Author Topic: NOAA (Read 3235 times)

Vasco · « **on:** February 28, 2025, 12:22:14 PM »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdell8n14x2o

hofpwx · « **Reply #1 on:** February 28, 2025, 03:13:22 PM »

It's disappointing how few friends NOAA has here.

Jasiu / JJ · « **Reply #2 on:** February 28, 2025, 05:24:18 PM »

Quote from: hofpwx on February 28, 2025, 03:13:22 PM

It's disappointing how few friends NOAA has here.

People will notice once service starts to degrade. I'm reading about WFOs already have to reduce the number of balloons launched due to staffing.

ocala · « **Reply #3 on:** February 28, 2025, 05:54:54 PM »

He'll just get out his sharpie and make things right.

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #4 on:** February 28, 2025, 06:38:25 PM »

I actually have some friends, talk with them all the time, and they knew it was coming. This extremely overgrown, bloated Government has needed cutback for years. Just like we have to live. I'm damn proud of it, unfortunately they likely won't cut enough.

TheBushPilot · « **Reply #5 on:** February 28, 2025, 10:56:10 PM »

I haven't wanted to make this post due to the political nature but I want to share my two cents...

I completely disagree with their approach. Terminating probationary hires many of whom have years of experience and knowledge for example just because of their title in the database. Utterly ridiculous. They are taking a sledgehammer to a problem requiring a scalpel. A multitude of WFO offices are now beyond understaffed requiring support from neighboring CWAs. Of all the administrative branches to target, why the weather service? Costing the taxpayer around $4 a year with returns immensely greater because of how great it is. Having to discontinue balloon launches in Alaska because of said understaffing. The implications there for model initializations are not good. It's as though they went "CTRL+F" and deleted all the documents containing "climate" as strangely the SLEP successor program for the NEXRAD network was deleted. Bizarre...

I have a friend who I personally know was let go from NWS Boston as a transplant from the Mount Washington Observatory due to his time there only being a month and him still having label "probationary". Just recently had his review with the boss with nothing but positive things to say. Many cases of this occurring some +20 years getting canned because of their transition.

I know for a fact there is excessive waste and spending in our government but to allow this reckless of an approach to a vital public service is completely irresponsible and the consequences may be great. I'm sure NOAA has wasteful spending but firing at already understaffed forecast offices is not going to correct our deficit.

And to say private entities will be fine and do it better is simply ignorant. The lump sum of weather enterprise gets their weather data from the NWS, public, private, etc. No one wins with these changes.

Trying times for our friends within NOAA.

Cheers

ocala · « **Reply #6 on:** March 01, 2025, 08:59:10 AM »

Quote from: ValentineWeather on February 28, 2025, 06:38:25 PM

I actually have some friends, talk with them all the time, and they knew it was coming. This extremely overgrown, bloated Government has needed cutback for years. Just like we have to live. I'm damn proud of it, unfortunately they likely won't cut enough.

Randy I get what you're saying but why take a sledge hammer to the process. Have inspectors go through each
division in each department. Determine what that person does. Can that job be combined with another position or eliminated completely. After going through each department you make recommendations. From that the executive branch makes the final call. Clinton did this in his term gutting 377,000 jobs.
Here's 2 links to that.
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/statement-signing-the-federal-workforce-restructuring-act-1994
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-clinton-initiative-cut-140000196.html
My daughter works at the VA. She's an emotional wreck as she doesn't know from one day to another if she'll have a job. She's just one person but multiply that by 2 million and there are a lot of other people going through the same thing.
If he wants to cut government spending, fine. Just do it in a respectable way that doesn't step on the dignity of a person.

Vasco · « **Reply #7 on:** March 01, 2025, 09:11:16 AM »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clydd7zeye7o

ocala · « **Reply #8 on:** March 01, 2025, 09:18:05 AM »

This could be a good thread or it could go off the rails.
It's OK to disagree. We all do just do it with respect, but ultimately its up to Ken.

Tln7559 · « **Reply #9 on:** March 01, 2025, 09:42:49 AM »

Such actions have ripple-effects.

Example for weather-amateurs: historically NOAA is linked to CWOP at one side and NWS at another side.
CWOP injects meteodata from private weatherstations all around the globe.
Likewise NWS also gets meteodata from various other sources like Weatherflow (see WF's webpages!), which in turn relies on free-of-charge input from linked private weatherstations (especially a large amount in the US).
NWS processes the received meteodata and translates to 'consumable data'.
AI might help in data-processing, but a model is as wise as the quality of it's inputs and the setup&maintenance of the model.
IMHO NOAA and NWS have useful responsibilities for that aspect.
Also because of the nature of weather prediction most often still human knowledge, experience and view is required to ultimately make sense of interpretations .......

Apparently the US-government assumes that companies like IBM WeatherChannel (incl. WUnderground) seamlessly and without cost-increase take over all services&responsibilities from NOAA and NWS.
Are they also expecting that those private weatherstations continue providing their data free of charge, if the resulting output would be commercially exploited?

davidmc36 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 01, 2025, 09:42:53 AM »

The sledge hammer approach is what seems so wrong. Like picking out an engagement ring by doing a smash-n-grab.

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #11 on:** March 01, 2025, 10:17:57 AM »

I've heard the argument both ways, the scalpel approach takes way too long, especially when this shouldn't be needed in the first place. We are broke. When in doubt take it out and force the agencies to justify their existence is the sledgehammer approach, yes it looks bad, but it's the right way when you have so much to cut.

hofpwx · « **Reply #12 on:** March 01, 2025, 12:01:38 PM »

Blowing holes in NOAA ending up with it looking like Swiss cheese is the worst way to do it.

Besides, NOAA is a rounding error in the federal budget. Cutting NOAA isn’t a fiscal decision but ideological.

hofpwx · « **Reply #13 on:** March 04, 2025, 12:27:24 PM »

DOGE moves to cancel NOAA leases on key weather buildings

https://www.axios.com/2025/03/03/doge-noaa-weather-building-leases-trump

The NOAA Center for Weather and Climate Prediction is one.

Jasiu / JJ · « **Reply #14 on:** March 04, 2025, 02:08:16 PM »

Quote from: hofpwx on March 04, 2025, 12:27:24 PM

DOGE moves to cancel NOAA leases on key weather buildings

https://www.axios.com/2025/03/03/doge-noaa-weather-building-leases-trump

The NOAA Center for Weather and Climate Prediction is one.

NCEP doesn't do much, right???

https://www.nco.ncep.noaa.gov/status/messages/

RetNavyWeatherLDO · « **Reply #15 on:** March 05, 2025, 11:48:58 AM »

Back in the 90's under a different administration, NOAA, NWS, and the military weater services were all downsized. NOAA lost several thousand then also IIRC. The Navy cut staffing at our weather detachments, and centralized aviation forecasting at the regional centers. I believe the NWS also consolidated and updated their technology.

The big difference between now and then is there were efforts to do it more systematically, and congress approved the cuts with buyouts etc.

I won't comment on the current efforts, because that is a political issue.

hofpwx · « **Reply #16 on:** March 05, 2025, 09:11:02 PM »

The list of "non-core" properties was pulled.

Jasiu / JJ · « **Reply #17 on:** March 07, 2025, 04:54:23 PM »

Quote

Effective immediately, and until further notice, the National Weather
Service (NWS) is temporarily suspending some weather balloon launches
in Albany, New York, and Gray, Maine, due to a lack of Weather
Forecast Office (WFO) staffing. Offices will perform twice daily
launches when staffing permits.

https://www.weather.gov/media/notification/pdf_2025/pns25-11_intermittent_suspension_of_raob_Launches-aly_gyx.pdf

BKS97 · « **Reply #18 on:** March 07, 2025, 05:45:25 PM »

Prominent meteorologist and weather entrepreneur Paul Douglas, founder of Aerisweather, voices his concerns about the NWS employee cuts in this article in the Minnesota Star Tribune:

https://www.startribune.com/trusted-meteorologist-sounds-the-alarm/601231477?utm_source=gift?utm_source=copy

Vasco · « **Reply #19 on:** March 08, 2025, 04:12:54 PM »

Might be a change coming: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpwd1722yr2o

SterlingVASPC · « **Reply #20 on:** March 14, 2025, 08:54:24 AM »

I beg to differ. NOAA is screwed at this point.
NOAA is not being funded but ATC is?? That's BS.
I mean seriously, NOAA is why we're here!

Vasco · « **Reply #21 on:** March 14, 2025, 09:58:39 AM »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgj5w052x3xo

SterlingVASPC · « **Reply #22 on:** March 14, 2025, 09:59:51 AM »

that's fair.
But wont stop Trump from taking down NOAA.

ValentineWeather · « **Reply #23 on:** March 14, 2025, 10:55:16 AM »

Quote from: SterlingVASPC on March 14, 2025, 09:59:51 AM

that's fair.
But wont stop Trump from taking down NOAA.

Why am I surprised? Maryland.

SterlingVASPC · « **Reply #24 on:** March 14, 2025, 10:56:03 AM »

maryland is where it's at

News:

Author Topic: NOAA (Read 3235 times)