Radar Holes

[Cameron E.]

You've got me!

There are two possible explanations:

• NWS was told by the Office and Management and Budget to say no for budgetary reasons but I cannot imagine that is the case. My DC friends who are in a position to know say that is not true.
• NWS thinks, even if they got extra money for maintenance, that managing 20 additional radars, in distant locations from their offices, was just too much trouble. For example, a radar in Paris, TX is a l-o-n-g way from any of their existing offices.

The NWS these days has many, many issues. They don't seem to be able to focus on their core mission and, as a result, tornado warnings are less accurate than they were a dozen years ago. The GFS is significantly inferior to the ECMWF and UKMET with no sign of the gap closing; that contributed to subpar warnings of Hurricane Ian. I could go on but those are sufficient to make my point.

Lol. Thank you for your input and what you know. How could the NWS tornado reports be declining in quality? Lack of personnel?

Maybe I'll start a new thread called, "Opinions on The Quality of Work Performed at The NWS?" lol.

I personally have no idea what the work environment/ethic/quality is like in the NWS. I'm in construction. But to hear from those who DO know would add value to StormTrack surely.

 

[Mike Smith]

Cameron: I wrote this for the tenth anniversary of JLN. The NWS's own stats show the deterioration: https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2021/05/21/joplin-tornado-warning-improvement-nws/

Since then, we have had a number of EF-3 intensity tornadoes that were poorly warned.

• Bensalem Tornado: Another Dangerous National Weather Service Warning Miss
• Gaylord, Michigan Struck By Strong Tornado

You can search my blog for other stories about unwarned strong tornadoes but the two above are pretty typical.

The situation has gotten bad enough that I have been calling for a National Disaster Review Board, modeled after the National Transportation Safety Board, to not just review the NWS but also FEMA, Red Cross, EM's and all associated with major weather-related disasters.

While this is an interesting topic, I do not wish to continue it because I do not want to sound like I am beating up on the agency. There are tremendously dedicated and talented people at the NWS and I want them to be hugely successful with their core mission.

 

[Gavin Nichols]

Cameron: I wrote this for the tenth anniversary of JLN. The NWS's own stats show the deterioration: https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2021/05/21/joplin-tornado-warning-improvement-nws/

Since then, we have had a number of EF-3 intensity tornadoes that were poorly warned.

• Bensalem Tornado: Another Dangerous National Weather Service Warning Miss
• Gaylord, Michigan Struck By Strong Tornado

You can search my blog for other stories about unwarned strong tornadoes but the two above are pretty typical.

The situation has gotten bad enough that I have been calling for a National Disaster Review Board, modeled after the National Transportation Safety Board, to not just review the NWS but also FEMA, Red Cross, EM's and all associated with major weather-related disasters.

While this is an interesting topic, I do not wish to continue it because I do not want to sound like I am beating up on the agency. There are tremendously dedicated and talented people at the NWS and I want them to be hugely successful with their core mission.

Just wanted to clear something up, could it have something to do with the fact these happened in areas where tornadoes of this rating are not common? the 2 you listed were in Michigan and Pennsylvania. those offices will have the knowledge about tornadoes yet have not experienced them.

another thing to point out, Obviously it's not the NWS's fault for their current radar problems.
I really hope it does not come down to some large outbreak or a single mass casualty tornado happening to have the feds provide the funding to Update the current radars or put in some new ones. that has happened before, and at this rate it will happen again and continue to happen unless things change. Any kind of radar is better than none at all.
As someone who Knows a lot historically, The fact we have these problems is ridiculous and little is being done by the people who can while the people who cant are trying desperately as possible to get it fixed.

 

[rdale]

The NWS is working on a whole new national radar network.

 

[Mike Smith]

Gavin,

could it have something to do with the fact these happened in areas where tornadoes of this rating are not common? the 2 you listed were in Michigan and Pennsylvania. those offices will have the knowledge about tornadoes yet have not experienced them.

The problem is not confined to states where tornadoes are less frequent. Here is an unwarned EF-3 from Kansas: The Truth of The (Non-) Warning of the Eureka, Kansas, Tornado

Obviously it's not the NWS's fault for their current radar problems.

Whose responsibility is it? Isn't it their job to run the national radar network?

I really hope it does not come down to some large outbreak or a single mass casualty tornado

We've already had the mass casualty tornado: Joplin on May 22, 2010. One hundred sixty-one people died due to a terrible failure of both the NWS and local emergency management. If you care to read my short book on that horrible storm, it can be downloaded here: "Warnings: The True Story of How Science Tamed the Weather" , Smith, Mike - Amazon.com or you can borrow it from the library.

The NWS is working on a whole new national radar network.

They've been "working" on it since the aught's. They are not meaningfully closer now than they were 15 years ago.

 

[Gavin Nichols]

The problem is not confined to states where tornadoes are less frequent. Here is an unwarned EF-3 from Kansas: The Truth of The (Non-) Warning of the Eureka, Kansas, Tornado

It is true that it is not localized, I may actually look into the policies for each office, just to see if that played a role.

Whose responsibility is it? Isn't it their job to run the national radar network?

YES. it is their responsibility to run them....and it's NOAA's and the DOC's responsibility to support them since the NWS is in that department. which means this problem is the fault of MANY. not just the NWS.

We've already had the mass casualty tornado: Joplin on May 22, 2010. One hundred sixty-one people died due to a terrible failure of both the NWS and local emergency management. If you care to read my short book on that horrible storm, it can be downloaded here: "Warnings: The True Story of How Science Tamed the Weather" , Smith, Mike - Amazon.com or you can borrow it from the library.

It is true that Joplin caused Some of the problems to be exposed. BUT the problem is NOT fixed in the slightest. And that happened over a decade ago now, and we have not had a event like that since then except for a couple select times. Surely things would have been fixed by now if they tried right? Wrong. they are STILL making the same mistakes, and its only a matter of time until another Joplin happens.

 

[rdale]

BUT the problem is NOT fixed in the slightest. And that happened over a decade ago now, and we have not had a event like that since then except for a couple select times. Surely things would have been fixed by now if they tried right? Wrong. they are STILL making the same mistakes, and its only a matter of time until another Joplin happens.

Remember Gavin we've discussed in the past that you're in the learning stage. Take advantage of this time to read and digest information, and not pass blame on people for a process you don't understand in a field you have no education or training.

Another Joplin certainly will happen, but that's because tornadoes are not perfectly predictable. I assume you are reply to something Mike said - but actual severe weather experts know his claims are not valid. Don't get caught up in them.

 

[Mike Smith]

Another Joplin certainly will happen, but that's because tornadoes are not perfectly predictable. I assume you are reply to something Mike said where he probably claimed that had he been in charge of the WFO and EM then no deaths would occur, but realize he's stretching the truth in order to sell books. Actual severe weather experts know his claims are not valid. Don't get caught up in them.

The above is utterly false, Rob. I've never said nor written anything close to the above.

1. There is no reason whatsoever for another tornado that was that obvious to be unwarned of.
2. There is no reason whatsoever for an emergency manager to sound the sirens in Joplin when there is no tornado warning for Joplin and then not re-sound them when a tornado warning is actually issued.
3. A tornado of the strength of JLN's in a city with that density of population would clearly have caused double-digit deaths. Triple digits had not been seen in the USA in the tornado warning era. That is a sign that the warnings were utterly ineffective and wrong.
4. I went to JLN -- three times -- and conducted interviews for my book, including at a Chamber of Commerce meeting. These very smart people told me, to a man and to a woman, they had "no idea" a tornado was headed for JLN. They thought the tornado was going to the north. They thought that the tornado was going to the north because that is what the NWS explicitly told them.
5. If you, for once, would read what I write before commenting, you'll see I suggested he could go to the library. That is a free way to read the book and I get no revenue if anyone decides to do so.
   

This is a false, personal attack. Moderators?

 

[Cameron E.]

Yeah Dale. Did you even read his articles. I did lol. He seems like a fairly intelligible fella.

You can't just say "Actual severe weather experts know his claims are not valid," without expanding on that claim.

 

[rdale]

Yeah Dale. Did you even read his articles.

Yeah E, I did. I actually teach a tornado awareness class across the country using the Joplin case as the basis.

He seems like a fairly intelligible fella.

He's very smart! He developed a business from the ground up that provided great alert and warning tools for businesses and sold it off to AccuWeather. Not many can do that, and you have to be somewhat intelligent I'd say

You can't just say "Actual severe weather experts know his claims are not valid," without expanding on that claim.

I can because they have been debunked many times. He's never been a NWS met, he's never worked in a WFO, he's never been an emergency manager, and never had to press the button for the siren. But he does write a good book and he does promote it well.

Were mistakes made in Joplin? Massive ones. If he was running the WFO and the EOC would he have been able to save dozens more lives? There's no evidence to validate that, and again I refer you to the fact that he's never worked in a WFO or EOC to begin with as a sign

My reply was intended to tone Gavin down, as he has a great passion for weather but no background - and when you make accusations like that, which are permanently recorded, it can come back to haunt him.

 

[Mike Smith]

More personal attacks with no evidence from Rob.

I can because they have been debunked many times.

As usual, Rob provides no specifics, no names, no evidence.

Yes, there were "massive' mistakes in JLN -- which is the basis for the book. What Rob doesn't like is that someone from outside of his "club" (government employees) first documented those massive mistakes in ways that are irrefutable. If they were refutable, I'm certain Rob would have done by now given the intervening 11 years since When the Sirens Were Silent was published. Instead, he keeps making evidence-free accusations.

The fact I wasn't working for the NWS is irrelevant. As documented in Sirens my team not only accurately warned of the JLN tornado, we did it with so much lead time that one of our railroad clients was able to move both people and equipment out of the path of the tornado in plenty of time!

Our team was so good that in 2018, we were given the American Meteorological Society's Award for Outstanding Specific Prediction. The first time it has ever been given to non-government forecasters. Why? We developed a unique way to forecast flash floods and prevented a huge train derailment in a remote, dessert area of Mexico where no radar data existed. Reviewing the other award winners, one would certainly put us on par with a NWS office! It is the American Meteorological Society that judged we had prevented "loss of life and property."

 

[John Farley]

Getting a bit more back on topic, the revival of this thread got me wondering if there was any news on the new radar location that was funded a few years ago near Durango, CO, which would be a huge help (if put in the right place) for the radar hole in my local area. So I did a little searching and found the article below, which I had missed at the time. It certainly gets into some of the issues that can come up with creating a radar site in relatively remote areas, especially when mountains are involved.

New radar project put on hold because of location problems – The Durango Herald

 

[rdale]

Good info John! I forgot about that.

Also many of the non-NWS radars hosted at universities are online with Iowa State and GR2AE.