Would you mobile mesonet for science?

[Paul Austin]

I also like the potential for more regional data collection. Those who are located further west would likely collect more data on storms that receive less attention in places like CO and WY, while those located toward the Great lakes would likely favor that area of the country, and the southeast, likewise. Obviously, the higher volume of data would likely be collected on storms in the hot spots during the peak months of May and June. But many chasers routinely chase early in the season and well into the summer months. This range of time is simply not feasible financially for something like Vortex. So, absolutely, if some level of consistency and validity can be maintained, this project would be very much worthwhile, even if some precision has to be sacrificed to make it financially feasible for the chaser community.

 

[Benjamin Rock]

Sure, why not. I already have a full weather station on the roof..Why not bump it up a notch? Count me in..

 

[Sean Waugh]

As I have mentioned before, and I have been discussing extensively with Tyler (who started this thread) there are two main issues here: cost and standardization. The fact is that in order for any useful information to come out of this type of endeavor, each and every vehicle must be instrumented exactly the same. This ensures that a measurement from one car can be compared to a measurement on the other. This requires that each vehicle have the same instruments, the same shields, the same rack design, and even mounted at the same heights (eg. 11 ft off ground for wind measurement). The problem here is that each car is different and you run into height from car roof issues with some vehicles (like a hummer for example).

The other issue is cost, something that is probably of most concern for most chasers. Most people aren't going to spend $1000 on a set of instruments and pipe to build a rack on their car. $500, though still a bit high for some, is more reasonable, but you run into issues trying to measure all the necessary variables. Temperature and pressure area relatively easy to do, if certain considerations are made and precautions taken. Wind speed and wind direction, and then Relative humidity are both very difficult to do correctly and cheaply.

So while this would be good if it can be worked out, there are some outstanding issues that need to be discussed and decided before someone would decide to go ahead with this.

And it might seem like there would be a good spatial resolution to this data set, keep in mind that there will be a vast majority of observations made in two locations. One location, nowhere near a storm, being made by those that chose their targets wrong, car broke down, or are otherwise having a bad chase day. The other location will be approximately 1000+ measurements within 2-5mi of the meso center/tornado, where almost all of the chasers congregate.

 

[Tyler Allison]

I plan on outlining our full discussions on a website soon so folks know the issues and the direction. Don't expect anything will be ready for testing before storm season 2010.

 

[John J. Holt]

Absolutely, I would do it in a heartbeat...

 

[Jeremy Den Hartog]

I would also be interested in this...like many others depending on cost

 

[Dean Baron]

Count me in too. I think this is an awesome idea.

 

[James Wilson]

Of course ... If this is a possibility add me to the list that would do so in a drop of a hat.

 

[Daniel Beuchert]

I would also love the opportunity!

 

[Paul Austin]

And it might seem like there would be a good spatial resolution to this data set, keep in mind that there will be a vast majority of observations made in two locations. One location, nowhere near a storm, being made by those that chose their targets wrong, car broke down, or are otherwise having a bad chase day. The other location will be approximately 1000+ measurements within 2-5mi of the meso center/tornado, where almost all of the chasers congregate.

I agree with most of the concerns you mention. However, I disagree, to a certain extent, with your spacial resolution point. While there is some truth to the picture you paint, many chasers prefer to 'stage' well ahead of a storm and wait for its passage. Others aren't especially comfortable positioning within a couple miles of a storm's core. Some are more prone to go for storm structure photography or video from a distance in certain situations. And I would think that data gathered away from a storm, i.e. from those who have a bad chase day for whatever reason, might still be useful, especially in areas which appeared somewhat favorable for development. I realize this wouldn't fall within the original vision, but perhaps useful nonetheless. Also consider days in which storms are less discrete, and chasers are likely to target a more varied selection of cells or days in which storm speed makes it very difficult or impossible to stay with a target. Getting on such a storm wouldn't necessarily mean staying within 2-5 miles of the circulation center for the duration. You are correct, however, in asserting the unlikelihood of acquiring a somewhat spatially homogeneous data set. As you rightly suggest, the highest concentration of points will be near the storm center (or at least in the non-core portion of the storm center. But this is not a bad thing. If a researcher were to limit a particular study to within five miles or so of the center of a well-sampled storm, the spacial resolution could be rather high, and this for almost the entire life cycle of such a storm. With so many data points available, anomalous data could be scrutinized and likely thrown out of the set. It becomes a means of data validation. Granted, data gathered from further out would likely have a much lower spacial resolution. But even that would likely be a much higher resolution than what is available from current fixed stations.

I know you're not just trying to poke holes in a good idea. I appreciate your effort to keep the vision realistic and to offer up for discussion many of the challenges and obstacles to be overcome. I'm just offering some counterpoint. Incidentally, I am not a researcher nor a meteorologist, so none of this comes from a qualified point of view. But I think the reasoning is sound. I would be interested to hear what other researchers or mets have to say concerning the usefulness or lack thereof for a realistic set of data points taken by a collection of typical storm chasers, considering both space and time.

 

[Sean Waugh]

The point I made wasn't necessarily a true point, it was more of a joke. There would be a fair number of chasers NOT near the tornado, I was simply remarking at the obvious that there are a considerable amount of chasers near the circulation. And to offer a counter point to my own point, A very high resolution data set extremely close to a circulation could shed light on small scale features that have otherwise been undiscovered as of yet. Not saying this is the case, just saying that there are always possibilities. So there is a real benefit here I think, it's the application that is the problem.

 

[Paul Austin]

Oh, got it. Yes, the application is a real challenge. We're pretty much on the same page there. I'm just glad to see some folks trying to think outside the box. I hope it proves both feasible and beneficial.

 

[john.sibley]

Count me in! I'd love to do it Tyler.

 

[Bill Tabor]

As soon as I saw the topic Mobil Mesonet and would everyone be willing to put it on a car I immediately made the leap to then connecting to to a network such as Spotternet. Brilliant idea Tyler! I'm sure tons of us would be interested...as you mention after all we are already there. Perhaps the occasional balloon launch too?

 

[Scott Roberts]

I'd be glad to join in.