worthwhile to seek the truth of these things.