Open letter to Spotter Network

[Tim Vasquez]

I want to apologize for bringing up the other spotter website in my post above (which I won't mention as they didn't want to be a part of this debate) -- this was an error on my part trying to take in what was going on here. Also as far as this thread being locked, that was not done by me. I had intended to keep it open, though I apparently failed to state that explicitly.

Tim

 

[Shawn Gossman]

You know I am no one special, no big name in the spotter/chaser field but I will say... I just like to stick with the real official spotter network...Skywarn Less drama...

 

[rdale]

That's no more "official" than Skywarn, and trust me - in the big picture - there is MUCH more drama in the ham world than in SN.

I will never forget the all-out rumbles that occurred when the Skywarn group leaders at the NWS office insisted that we use 6M for comms, even though they went to pot when a storm line passed between us. We went to the (insert shock here) PHONE when we couldn't use the radio, and about got cut off from the Skywarn system as a result. Their suggestion was that we send the info through four unlinked 2M repeaters instead, just having someone in range of 2 at a time relay the info.

 

[Jason Foster]

That's no more "official" than Skywarn, and trust me - in the big picture - there is MUCH more drama in the ham world than in SN.

Oh my god....you telling me. Everyday since giving it up months and months ago...I'm still not regretting it. Now looking at it from the outside:

LOL...do I get an infraction for making an ad hom. attack at a hobby...because I know I piss a ton of people off every time I bring this up.


I think in the end...with IEM taking their deal down...it'll fade and those that may have left SN will be back (hence my earlier post).

Was kinda surprised the thread was locked....maybe a mistake...it's happened a few times (even on non-issue threads).

 

[John Wetter]

This is a good privacy discussion but I hope people go away from the discussion just knowing the facts as the information provided by SN continues to make a larger impact in warning operations.

 

[Ryan Davis]

Precisely, Chris. And this is why I ALWAYS turn off my SN at a random distance from where I'm stopping that night. Yes it's not perfect... but it's better than just leading all you crumbs straight to me.

For instance, I could write an application that determines your home location --based on average occurrence of your SN icon-- and then sell that information to VictimizeMe.com so that thieves could burglarize your home when the data shows you're gone. Or perhaps I could use the data to know when you are out storm chasing and are staying at a motel (a quick GIS cross-reference) so that I can find your vehicle and steal all of your video equipment.

 

[Jason Foster]

The discussion on home locations is funny as hell when it comes from ham radio operators. HELLO! FCC database.

 

[Tim Shriver]

That's no more "official" than Skywarn, and trust me - in the big picture - there is MUCH more drama in the ham world than in SN.

I will never forget the all-out rumbles that occurred when the Skywarn group leaders at the NWS office insisted that we use 6M for comms, even though they went to pot when a storm line passed between us. We went to the (insert shock here) PHONE when we couldn't use the radio, and about got cut off from the Skywarn system as a result. Their suggestion was that we send the info through four unlinked 2M repeaters instead, just having someone in range of 2 at a time relay the info.

Shocking, I agree with rdale.

While Skywarn is not exclusive to ham operators hams do make up much of it. Thus drama does occur from time to time.

I have always thought that if a WFO is running a 2 way radio system, most of which are ham, for the receiving of storm reports it should be a Business Band system and not a ham system.

This removes the "rag chewer" issues and removes ARES/RACEs from the power structure. It seems, at least around here, that you need to be a ham to be a Skywarn Rep. This should not be so. While I support ARES/RACES I think they have to heavy a hand in the NWS right now.


It also make it a private frequency. I think this would be a major plus.

No comment on the SN issue as we do not use it.


Tim

 

[Jeff Smith]

I have always thought that if a WFO is running a 2 way radio system, most of which are ham, for the receiving of storm reports it should be a Business Band system and not a ham system.

Tim

Tim, I don't understand your thinking. If the NWS would go to business band to recieve reports, then your spotters would have to purchase expensive equipment just to be able to volunteer reports, hence cutting down dramatically your spotter base. Locally, we don't have any "rag-chewing" problems when severe wx is occurring and Tulsa has one of the best link systems (W5IAS)that I have seen. As soon as a net is called, all the rag chewing stops. It works really well in this area. There has been talk of going digital but you would have the same issue--volunteer spotters needing to buy expensive rigs just to be able to call in reports.

Note to mods--this ham discussion may need split into another thread so not to dreail the ongiong thread.

 

[Tim Shriver]

Tim, I don't understand your thinking. If the NWS would go to business band to recieve reports, then your spotters would have to purchase expensive equipment just to be able to volunteer reports, hence cutting down dramatically your spotter base. Locally, we don't have any "rag-chewing" problems when severe wx is occurring and Tulsa has one of the best link systems (W5IAS)that I have seen. As soon as a net is called, all the rag chewing stops. It works really well in this area. There has been talk of going digital but you would have the same issue--volunteer spotters needing to buy expensive rigs just to be able to call in reports.

Note to mods--this ham discussion may need split into another thread so not to dreail the ongiong thread.

$250 for the repeater license.

Used Motorola radios are cheap. You can get a P1225 (HT) which works on both ham and Business Band (BizBand) for around $150 used but in good shape.
Same with a mobile or base M1225s run about the same price. Around $150 to $200 used.
So the cost for equipment is in-line with ham.
Same with repeater and antennas. We use the same kind of repeaters
for both ham and business band.

With our WFO spotters do not use the NWS backbone (2 meter ham repeater system). They must put the report
into a local spotter group and that spotter group then goes on to the NWS backbone to submit the report. So not all spotters would have to have one. Just the spotter groups relay person.

spotter>relay person>WFO

If you attempt to put in a storm report via the NWS backbone you will be directed to a local spotter group frequency. There are few exceptions.

We have the same good luck with the ham side as you do. But I have seen
instances when a ham comes on and starts arguing with the radio folks at the WFO on the backbone.

We have used Business Band for many years, we have added the ham side of things just in the past 4 years. So we have a few years experience with both.

Cost wise, the $250 for the Business Band license is the only extra cost when compared with ham.

The added bonus to Bizband is that the user does not need to take a test.
You, as the Bizband license holder grants the users permission to use the system. No tests, no ARRL, no OO and its is a private frequency in most cases.

Bizband also has the side affect of getting folks interested in getting their ham
tickets as well. Win Win!


Try it, you might like it!

Tim
Note: I know that not all WFOs run things the same way as our does so this may or may not
apply to you. Just something that works for us and has some good benefits as well.

 

[Chris Novy]

With our WFO spotters do not use the NWS backbone (2 meter ham repeater system). They must put the report
into a local spotter group and that spotter group then goes on to the NWS backbone to submit the report. So not all spotters would have to have one. Just the spotter groups relay person.

spotter>relay person>WFO

Nets operate differently around the country. In some places the net ts run from the NWS office by local hams who come in whenever a watch is issued. Other places use a similar staffing plan for the NWS except the net is not actually run from the NWS office. Rather, NWS is just one node (albeit an important one) on the net. In some places NWS employees operate the radios themselves --no outsiders are needed. I like this system because there are no start-up delays when a watch or warning is issued.

Some nets use a tiered system. Spotters talk on one net and reports are passed to the NWS on another. Spotters therefore never speak directly with the NWS. I personally prefer a single net where everybody hears everybody else. This can be accomplished via repeater linking (in the case of wide coverage areas) and through good net discipline when there are a large number of hams on the air. The simpler and more direct the system is the faster reports can be transmitted and the better informed everyone is. Segmenting networks looks good on paper but in my experience it's often bureaucratic and inefficient.

..Chris..

 

[Andrew Herron]

Here in Wayne County we use the two tiered system because our CWA is large and widespread. It's not uncommon for our MICON net to be in red while other county nets are in green. We've found this system work very well though we do still have some dead spots in our repeater coverage.

 

[Tim Shriver]

Thanks for the constructive information.

I would think a single level system would work fine in areas of low severe weather probabilities or where the population
is wide spread and less dense.

With the number of hams our WFO deals with I would think running a "single level" net out of the WFO would find itself overwhelmed in an outbreak or widespread event.

Two levels allows for some added capacity, buffering and qualifying as well. Works well for us.

Also allows the WFO to put "all hands" on the weather related items.

Our WFO has a ham group that works the radios. They have a East, Central and West repeaters. They
can link or unlink as needed. Most of the time they link them all but have different net status levels they can use
on each repeater, if needed.

Works well for the number of hams and the cities/counties they cover.

But I do like the information on the single level as it is useful for local event logistics and coordination, etc.
Such as when we run a "damage net" out of the EOC and collect damage reports. That works best
as a single level net.


Tim