Spotter Network "Note" field

[Jesse Risley]

On your account settings, there is a tab that allows you to insert personal information that only NWS/EMA have access to. I've always put my local NWS Office Spotter ID number in that space.

While I understand that not all NWS offices issues spotter numbers or even maintain a current database, for those that do, having this information in your profile (spotter ID or most recent FO training session) might lend a bit more credibility to the person reporting. I don't see where it could hurt.

 

[Jarrod Cook]

Jeeze. Despite what a few posters may think, I have a sense of humor too and don't have any problem with inside jokes. I just think there are better outlets for them than the spotter network. If that makes me a boring wx-weenie, then you can think that.

I know this is not nearly as big of a deal as the bogus reporting. I'll admit when I started this thread, I had forgotten that the NWS/EMA has their own contact information you can display. However this doesn't mean that absolutely no NWS or EMA people will never see the public comments. And I know if they did see the one-liners that doesn't necessarily mean they will automatically think lower of that person, but I can easily see the ones who are already sick of the bogus reporting also think lower of these comments in the notes fields.

The main purpose of SN is to provide an easy and accurate method for chasers and spotters to sumbit reports and provide position information to NWS - who are professionals. What's wrong with trying to act semi-professional on the other end (SN) by the information you provide? You'd do the same thing if you called them on the phone!

 

[Robert Dewey]

We all (including NWS) want non-severe reports, since it confirms that a storm we might be on the edge about warning is not doing anything at ground level.

I was just going to write something like that, but see you have it covered. I don't think that sub-severe reports are necessarily a bad thing, as it can confirm the non-severity of a storm.

There have been plenty of instances where an SVR has been issued for my exact location -- and the radar definitely looks ominous -- but the most I encounter is very heavy rains and a brief 35MPH gust. I would say that's a pretty important report.

 

[Jarrod Cook]

I was just going to write something like that, but see you have it covered. I don't think that sub-severe reports are necessarily a bad thing, as it can confirm the non-severity of a storm.

There have been plenty of instances where an SVR has been issued for my exact location -- and the radar definitely looks ominous -- but the most I encounter is very heavy rains and a brief 35MPH gust. I would say that's a pretty important report.

I agree. I've actually made a report on SN once like this. They had a SVR issued for where I was, and I sent a report stating the winds were only 35-40 MPH and no hail, and they canceled the warning soon after.

 

[Shane Adams]

I was just going to write something like that, but see you have it covered. I don't think that sub-severe reports are necessarily a bad thing, as it can confirm the non-severity of a storm.

There have been plenty of instances where an SVR has been issued for my exact location -- and the radar definitely looks ominous -- but the most I encounter is very heavy rains and a brief 35MPH gust. I would say that's a pretty important report.

This is an interesting point. I think the main reason it's generally accepted that sub-severe reports are a waste of time, is because the whole principle of having spotters in the field is to protect life and property...not much danger from benign, non-severe stuff.

However, on the flip-side, it is a good thing to provide ground truth relative to radar observations, for both severe and non-severe events, because regardless of what side of the threshold we're dealing with, the results are the same: increased knowledge and understanding of what's really happening with storms VS what the radar shows.

Maybe we need a new breed of wx-observer, the ones who simply go out and report any activity within a storm, for the main purpose of radar interpretation. It would be like spotting but in the interest of radar technology/science first. Then again, I'm sure many have had this same epiphany before.

 

[rdale]

"I think the main reason it's generally accepted that sub-severe reports are a waste of time, is because the whole principle of having spotters in the field is to protect life and property..."

Actually it's because previous forms of communications (ham radio, phone) meant that the report of blue skies tied up the line, so a tornado report gets missed or delayed. Now with SN being automatic, that simply isn't an issue.

 

[Ben Holcomb]

IWX thanked me last Friday for sending in pea sized hail and 45-50 mph wind reports - sub severe. They were on the brink of warning the cell and held off for awhile because of my report. (They even told me that over IEM Chat)

Maybe the WFO's in the plains don't care as much, but I'm guessing the Midwest/Eastern WFO's really appreciate the sub-severe reports so they can overlay real reports with their radar. Otherwise they're just relying on radar (And last time I checked, that is a bad thing to do according to ST...........)

 

[Damon Poole]

I generally only phone in reports when I have reportable criteria. For non-severe reports, and post storm reports, I use the web form on the local NWS website, except when it's obvious that it's time critical (i.e, warning verification/decision). That way I'm not wasting time that might be needed elsewhere.

 

[Erik Perozo]

Well sometimes I don't think it does any good to submit reports via SN or by calling in reports directly to the NWS. For example early this morning as Hanna was making landfall I called in a report directly to the NWS near the time of occurrence and submitted it via SN and neither showed up on the LSR's. I guess stating that you are a Met Grad doesn't mean anything when calling in reports. I'm sorry for sounding like I'm on a rampage but I have just had to many bad experiences calling in reports stating that I am a Met Grad student assuming that would add more validity to the report but Bubba Bob Coop Observer calls in a report of a broken plum tree branch or sheriffnado and bam it gets slapped on the LSR. I'm just hoping the wind report I called in this morning was of some valuable use being that it was instrument recorded. The reason I am a little mad is bc I know they use the data to go over storm events sometimes but they can't use a report they don't have or haven't submitted.

 

[Chris Nuttall]

Just because your report didn't show up on an LSR doesn't necessarily mean anything. Someone could have called in and reported the same thing, in which case there is no sense in reporting it twice. Each report of hail or wind damage, including multiple reports of the same thing, are classified as separate events. Maybe the report wasn't jiving with what they saw on radar or other reports they were getting. Maybe they wanted a second confirmation before sending it out. Maybe they are going to wait and send out a mass LSR after everything is in. There could be any number of reasons for this.

Some offices don't like to issue tornado LSRs during the event unless they are absolutely sure. Once an LSR is issued, it's basically impossible to "take back" and correct the report. Can a correction be issued? Sure. It will also probably be corrected before the official Storm Data is issued, but once it's already been transmitted and is out there, users are going to take the info and run with it.

Most of your general media types (reporters, not necessarily mets) only see info on LSRs. How many times have we heard, "There were over 500 tornadoes today!" LSRs can become tricky buisness.

 

[Tyler Allison]

What Chris said. I would not expect more than 10% of reports get turned into LSRs. It's not that the NWS doesn't trust or even appreciate the reports.

 

[John Wetter]

Having been in the middle of taking in reports and LSR's going out many many times, the comments are correct that in 'larger' events only about 10% or so of them are LSR'ed. This can be due to staffing and also just what makes sense to put out in statements. I've seen events with 10+ pages of reports (~40 reports per page) turn into an LSR count of around 40 or so. A spotter shouldn't expect that every one of their reports, or even a minority of their reports to end up in LSR's, that's just not how it works. Yes, it's always nice to see your report end up in an LSR but it shouldn't be expected.