Warning Decision Update

[Van DeWald]

There are a few NWS offices issuing Warning Decision Update text products, including Kansas City, Omaha, Dallas/Ft. Worth, and Oklahoma City. There could be more, not sure. These are highly technical discussions about recent storm trends, and also give insight into the warning forecaster's thought process, whether or not we'll be transitioning to or away from a particular type of warning and so forth. Just FYI, last season, the Omaha office issued the product under the SPS product header. This season, we'll be issuing the product under the AWU header, with a text product category of Area Weather Update.

Beyond that announcement, what's the general opinion of these highly technical discussions? Do you find them not necessary, not technical enough, too technical, or just about right? Essentially, we're trying to give those in the met and spotter community more detail about the environment that storms are developing in, and also give some idea of what we're thinking in the NWS office. Obviously intended for folks who know the terminology, most of the info would be over the heads of the average citizen. More importantly, I think it's our chance to convey our warning thoughts to the spotters and chasers out there, to let you know what we're looking at, what our warning criteria might be, and so forth.

Any thoughts in general about the Warning Decision Update text product?

Regards,
Van

 

[Jeff Snyder]

The WDU (under AWU header, I believe) has been one of my favorite NWS products largely because it is insightful in a manner not possible most of the time (for "public" products). It's great to get some technical discussion regarding current events.

FWIW, I'm not sure if OUN releases WDUs very often any more. I haven't seen many from them this year yet (that I recall, so I may have missed a few), and they didn't do too many last year. I really do wish more offices would send them out, though I know time constraints (particularly with ongoing severe threats) may preclude this. OUN did many in 2004, and I found the product quite beneficial.

 

[Van DeWald]

Jeff,

OUN has issued a few this year, most recently on Mar 30th. The CR NWS webserver has a listing here. As you mentioned, this is a product that is sent out as time and staffing allow, but our goal at OAX will be to issue them frequently. We feel it's a viable communication chain to let you all know what we're really thinking, but have no other avenue to convey this type of info.

Van

 

[rdale]

Certainly it's nice to have, but TV / radio / EM's already get this information from the offices in realtime discussions through IEMChat, so it's a bit of a duplication, but as long as resources allow there's no reason not to send.

 

[Jeff Snyder]

Jeff,

OUN has issued a few this year, most recently on Mar 30th. The CR NWS webserver has a listing here. As you mentioned, this is a product that is sent out as time and staffing allow, but our goal at OAX will be to issue them frequently. We feel it's a viable communication chain to let you all know what we're really thinking, but have no other avenue to convey this type of info.

Van

Cool deal! I used to check for them all the time in 2004 and 2005, but I've since backed off since the number issued seems to have waned in the past year (granted, so has the number of severe events in the OUN area!). I'm quite happy to see that there are some WDUs from the past couple of events in the OUN area.

 

[Robert Dewey]

We're not all as lucky as you, Rob... The rest of us have to rely on conventional product dissemination for discussions from NWS/NOAA. If real-time chat logs were opened up (i.e. allow people to watch in a read-only format?), then I would agree - until then, my tax money pays for dissemination

I may be sounding like an ass... But, April Fools (I've found that saying that combination of words fixes everything) ;-)

 

[rdale]

Not saying luck is involved ;> Just saying that if it comes to a point where office productivity falls because someone is spending time writing them up, when the info is already going to the most important recipients with the chat stuff , then it's not good.

 

[Van DeWald]

Certainly it's nice to have, but TV / radio / EM's already get this information from the offices in realtime discussions through IEMChat, so it's a bit of a duplication, but as long as resources allow there's no reason not to send.

That's assuming those folks are registered and logged into chat. We only have TV mets participating in IEM Chat here, in other words, the other 99.9% of the weather community is not getting this info, thus the reasoning for the warning decision product.

 

[rdale]

Interesting... Why haven't your EM's picked up on it? Are they more the political type than true emergency managers?

- Rob