Topic: Getting conflicting info on my data quality

[Wxbeginner]

Hi,
Recently joined the CWOP and confused about a couple of things:

This site says something wrong with my temp data.  Not sure which value they mean when they say neg or positive number but I think they are saying my temps are too hot.
The link they offer to get help is dead.

https://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/AW575


Yet this site says everything is fine. Who is right?

https://mesowest.utah.edu/cgi-bin/droman/meso_base.cgi?stn=AW575


Thanks,
Fletch

[davidmc36]

Don't put too much stock in the CWOP quality checks. They compare to stations near you and if others are wildy different, yours may appear inaccurate. It is safe to ignore that page.

It actually appears to me just now you have all green thumbs up.

[Wxbeginner]

Don't put too much stock in the CWOP quality checks. They compare to stations near you and if others are wildy different, yours may appear inaccurate. It is safe to ignore that page.

It actually appears to me just now you have all green thumbs up.

Thanks _ I am new to cwop and just wanted to make sure I wasn't polluting the network ...

[CW2274]

Don't put too much stock in the CWOP quality checks. They compare to stations near you and if others are wildy different, yours may appear inaccurate. It is safe to ignore that page.

It actually appears to me just now you have all green thumbs up.

Thanks _ I am new to cwop and just wanted to make sure I wasn't polluting the network ...

Personally, I haven't used Gladestone in years. They got flaky, and has seemingly been on autopilot. Besides, Mesowest has a much more exclusive database to work with, so I trust their QC more so than Gladestone. Not sure if you noticed, but at the bottom left of your Mesowest page has your QC.

https://mesowest.utah.edu/cgi-bin/droman/regress_database_top.cgi?stn=AW575

As you can see, your data looks just fine.

[Wxbeginner]

Don't put too much stock in the CWOP quality checks. They compare to stations near you and if others are wildy different, yours may appear inaccurate. It is safe to ignore that page.

It actually appears to me just now you have all green thumbs up.

Thanks _ I am new to cwop and just wanted to make sure I wasn't polluting the network ...

Personally, I haven't used Gladestone in years. They got flaky, and has seemingly been on autopilot. Besides, Mesowest has a much more exclusive database to work with, so I trust their QC more so than Gladestone. Not sure if you noticed, but at the bottom left of your Mesowest page has your QC.

https://mesowest.utah.edu/cgi-bin/droman/regress_database_top.cgi?stn=AW575

As you can see, your data looks just fine.

Thank you...

[CW2274]

You're welcome. That said, your pic shows your "array", I believe it's called, strapped to your chimney. No idea how long it's been up there, but your acceptable QC may go down the tubes with stronger summer isolation approaching, as that's about the worst place for it. Needs to come down to the ground somewhere, if able.

https://www.weather.gov/media/epz/mesonet/CWOP-Siting.pdf

[Wxbeginner]

You're welcome. That said, your pic shows your "array", I believe it's called, strapped to your chimney. No idea how long it's been up there, but your acceptable QC may go down the tubes with stronger summer isolation approaching, as that's about the worst place for it. Needs to come down to the ground somewhere, if able.

https://www.weather.gov/media/epz/mesonet/CWOP-Siting.pdf

No worries that is just a secondary station that doesn't report to CWOP.

What you see is just the anemometer and a non functional lighting detector. Main station is mounted on top of my backyard fence. Kind of doing my own comparison tests between all in one electronic vs traditional discrete sensors.

[CW2274]