Author Topic: NOAA  (Read 13320 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline davidmc36

  • He who dies with the most toys wins!
  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1507
  • FN25IE61IX
    • MorewoodW34
Re: NOAA
« Reply #75 on: May 24, 2025, 01:17:39 AM »
One area is similar to the next, which is similar to the next, which is similar to the next .........

What granularity is acceptable?

Offline K2GW

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 42
  • Former Navigator; Amateur Radio; Skywarn Spotter
Re: NOAA
« Reply #76 on: May 24, 2025, 06:07:45 AM »
A more relevant question is what level of staffing and organization structure is necessary to produce the current forecast granularity (1 Sq. KM)? 

Remember, the current NWSFO organization structure was mostly based on the range of the WSR-88D radars, not on how efficiently the tasks might actually be distributed amongst the staff of adjacent offices.

Offline hofpwx

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 196
    • HyView Boulder weather
Re: NOAA
« Reply #77 on: May 27, 2025, 12:24:44 PM »
The current strategy of trimming funding, staff and research will end up with something breaking. The amount of damage could be catastrophic.

Offline SoMDWx

  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
    • Southern Maryland Weather
Re: NOAA
« Reply #78 on: May 27, 2025, 12:41:07 PM »

Offline hofpwx

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 196
    • HyView Boulder weather
Re: NOAA
« Reply #79 on: May 27, 2025, 12:49:29 PM »

Offline davidmc36

  • He who dies with the most toys wins!
  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1507
  • FN25IE61IX
    • MorewoodW34
Re: NOAA
« Reply #80 on: May 27, 2025, 05:21:03 PM »
The current strategy of trimming funding, staff and research will end up with something breaking. The amount of damage could be catastrophic.

Already happening

https://www.mesoscalenews.com/p/tornado-warnings-delayed-because

Offline CW2274

  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 6933
    • Conditions @ CW2274 West Tucson-Painted Hills Ranch
Re: NOAA
« Reply #81 on: May 27, 2025, 07:01:45 PM »
Exactly why I stopped posting here is because of one-way garbage like this.

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=Rebekah+Jones&ia=web

Offline SoMDWx

  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
    • Southern Maryland Weather
Re: NOAA
« Reply #82 on: May 27, 2025, 07:07:54 PM »
Exactly my point.. More fear mongering....

Offline hofpwx

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 196
    • HyView Boulder weather
Re: NOAA
« Reply #83 on: May 27, 2025, 07:21:41 PM »
The current strategy of trimming funding, staff and research will end up with something breaking. The amount of damage could be catastrophic.

Already happening

https://www.mesoscalenews.com/p/tornado-warnings-delayed-because
Of course the NWS and/or NOAA will be scapegoated.

Offline K2GW

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 42
  • Former Navigator; Amateur Radio; Skywarn Spotter
Re: NOAA
« Reply #84 on: May 27, 2025, 08:08:18 PM »
I was also thinking more about how the local forecast office operations might be more streamlined in light of current technology instead of simply repeating what's been done for the past 30 years.

At the risk of over simplifying things, currently each forecast office develops their local forecasts twice a day based on the latest national model runs, and then tweaks it  2 more times a day in between.  Essentially, the forecaster looks at the national model prediction, and then writes a detailed local forecast based on knowledge of the circumstances unique to the local area history.  They also write a detailed forecast discussion to explain their rationale to the adjacent offices so as not to be too out of line with each other.  Writing these thousands of words every day  takes time.

Now consider this as a way of reducing the effort so it could be done with a smaller staff nationwide:  The advances in Artificial Intelligence are amazing and these products could be drafted by AI and then merely reviewed and tweaked by a forecaster.

Detailed histories of similar model runs for the area are already available on line, as well as the actual conditions that developed.  So it's seems like an ideal candidate for AI initial drafting, allowing for fewer manhours.  And the AI memory might even be greater than that of a forecaster who has only been there for a few years. 

And a similar process might  be set up for initial warnings.

But simply saying, let's keep doing things we always have isn't efficient nor realistic.




Offline hofpwx

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 196
    • HyView Boulder weather
Re: NOAA
« Reply #85 on: May 27, 2025, 08:30:04 PM »
I do not trust AI. At all.

Offline Tln7559

  • Slangenbeek
  • Senior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • Weather&PV Hengelo_Slangenbeek
Re: NOAA
« Reply #86 on: May 28, 2025, 05:42:22 AM »
AI fed with historical data will assume that history is still valid:
in the presently unstable world that is dangerous.
The human mind (usually) is much more flexible than software.
AI = software = as good as it's programmer

 :-( Like they warn you for shares:
do not expect that history is repeating ..........
Sensors: TFA_Nexus + LaCrosse_WS7000 + Tempest + Ecowitt + DIY
Software: WsWin + WeeWX + Domoticz + GW1000 + Meteobridge

Offline hofpwx

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 196
    • HyView Boulder weather
Re: NOAA
« Reply #87 on: May 28, 2025, 09:21:01 AM »
Exactly why I stopped posting here is because of one-way garbage like this.
What does she have to do with NOAA?
Is anthropogenic climate change a big ol’ nothingburger akin to COVID (despite 2+ million Americans dead from it)?
If only it was.

Offline ocala

  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 4514
  • The blues had a baby and named it rock n roll
Re: NOAA
« Reply #88 on: May 28, 2025, 04:08:30 PM »
I was also thinking more about how the local forecast office operations might be more streamlined in light of current technology instead of simply repeating what's been done for the past 30 years.

At the risk of over simplifying things, currently each forecast office develops their local forecasts twice a day based on the latest national model runs, and then tweaks it  2 more times a day in between.  Essentially, the forecaster looks at the national model prediction, and then writes a detailed local forecast based on knowledge of the circumstances unique to the local area history.  They also write a detailed forecast discussion to explain their rationale to the adjacent offices so as not to be too out of line with each other.  Writing these thousands of words every day  takes time.

Now consider this as a way of reducing the effort so it could be done with a smaller staff nationwide:  The advances in Artificial Intelligence are amazing and these products could be drafted by AI and then merely reviewed and tweaked by a forecaster.

Detailed histories of similar model runs for the area are already available on line, as well as the actual conditions that developed.  So it's seems like an ideal candidate for AI initial drafting, allowing for fewer manhours.  And the AI memory might even be greater than that of a forecaster who has only been there for a few years. 

And a similar process might  be set up for initial warnings.

But simply saying, let's keep doing things we always have isn't efficient nor realistic.
If NWS offices can do the job with 35 people as opposed to 50 then by all means do it. My issue has been the chain saw versus a scalpel. The individual offices should decide what they need to do the job. Not somebody in Washington who has no idea what is needed to run a NWS office.

Offline CW2274

  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 6933
    • Conditions @ CW2274 West Tucson-Painted Hills Ranch
Re: NOAA
« Reply #89 on: May 28, 2025, 04:30:14 PM »
Exactly why I stopped posting here is because of one-way garbage like this.
What does she have to do with NOAA?

Is anthropogenic climate change a big ol’ nothingburger akin to COVID (despite 2+ million Americans dead from it)?
If only it was.
Why are you asking me? Did I post her link above me? No, no, I didn't. I merely responded.

As far as your "covid" BS, did you know hospitals received substantial bonuses to report deaths as covid? Something like 30K per patient IIRC. If covid was present in the body with stage four cancer? COD? Covid. Fatal car wreck? Covid. Heart attack? Covid. Covid is the biggest scam in world history, right along with the Biden cover-up that the left thought the rest of us were too stupid to see for ourselves.

Offline SoMDWx

  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
    • Southern Maryland Weather
Re: NOAA
« Reply #90 on: May 28, 2025, 05:13:44 PM »
I was also thinking more about how the local forecast office operations might be more streamlined in light of current technology instead of simply repeating what's been done for the past 30 years.

At the risk of over simplifying things, currently each forecast office develops their local forecasts twice a day based on the latest national model runs, and then tweaks it  2 more times a day in between.  Essentially, the forecaster looks at the national model prediction, and then writes a detailed local forecast based on knowledge of the circumstances unique to the local area history.  They also write a detailed forecast discussion to explain their rationale to the adjacent offices so as not to be too out of line with each other.  Writing these thousands of words every day  takes time.

Now consider this as a way of reducing the effort so it could be done with a smaller staff nationwide:  The advances in Artificial Intelligence are amazing and these products could be drafted by AI and then merely reviewed and tweaked by a forecaster.

Detailed histories of similar model runs for the area are already available on line, as well as the actual conditions that developed.  So it's seems like an ideal candidate for AI initial drafting, allowing for fewer manhours.  And the AI memory might even be greater than that of a forecaster who has only been there for a few years. 

And a similar process might  be set up for initial warnings.

But simply saying, let's keep doing things we always have isn't efficient nor realistic.
If NWS offices can do the job with 35 people as opposed to 50 then by all means do it. My issue has been the chain saw versus a scalpel. The individual offices should decide what they need to do the job. Not somebody in Washington who has no idea what is needed to run a NWS office.

In this lies the bigger problem. Of course any organization is going to say it needs more people and money....On the flip side, do regulators really know how the job works and what it entails. The chain saw approach as you say is extreme, but it cuts right down to the root and shows you what is needed and not needed. But how long does this take for someone to recognize before they turn on the funding tap again....its all a sliipery slope. For no one here truly understand what is going on behind all the close doors...

Offline hofpwx

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 196
    • HyView Boulder weather
Re: NOAA
« Reply #91 on: May 28, 2025, 07:44:17 PM »
Exactly why I stopped posting here is because of one-way garbage like this.
What does she have to do with NOAA?

Is anthropogenic climate change a big ol’ nothingburger akin to COVID (despite 2+ million Americans dead from it)?
If only it was.
Why are you asking me? Did I post her link above me? No, no, I didn't. I merely responded.

As far as your "covid" BS, did you know hospitals received substantial bonuses to report deaths as covid? Something like 30K per patient IIRC. If covid was present in the body with stage four cancer? COD? Covid. Fatal car wreck? Covid. Heart attack? Covid. Covid is the biggest scam in world history, right along with the Biden cover-up that the left thought the rest of us were too stupid to see for ourselves.
I expected no other kind of reply. The excess deaths prove you wrong.

Offline CW2274

  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 6933
    • Conditions @ CW2274 West Tucson-Painted Hills Ranch
Re: NOAA
« Reply #92 on: May 28, 2025, 08:12:34 PM »
Let's get one thing perfectly straight... I don't give a DAMN what you think. Neither does the majority of the country. As usual, your self-righteousness is all you people know. You make it very easy to ignore this board. Time to start another boycott. BYE!

Offline K2GW

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 42
  • Former Navigator; Amateur Radio; Skywarn Spotter
Re: NOAA
« Reply #93 on: May 28, 2025, 11:16:15 PM »
>>"In this lies the bigger problem. Of course any organization is going to say it needs more people and money....On the flip side, do regulators really know how the job works and what it entails. The chain saw approach as you say is extreme, but it cuts right down to the root and shows you what is needed and not needed. But how long does this take for someone to recognize before they turn on the funding tap again....its all a sliipery slope. For no one here truly understand what is going on behind all the close doors..."

Exactly.  The bureaucrats had years to apply the scalpel approach but didn't, so they now have to deal with the externally applied chain saw.

There's an old joke that gets to the heart of many of the things being done, as witnessed by the staff and spending cuts, and even the approach on tariffs to balance trade deficits, and efforts to get Europeans to spend more on their own defense.

The joke goes:

A farmer had a well-trained mule that he said immediately followed every command he told it to do.  A skeptical reporter asked him to tell the mule to lie down.  The farmer picked up a two by four, whacked the mule on the head with it, and told the mule to lie down.  The mule then lay down.

The reporter was aghast!  "If the mule is so well trained to listen, why did you hit it with the two by four?" he asked the farmer.

The farmer replied, "He does listen, but first you have to get its attention."


Offline davidmc36

  • He who dies with the most toys wins!
  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1507
  • FN25IE61IX
    • MorewoodW34
Re: NOAA
« Reply #94 on: May 29, 2025, 05:31:21 AM »
That's the thing about most jokes eh? They are based on some form of physically or otherwise abusive action by one party to another.

It IS possible to get someone's attention without being a bully about it.

Offline hofpwx

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 196
    • HyView Boulder weather
Re: NOAA
« Reply #95 on: May 29, 2025, 12:30:27 PM »
I have absolutely zero doubt that if this coming hurricane season goes very badly NOAA will get blamed, by the same people that are gutting it and want it gone entirely.

Offline ocala

  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 4514
  • The blues had a baby and named it rock n roll
Re: NOAA
« Reply #96 on: May 30, 2025, 03:18:51 PM »
>>"In this lies the bigger problem. Of course any organization is going to say it needs more people and money....On the flip side, do regulators really know how the job works and what it entails. The chain saw approach as you say is extreme, but it cuts right down to the root and shows you what is needed and not needed. But how long does this take for someone to recognize before they turn on the funding tap again....its all a sliipery slope. For no one here truly understand what is going on behind all the close doors..."

Exactly.  The bureaucrats had years to apply the scalpel approach but didn't, so they now have to deal with the externally applied chain saw.

There's an old joke that gets to the heart of many of the things being done, as witnessed by the staff and spending cuts, and even the approach on tariffs to balance trade deficits, and efforts to get Europeans to spend more on their own defense.

The joke goes:

A farmer had a well-trained mule that he said immediately followed every command he told it to do.  A skeptical reporter asked him to tell the mule to lie down.  The farmer picked up a two by four, whacked the mule on the head with it, and told the mule to lie down.  The mule then lay down.

The reporter was aghast!  "If the mule is so well trained to listen, why did you hit it with the two by four?" he asked the farmer.

The farmer replied, "He does listen, but first you have to get its attention."
5 agencies that fired or laidoff people only to rehire them because they were essential personnel. Yeah, the chainsaw is the way to go
 [ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Offline ocala

  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 4514
  • The blues had a baby and named it rock n roll
Re: NOAA
« Reply #97 on: May 30, 2025, 03:29:40 PM »
Each department head has to be held responsible for controlling bloat. As I said above if you need 35 people to run an office and six months later you have 38 then that person  in charge needs to be held accountable. For way to long departments have gone unchecked. There's a correct way to clean up the mess. Indiscriminate firings are not the way to go.

Offline ocala

  • Forecaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 4514
  • The blues had a baby and named it rock n roll
Re: NOAA
« Reply #98 on: May 31, 2025, 05:33:14 AM »
I have absolutely zero doubt that if this coming hurricane season goes very badly NOAA will get blamed, by the same people that are gutting it and want it gone entirely.
I honestly think the hurricane center will be able to do their forecasting and updates in a timely manner.
When a storm forms models predict its path but forecasters input their knowledge and make the adjustments. The aircraft that fly through the storms relay valuable data that helps in determining the path. Really the final 24 hours before landfall is what's critical. Will it go N,S,E, or W. This is where the forecasts are at their best and I have confidence that they will do a great job.
The only issue I have would be fatigue. In a busy season with multiple active storms and less personnel to evaluate conditions anxiety levels could be a factor.

Offline hofpwx

  • Senior Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 196
    • HyView Boulder weather
Re: NOAA
« Reply #99 on: June 01, 2025, 09:26:09 AM »
Each department head has to be held responsible for controlling bloat. As I said above if you need 35 people to run an office and six months later you have 38 then that person  in charge needs to be held accountable. For way to long departments have gone unchecked. There's a correct way to clean up the mess. Indiscriminate firings are not the way to go.
Agreed. Problem is, 35 is far too low so an increase of 3 barely makes a dent in the underservice and the overwork.

 

anything