Topic: Just look at this junk

[txweather.org]

Got a reply from the mailing list. Basically the issue is bad/missing data from allot of stations around me/us
Nothing nobody can do to what I understand...

[Beaudog]

Well in my case I know who the  primary offender is it is this person.  She has been sending 10 milbar low for years and made no effort to fix it.

I don't know if it is lazy, dumb, or don't care.   I thought of sending her an email many times but figure I would be ignored or told to kiss off.    I don't need the high blood pressure from that.

http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/cgi-bin/wxqchart.pl?site=D2196

And this guy who has send 10 high for years.

http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/cgi-bin/wxqchart.pl?site=C1704

Rats  I forgot to resize the pics.  Too lazy now.

[George Richardson]

"Well in my case I know who the  primary offender is it is this person.  She has been sending 10 milbar low for years and made no effort to fix it."

I must respectfully disagree. The primary offender is the organization that continues to accept the garbage and test others by it despite knowing the total lack of quality it contains.

FWIW

George

[txweather.org]

"Well in my case I know who the  primary offender is it is this person.  She has been sending 10 milbar low for years and made no effort to fix it."

I must respectfully disagree. The primary offender is the organization that continues to accept the garbage and test others by it despite knowing the total lack of quality it contains.

FWIW

George

I am not one to cause troubles but you sr speak the truth. It starts at the top.
If they don't care to do anything about bad data than the user wont ether.

They should do what WU does. Disable the station until the user fix the "probable issue"

[ValentineWeather]

I found the problem for my analysis, station name EW5243, operator name Hanna. Located 69 miles away and is negative -135 millibars off. I agree stations like this need to be removed from data analysis.

[SlowModem]

I'm getting the same kind of junk. Look at the analysis pressure its all over the place and I got Sensor fails following checks:
L3 Spatial Consistency.

There's no way a barometer graph should look like a seismograph in an 8.0 earthquake.  I'd pay it no mind.

[SlowModem]

I found the problem for my analysis, station name EW5243, operator name Hanna. Located 69 miles away and is negative -135 millibars off. I agree stations like this need to be removed from data analysis.

You may be exactly right.  But remember what the Summary page says:

This is a list of stations that are close to this station. Note that this is not the list of stations that are used in the data analysis. That list of stations is known only to MADIS.

[txweather.org]

I got more information.
They are working on the issue at least in my case... They can't seem to find the origin of the garbage data but they are trying to track it down.