[wxqc] wxqc Help

[Gerry Creager]

Ben,

Specifically, you have one report where your anemometry (DD is wind 
direction) and FF (wind speed) didn't match the statistical model for QC.

gerry

bfgiii at adelphia.net wrote:
> Hello Evan,
> Thanks for your consideration.  I was lucky enough to have a new ASOS installed recently at a small airport only 3.2 miles from my station (K3B2).  We're both on the close coastal plain here in S.E. Massachusetts half way between Boston and the Cape Cod Canal.  Conditions can vary greatly between stations here depending on distance away from the shore alone.  Nice to have a pro station near by in very similar terrain.  The more verification tools, the better.  
> K3B2 should provide NOAA with a lot of valuable data as its location is unique in its exposure to the fierce Nor'Easter's we're famous for.  It was one of two stations in Massachusetts that recorded Blizzard level criteria for the February 11-12, 2006 storm.  Now, 
> if you could get it to stop sensing lightning in clear weather...
> Many Thanks Again,
> Ben Goodrich
> CW0467
> 
> ---- Evan Bookbinder <Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov> wrote: 
> 
> =============
> Ben,
> 
> There's absolutely nothing wrong with your data. In fact, it's about the 
> most dead on I've seen one of these graphs in a long time. Don't touch a 
> thing. The QC report below is telling you the number of flagged 
> observations out of the total number received for processing in the 
> report. You're sitting at  99-100%. Looks great!
> 
> Evan
> 
> bfgiii at adelphia.net wrote:
> 
> 
>>Greetings!
>>
>>I received this data quality email report and linked graph for Feb 24th:
>>
>>
>> DATE     UTC      SITE  *   ALT    * POT TEMP *  DEW PNT *    DD    *    FF    
>>                          *   (MB)   *  (DEG F) *  (DEG F) *   (DEG)  *   (KNT)  
>>24-FEB-2006 Errs    CW0467 *   0/93   *   0/93   *   0/93   *   1/93   *   1/93   
>>
>>http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/qchart/C0467?date=20060225
>>
>>
>>I have a hard time understanding these reports.  The graph looked ok except for the problem Peet Bros gear seems to have reading the very low humidity usually associated with Arctic air invasions like the one we've been under.
>>Which error caused this email to be generated?  Was it the higher than expected Dew Points/Humidity?  Was it a wind speed problem?
>>Regarding the humidity problem, should I consider using the Weather-Display "slope" adjustment to compensate some?  I know that offsets should be avoided.
>>Any thoughts would be appreciated.
>>
>>Ben Goodrich
>>CW0467
>>Duxbury, MA
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>> 
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
> 
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
> 
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.

-- 
Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager at tamu.edu
Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University	
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020  FAX 979.862.3983
MAIL:  AATLT, 3139 TAMU
Physical: 1700 Research Parkway, Suite 160,
College Station, TX 77843-3139