FYI, this is a scheduled presentation at the Minnesota Skywarn Workshop on April 10th! Come up and see it everyone! www.mnskywarnworkshop.org
It also was talked about at NSWW.
It also was talked about at NSWW.
-
A new feature has been added to the Xenforo software - Shoutbox. A quick chat platform
- Science and Storm Chasing
- Advanced weather & chasing
Storm Reporting Problems and Proposals
- Thread starter Bill Tabor
- Start date
Rob Herman
EF2
I've been to many spotter training sessions over the years. Attendance by emergency personnel appeared to be lacking. I say appeared because I'm not familiar with all the emergency personnel in my area.
Now they have the only closed training session, I know of, in the KTOP warning area.
Emergency personnel are provided the equipment and may have the dedication to do storm spotting, but if their heart isn't in it they might just end up being a stationary target.
Randy Denzer
EF2
I guess I'll let you prove me wrong
but I don't see the slightest chance in he-double-hockey sticks that my local fire chief or county sheriff will be adding weather spotting to their academy requirements.
ESPECIALLY if it comes as a "Washington DC suggestion."
Rob,
I work through the NFPA so it is a certification issue......If it gets NFPA approval then they have no choice.
I love it when I hear the word never.... I have guys in the station that sit around and are negative all the time and I then have other guys who actually create solutions and work to make things better.. It's hard to keep the solution guys around because they go places!rdale
EF5
You know more about NFPA than I do, so I'll take your word that approval should be coming. Any ideas on the timeframe?
"negative" and "realistic" are two VERY different terms. Tyler mentions that his group is proposing a national online test / spotter ID. That certainly has a chance of happening with Skywarn, and would be a great idea. But the complete reorganization of Skywarn you're talking about? No. It's a volunteer organization, so your odds of successfully going in to every program and telling them "this is the way you will do Skywarn" makes the plan a non-starter. Is it a "positive idea"? Certainly. I'd love it if every Skywarn report cames from a fully training, experienced spotter. I'm not being "negative" by saying you can't tell Otsego County Skywarn how they are going to accept reports, I'm being realistic.
Telling every fire and police agency that they WILL train the FF's / officers in severe weather? Again - you know more about national certifications than me so I believe you if you say it will happen - but I don't see it.
Bill Tabor
EF5
Everyone brings up some good points here, and a lot of new information being presented such as Skywarn 2.0 with Randy and Tyler involved, etc. I was actually unaware this was taking place. I think it's amazing that I was thinking much of the same thing these folks and the rest of the NWS organizers are. I think the National Spotter Id was an original idea I thought in my head, but maybe Randy mentioned it at one of our Beer Fests and I forgot -. Either way, I think it's really good stuff. Keep in mind however, that my list may also include issues and solutions not currently on the Skywarn 2.0 reorganization plan. I ask that you review and consider them carefully, and if not, and you agree then add them to the reorg. As for money, true..the nation is broke, but what about that unspent stimulus money? I think there is still 400 Billion or so available. Request a grant and get the funding. As Rob mentions it will be tough because it is a network organization / fellowship and I suppose fairly informal. However I believe the training requirements, reporting requirements, etc are established from a national viewpoint even if it is loose based. I think the Fed can take a bit tighter reign / involvement here in establishing more consistency in all areas. Certainly there should be similar operational standards between WFO's and the local groups that support them. Once this push comes from the top (HQ and DC) as apparently it is then it becomes a matter of organizing and prioritizing. Sounds like they already have a good start. Keep in mind my ideas weren't just for Skywarn overall but in particular as they relate to reports by chasers and mobile spotters who historically may have difficulty accessing the system and accurately / productively reporting. There are also issues with NWS and voicemail systems...for example call the El Paso WFO office and see what you get. Dale mentions an NWS 800 number. Is that one primary number or different ones for each office? I have many of the 800 numbers that I provide through Street Atlas as an overlay and through GR3 as a placefile, but some of these are not the direct 800 number. In those cases their will be problems when chasers and mobile spotters try and make a report. I've experienced this first hand and it can be frustrating. It's also annoying when you make a report and it seems to be ignored. Some of the things I brought up address those issues. In addition as Randy / Tyler, etc mention this will also be to help improve the quality of reports between all spotters with consistent training. The certification should at least show a certain amount of basic education, but of course nothing beats real world experience. Randy, Josh, the team and probably many others have lots of ideas on how to do this and working on it. There will always be poor reports and maybe a few false. Losing system privileges and re-training as Randy mentions is a good approach I think or at least a step in the right direction.
Other thoughts... don't forget to consider the different modern streams of information and video coming in and how to utilize that for ground truth, verification, etc. Figure out the best way to manage it without overwhelming those at the WFO's trying to use it. Politics will probably have to be addressed between these large Amateur Radio nets showing them how to work with the rest of the team. Once they understand the big picture and know chasers / mobile spotters are part of it, I think they won't have a problem going along.
As for the police / firefighters training, etc...yep definitely get them some basic training and certification. I think of the Sheriff at Pampa, Tx running around trying to warn people and the good Sheriff who perished in the Greensburg tornado. That was a tragedy that happened to the guy at Greensburg. Better training may have helped...not sure. I don't know how well he was trained and obviously he was trying to help his community. Anyone stuck in that town near that time would have had a tough time escaping and being safe. Point is though as others have mentioned law enforcement, firefighters, and emergency management are a big part of the reporting / warning equation - bring them in the loop, make sure they are trained at least minimally, and show them the role of the chasers / mobile spotters so we can all work on the same page.
Hey...if we could save one extra life....my guess this could do much more...but we also have to address the public side of things. Get the false alarm rate down, polygon warnings, so fewer warned unneccesarily, better building standards, and educate the public of what to do, where to go.rdale
EF5
The 800# is a national, single number for anyone to call. It routes your report right to AWIPS and pops up on the end-user screen.
My concern with FF's is that a LARGE number of them never are called to spot. Ever. Big city FF's don't man the rigs and head out for a tornado. I applaud Randy's push - but I still don't believe the NFPA would require every firefighter to be a certified weather spotter before they could join the FDNY.
Bill Tabor
EF5
So far I don't have that 800 number, and as far as I know no other chasers or Spotternetwork has it either. I guess we'll all have to see if it's appropriate for chasers / mobile spotters to call in the new scheme of things or if they prefer other alternatives.rdale
EF5
I posted that a few months ago, http://stormtrack.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22761
Also the plan for the Skywarn spotter database was mentioned at NSWW. It's not an overhaul of Skywarn - just an improved method of training and storing the spotter's information in a national database.
http://www.norman.noaa.gov/nsww/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/TanjaFransen_NSWW2010.pdf
Bill Tabor
EF5
Thanks Dale for providing those links. Guess I missed it earlier (off season). NPOP is an automated line. Wonder if you can send text message reports to it as well? I also wonder how it is expected to be used and what NWS prefers Spotters, Chasers to use. Is this primarily for the general public? I suppose it's a good secondary if you don't have a direct line to talk with someone. Perhaps Randy, Tanja, etc will explain what they feel is the proper approach. I've been updating the NWS phone numbers for Street Atlas and GR3 but likely this task / responsibility needs to be pushed back to the government side of things. It was an un-met need I saw that I knew how to resolve so I acted. Probably having me dealing with it long term isn't the best policy however.rdale
EF5
It's intended for the general public - but if you can't get a hold of the NWS using other means then it's certainly something to use as a backup.Mike Johnston
EF5
If a single standard training module is implemented, I hope there is some way to retain/factor in localized information. For example, a few years ago I attended an excellent training session presented by the Kansas City (Pleasant Hill) NWS staff. They spent some time going over the fact the area tends to experience a number of HP storms, the practical challenges this presents to spotters, amongst other issues characteristic of the local environment. I just think having that local professional forecaster there, in person, is an important element in the training and hope it isn't lost.
Greg Higgins
SupporterI would like to throw in another concern, one that I have seen occur over the years and which had a major impact. That is the use of the word "certification". Many years ago, both the American Red Cross (ARC) and American Heart Association (AHA) would teach first aid and CPR courses and then issue a "certification card". This practice came to a screaming halt when "certified" people were sued for providing aid to a victim and the victim had a bad outcome, through no fault of the "certified" caregiver. Both the ARC and AHA were also sued and after a few years, removed the word "certification" from their training literature, course descriptions and cards. As a Regional Falculty with the AH for many years, we were directed to ensure that instructors and courses were not referred to as "certified" in any shape, form or manner, a student simply completed a "course of instruction" and were issued a "course completion card".
This was all based on legal and monetary concerns. The word certification in the professional world pertains to "Certifications earned from a Professional society and, in general, must be renewed periodically, or may be valid for a specific period of time (e.g., the life-time of the product upon which the individual is certified). As a part of a complete renewal of an individual's certification, it is common for the individual to show evidence of continued learning — often termed continuing education — or earning continuing education units (CEU)." It also implies that the person being certified have a monetary investment in the process.
Another concern is that they agency granting such a certification be a national recognized agency.
In todays world, I can easily see the following scenario: a "certified" spotter / chaser calls in a tornado causing the local EM / NWS to sound warning sirens / issue a tornado warning which in turn closes down a business because the business wants to protect their employees. After "x" amount of time when no tornado arrives because the "certified" spotter / chasers report was inaccurate / faulty / etc., the business decides to sue the EM / NWS and whoever else to recoup lost money and productivity. I know that several of you on this forum will take great delight and tell me how stupid this is, have at it, but do a little research yourself...this sort of stuff happens all of the time. And granted that in reality, EM, city / county governments / NWS get sued all of the time but rarely lose. They still have to defend themselves which costs time and money.
A valid solution to consider is to follow the path that the ARC and AHA (and others) did and that is to simply provide a "course completion card". An ID number and other information can be included, but just get rid of the word "certification" and all that it implies. Are there other solutions? Sure! This is just one opinion in trying to head off problems down the road.Zach Borst
EF0
I would bet that if businesses were going to sue over false alarms this would have occurred a long time ago. As far as getting responders to get trained, I am working with my university's emergency management and the NWS near me (I have an internship at both) and am about to finish the "storm ready" certification for my university. At first there was some trouble getting people on board with getting skywarn training and other storm ready requirements. I did a presentation to the emergency management board and told them that this is a responder safety issue. The chiefs ate this up. Originally the police and other agencies were going to provide the skywarn training as a volunteer option, after my presentation they made it required and paid OT for the responders.
Randy and everyone he is working with are doing a great job getting this off the ground and have addressed many issues not even discussed here. Randy is also looking at this from a firefighters point of view. Fire service training is just starting to go to the national level for the same reason that skywarn is going national. With many certifications now you can go all over the country and your certification will be recognized. EMS is pretty much the same.
Paul Hadfield
EF3
Interesting you would mention this Adam, I figured LOT would have been doing the same as down here. ILX went with this system where upon completion of an official spotter class, the individual is issued a unique 4 digit number. When calling in a report, the person states their name and four digit ID so to establish immediate credibility. From what I have heard over time, they like the ID for being able to weed out the untrained. The ID/card system has also been useful in dealing with LEO's who during a couple of events I was out spotting for would ask for some form of proof.
Last edited by a moderator:Similar threads
