From nmupdraft at gmail.com  Fri Sep  1 01:25:24 2006
From: nmupdraft at gmail.com (jody radzik)
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 23:25:24 -0600
Subject: [wxqc] Re :Data spike on WA4IKQ
In-Reply-To: <20060831225846.19340.qmail@web50804.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.0.1157040000.28605.wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net>
	<20060831225846.19340.qmail@web50804.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ee8522780608312225w7d8b3295k826b2f21e2f0727d@mail.gmail.com>

Wow.  That happened here too:

http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/qchart/C6266?date=20060831

I'm just north of Santa Fe, New Mexico.  This has got to be a database anomaly
rather than a record of an actual atmospheric event.

Jody Radzik
http://nmupdraft.blogspot.com

On 8/31/06, Ray <ray1amazon at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> --- wxqc-request at lists.gladstonefamily.net wrote:
>
>
>
> > WA4IKQ 2006-Aug-30 Analysis has left me with
> > something I
> > cannot explain:
> >
> > 1)  The Barometric Pressure Graph for AS140 on
> > 8/30/2006
> >     has a very sharp spike rising from 1008.5 hPa to
> >
> >     1018.5 hPa near time 20:00.
> >
> > 2)  Simultaneously, the Temperature Graph took a
> > sharp
> >     dive from 81 deg. F to 78 deg. F.
> >
>
> I had the spikes at the same time, so it was not an
> issue, and I am in the Rockies so it is not a local
> occurence. Reference http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/AS186
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>

From philip at gladstonefamily.net  Fri Sep  1 08:14:19 2006
From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone)
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2006 08:14:19 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] Re :Data spike on WA4IKQ
In-Reply-To: <ee8522780608312225w7d8b3295k826b2f21e2f0727d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.0.1157040000.28605.wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net>	<20060831225846.19340.qmail@web50804.mail.yahoo.com>
	<ee8522780608312225w7d8b3295k826b2f21e2f0727d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <44F8241B.6020109@gladstonefamily.net>

I took a look at the raw data, and it seems that the flaky samples came 
from the MADIS feed of data. The 1950 on 2006-08-30 readings seem dodgy. 
The same anomaly does not appear in the data that I pull directly from 
findU.

In some cases, the spike shows up in the analysis, but sometimes (I 
guess) MADIS filters it out.

Philip

jody radzik wrote:
> Wow.  That happened here too:
> 
> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/qchart/C6266?date=20060831
> 
> I'm just north of Santa Fe, New Mexico.  This has got to be a database anomaly
> rather than a record of an actual atmospheric event.
> 
> Jody Radzik
> http://nmupdraft.blogspot.com
> 
> On 8/31/06, Ray <ray1amazon at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> --- wxqc-request at lists.gladstonefamily.net wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> WA4IKQ 2006-Aug-30 Analysis has left me with
>>> something I
>>> cannot explain:
>>>
>>> 1)  The Barometric Pressure Graph for AS140 on
>>> 8/30/2006
>>>     has a very sharp spike rising from 1008.5 hPa to
>>>
>>>     1018.5 hPa near time 20:00.
>>>
>>> 2)  Simultaneously, the Temperature Graph took a
>>> sharp
>>>     dive from 81 deg. F to 78 deg. F.
>>>
>> I had the spikes at the same time, so it was not an
>> issue, and I am in the Rockies so it is not a local
>> occurence. Reference http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/AS186
>>
>> __________________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3389 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060901/60410697/attachment.bin 

From philip at gladstonefamily.net  Fri Sep  1 11:56:14 2006
From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone)
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2006 11:56:14 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] Problems with mailing list
Message-ID: <44F8581E.8000902@gladstonefamily.net>

There is a problem with the mailing list -- I am currently unable to 
receive incoming email due to a problem at my ISP. I am working on 
resolving this issue.

Sorry.

Philip
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3389 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060901/69df91e9/attachment.bin 

From philip at gladstonefamily.net  Sat Sep  2 06:36:42 2006
From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone)
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2006 06:36:42 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] Problems with mailing list
In-Reply-To: <44F8581E.8000902@gladstonefamily.net>
References: <44F8581E.8000902@gladstonefamily.net>
Message-ID: <44F95EBA.2090804@gladstonefamily.net>

It is now resolved -- I think.

Philip

Philip Gladstone wrote:
> There is a problem with the mailing list -- I am currently unable to 
> receive incoming email due to a problem at my ISP. I am working on 
> resolving this issue.
> 
> Sorry.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3389 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060902/2f3ccc60/attachment.bin 

From steve_03222 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  5 17:29:32 2006
From: steve_03222 at yahoo.com (Steve Gunn)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 14:29:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [wxqc] Need Help Understanding Report
In-Reply-To: <mailman.0.1147967995.11208.wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net>
Message-ID: <20060905212932.48713.qmail@web54208.mail.yahoo.com>

I need help understanding the report in th elink below.
  For that week I only received on daily report wit 2 of 96 error for temperature.
  I do not understand the drastic change.
   
  http://weather.gladstonefamily.net/site/C5443?tile=10;days=91#Data
   
  Thanks, Steve
  CW5443

 		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2?/min or less.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060905/0f893bc2/attachment.html 

From stan at gdkandco.com  Tue Sep  5 11:06:21 2006
From: stan at gdkandco.com (Stan Greenwald)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 11:06:21 -0400
Subject: [wxqc]  Barometric Pressure Readings
Message-ID: <200609051056171.SM00796@stantablet>

Are you able to tell me how to determine barometric pressure at any location
on the net.  I live in Canton, Ohio, 44720.

 

Stan Greenwald

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060905/f343fe50/attachment.html 

From john.neil.story at cmich.edu  Fri Sep  8 08:03:52 2006
From: john.neil.story at cmich.edu (Neil Story)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 08:03:52 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] not receiving the digest
Message-ID: <69930abb28c78347bbc0e17f588b6d95@cmich.edu>

Unless no digests have been sent in the last few weeks, there is a 
problem, for I have not been receiving e-mails from the list. I hope 
there is a quick fix, for I enjoy the service you provide very much. 
Thank you.

Neil Story


From philip at gladstonefamily.net  Fri Sep  8 10:01:32 2006
From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone)
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2006 10:01:32 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] not receiving the digest
In-Reply-To: <69930abb28c78347bbc0e17f588b6d95@cmich.edu>
References: <69930abb28c78347bbc0e17f588b6d95@cmich.edu>
Message-ID: <450177BC.6050108@gladstonefamily.net>

Neil,

I now have a properly hosted system, and am in the process of moving 
everything over to it. Hopefully, things will improve by the end of the 
weekend.

Yes, for some reason, you have not been getting the digest (and there 
are three other people in the same boat).

Hang on a few more days....

Philip

Neil Story wrote:
> Unless no digests have been sent in the last few weeks, there is a 
> problem, for I have not been receiving e-mails from the list. I hope 
> there is a quick fix, for I enjoy the service you provide very much. 
> Thank you.
> 
> Neil Story
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3389 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060908/9e5e98df/attachment.bin 

From brillig at gmail.com  Fri Sep  8 21:57:46 2006
From: brillig at gmail.com (Victor Engel)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 20:57:46 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] VWS Wind
Message-ID: <e0e999680609081857n3f2fa9bcwcfc8bf7c285527f7@mail.gmail.com>

I glanced at my weather station data and noticed the strongest wind gust in
the past hour and half was 0 mph. That's right. It's dead calm right now. So
I decided to take weatherunderground's visual tour of the city, showing the
temps and windspeeds of all the stations. All stations except one showed no
wind at all most of the time. If I expanded the view, some more showed up
with some slight wind. No surprise there.

I decided to check on the data of specific weather stations. Every one that
I checked on that had wind was using VWS. One of them, had rapid fire
installed and was showing a steady 2mph breeze. This gave a gust reading of
2 in the rapid fire window. However, on the chart below, and on the data
table, the gust speed was all zeros, with average speed being 2.

Is there some explanation for this, or is there a bug in VWS? The station I
was looking at, specifically, was
http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=KTXAUSTI33
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060908/0b893e58/attachment.html 

From gakellerman at gmail.com  Tue Sep 12 12:58:03 2006
From: gakellerman at gmail.com (George Kellerman)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:58:03 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] FW: Alert:Centerville, KS
Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAaYoYO9pMuk6uLqQDl50uv8KAAAAQAAAAsl/+An/t2kyxkhE8+dbbqQEAAAAA@gmail.com>


Thought this might be interesting to this list

Public Information Statement
807 am EDT Tue Sep 12 2006
public information statement
National Weather Service Kansas City/Pleasant Hill MO
700 am CDT Tue sept 12 2006

The following change has no direct impact on NOAA weather wire 
service subscribers.

The automated surface observing system/ASOS/product improvement 
program will deploy a replacement wind sensor at the downtown Kansas 
City Airport/mkc...Wednesday September 13, 2006. The new sensor will 
report wind information using the 3-second world meteorological 
organization/WMO/gust Standard.

The current ASOS wind sensor/Belfort 2000/uses rotating cups to 
measure wind speed and a vane to measure wind direction. Over a 
two-minute period...ASOS uses 24 five-second averages to determine 
the two-minute average wind speed and direction. Every minute ASOS 
stores the highest five-second average speed for the past 
minute...along with its direction...in the 12-hour archive for 
additional processing. The highest speed value is used to determine 
if a gust and/or a peak wind remark will be reported.

The new ASOS wind sensor/vaisala 425nws/is a sonic anemometer. It is 
known as the ice free wind/ifw/sensor. It has no moving parts and 
will operate better in winter weather condtions. As with the Belfort 
sensor...over a two-minute period...ASOS uses 24 five-second 
averages to determine the two-minute average wind speed and 
direction. But the highest three-second running average speed is 
stored for gust and peak wind processing.

While there will be little difference in two-minute average 
windspeed and reporting...the changes in gust and peak wind 
reporting may be significant. We can expect to see more gusts and 
peak winds reported with the new sensor. The mass of the moving 
parts in existing sensors limits responsiveness. The new sensor 
will be more responsive to short term gusts.

If you have any questions about this change...please contact:

George Amis
observing program Leader
WFO Pleasant Hill Missouri
816-540-5147


-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/441 - Release Date: 9/7/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/441 - Release Date: 9/7/2006
 


From gerry.creager at tamu.edu  Tue Sep 12 21:23:02 2006
From: gerry.creager at tamu.edu (Gerry Creager N5JXS)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:23:02 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] FW: Alert:Centerville, KS
In-Reply-To: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAaYoYO9pMuk6uLqQDl50uv8KAAAAQAAAAsl/+An/t2kyxkhE8+dbbqQEAAAAA@gmail.com>
References: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAaYoYO9pMuk6uLqQDl50uv8KAAAAQAAAAsl/+An/t2kyxkhE8+dbbqQEAAAAA@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <45075D76.1020306@tamu.edu>

I visited Vaisala last year and had a chance to fondle the 425's that 
were done with testing and being packed to ship to NWS.  I'm a big fan 
of sonic anemometers and the NWS 425's have a larger heating capacity to 
keep them ice-free than the ones I've worked with for other projects... 
and I've not frozen one yet.  I'm looking forward to seeing these in the 
update cycle.

gerry

George Kellerman wrote:
> Thought this might be interesting to this list
> 
> Public Information Statement
> 807 am EDT Tue Sep 12 2006
> public information statement
> National Weather Service Kansas City/Pleasant Hill MO
> 700 am CDT Tue sept 12 2006
> 
> The following change has no direct impact on NOAA weather wire 
> service subscribers.
> 
> The automated surface observing system/ASOS/product improvement 
> program will deploy a replacement wind sensor at the downtown Kansas 
> City Airport/mkc...Wednesday September 13, 2006. The new sensor will 
> report wind information using the 3-second world meteorological 
> organization/WMO/gust Standard.
> 
> The current ASOS wind sensor/Belfort 2000/uses rotating cups to 
> measure wind speed and a vane to measure wind direction. Over a 
> two-minute period...ASOS uses 24 five-second averages to determine 
> the two-minute average wind speed and direction. Every minute ASOS 
> stores the highest five-second average speed for the past 
> minute...along with its direction...in the 12-hour archive for 
> additional processing. The highest speed value is used to determine 
> if a gust and/or a peak wind remark will be reported.
> 
> The new ASOS wind sensor/vaisala 425nws/is a sonic anemometer. It is 
> known as the ice free wind/ifw/sensor. It has no moving parts and 
> will operate better in winter weather condtions. As with the Belfort 
> sensor...over a two-minute period...ASOS uses 24 five-second 
> averages to determine the two-minute average wind speed and 
> direction. But the highest three-second running average speed is 
> stored for gust and peak wind processing.
> 
> While there will be little difference in two-minute average 
> windspeed and reporting...the changes in gust and peak wind 
> reporting may be significant. We can expect to see more gusts and 
> peak winds reported with the new sensor. The mass of the moving 
> parts in existing sensors limits responsiveness. The new sensor 
> will be more responsive to short term gusts.
> 
> If you have any questions about this change...please contact:
> 
> George Amis
> observing program Leader
> WFO Pleasant Hill Missouri
> 816-540-5147
> 
> 

-- 
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
Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843

From brillig at gmail.com  Thu Sep 14 16:22:26 2006
From: brillig at gmail.com (Victor Engel)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 15:22:26 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Rain Forecast
Message-ID: <e0e999680609141322x3d1b2670o4caa110fa0be2ac9@mail.gmail.com>

I was having a conversation with someone recently about rain forecasts.
Something that people (myself included) seem to be confused about is the
probability of rain. What is the probability actually supposed to be
measuring?

I did a lot of searching around the NOAA website, and it looks like their
numbers are not entered by computer, but are entered by people. The numbers
seem to be forecast probabilities for the covered time periods. The time
periods I looked at seemed to be three hours. This seems to be confirmed by
the chart given at the following URL (I really like this chart, by the way):

http://tinyurl.com/jvf7v

I decided to take the data from this chart and compute 24 hour probabilities
as well as probabilities over longer periods, let's call the periods UNTIL
X, where X is some future time.

If the data points represent probabilities that it will rain sometime in the
subsequent three hour period, then the probability that it will rain in the
subsequent 24 hour period is simple to derive.

Let P3(i) be the probability of rain at sample i (a 3 hour period).
P3(i+1) is the probability of rain for the following 3 hour period).

P3 is a number from 0 to 1 where 0 is 0% chance of rain, and 1 is 100%
chance of rain.

Then P24(i), the probability of rain for the 24 hour period, will be:

1 - (product of (1-P3(i)) for i from 1 to 8.

For example, suppose the probabilities of rain for midnight, 3 am, 6am, 9am,
noon, 3pm, 6pm, 9pm are:

0.1, 0.1, 0.2, 0.2, 0.3, 0.1, 0.1, 0.1, then the probability that it will
rain sometime during the whole day is:

1 - (0.9 * 0.9 * 0.8 * 0.8 * 0.7 * 0.9 * 0.9 * 0.9) = 0.735 or about a 74%
chance of rain.

Anyway, in the conversation I had, the person mentioned that it looks like
we'll be without rain until Monday. The link above, run early this morning,
gave probabilities of:

Date/Time Probability
9/14 07:00 0.05
9/15 07:00 0.10
9/17 13:00 0.20
9/18 07:00 0.50
9/18 19:00 0.30
9/19 07:00 0.20
9/20 07:00 0.10

Using the above calculations, I get the following probabilities for the 24
hour periods following those same times:

9/14 07:00 0.34
9/15 07:00 0.57
9/17 13:00 0.93
9/18 07:00 0.98
9/18 19:00 0.90
9/19 07:00 0.83
9/20 07:00 ----

The last line is blank because the projection does not go that far. Now I
show the probabilities that it will rain sometime BY the time listed (these
times are 3 hours later, because the times in the numbers above are for
subsequent periods).

9/14 10:00 0.05
9/15 10:00 0.40
9/17 13:00 0.92
9/18 07:00 0.99
9/18 19:00 1.00
9/19 07:00 1.00
9/20 07:00 1.00

In other words, given the numbers on the site, it's a virtual certainty that
it will rain by 7PM on Monday.

This analysis is very sensitive to error, especially at the low end.
Suppose, for example, I change all the 5% probabilities to 1% instead. Then
we get the following:

9/14 10:00 0.01
9/15 10:00 0.17
9/17 13:00 0.89
9/18 07:00 0.98
9/18 19:00 1.00
9/19 07:00 1.00
9/20 07:00 1.00

Anyone see a problem in my analysis?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060914/60adc770/attachment.html 

From Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov  Thu Sep 14 16:50:07 2006
From: Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov (Evan Bookbinder)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 15:50:07 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Rain Forecast
In-Reply-To: <e0e999680609141322x3d1b2670o4caa110fa0be2ac9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e0e999680609141322x3d1b2670o4caa110fa0be2ac9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4509C07F.8080806@noaa.gov>

Victor,

In terms of the NWS, the zone forecasts imply the probability that 0.01" 
(measurable) precipitation will occur in a 12 hour time frame covering 
that period (today, tonight, etc...). That time frame is understood to 
be 12Z to 00Z and 00Z to 12Z.

With respect to the graphical forecasts used in the link below, those 
are 6 hourly pops covering time periods 00Z to 06Z, 06Z-12Z, 12Z-18Z, 
and 18Z-00Z. You'll notice the numbers remain constant in those 6 hour 
blocks. Again, the forecast is the chance that 0.01" (measurable) 
precipitation will be observed at that location in that 6 hour window.

With respect to your calculations below, this is incorrect. This is a 
matter of statistics equations (which I unfortunately don not have handy 
at the moment). You're assuming the events are cumulative, which they 
are not. Each 6 hour window is mutually exclusive from other events. In 
other words, the chance of rain in a 24 hour or 48 hour period is not 
the highest 6-hour number, not a sum of 6 hour numbers, nor an average 
of them. I wish I had my statistics book to reference the appropriate 
means to calculate what you're after, but I can say with 100% certainty 
that the approach below is not germane to the data provided.

Hope this helps,
Evan




Victor Engel wrote:
> I was having a conversation with someone recently about rain 
> forecasts. Something that people (myself included) seem to be confused 
> about is the probability of rain. What is the probability actually 
> supposed to be measuring?
>
> I did a lot of searching around the NOAA website, and it looks like 
> their numbers are not entered by computer, but are entered by people. 
> The numbers seem to be forecast probabilities for the covered time 
> periods. The time periods I looked at seemed to be three hours. This 
> seems to be confirmed by the chart given at the following URL (I 
> really like this chart, by the way):
>
> http://tinyurl.com/jvf7v
>
> I decided to take the data from this chart and compute 24 hour 
> probabilities as well as probabilities over longer periods, let's call 
> the periods UNTIL X, where X is some future time.
>
> If the data points represent probabilities that it will rain sometime 
> in the subsequent three hour period, then the probability that it will 
> rain in the subsequent 24 hour period is simple to derive.
>
> Let P3(i) be the probability of rain at sample i (a 3 hour period).
> P3(i+1) is the probability of rain for the following 3 hour period).
>
> P3 is a number from 0 to 1 where 0 is 0% chance of rain, and 1 is 100% 
> chance of rain.
>
> Then P24(i), the probability of rain for the 24 hour period, will be:
>
> 1 - (product of (1-P3(i)) for i from 1 to 8.
>
> For example, suppose the probabilities of rain for midnight, 3 am, 
> 6am, 9am, noon, 3pm, 6pm, 9pm are:
>
> 0.1, 0.1, 0.2, 0.2, 0.3, 0.1, 0.1, 0.1, then the probability that it 
> will rain sometime during the whole day is:
>
> 1 - (0.9 * 0.9 * 0.8 * 0.8 * 0.7 * 0.9 * 0.9 * 0.9) = 0.735 or about a 
> 74% chance of rain.
>
> Anyway, in the conversation I had, the person mentioned that it looks 
> like we'll be without rain until Monday. The link above, run early 
> this morning, gave probabilities of:
>
> Date/Time Probability
> 9/14 07:00 0.05
> 9/15 07:00 0.10
> 9/17 13:00 0.20
> 9/18 07:00 0.50
> 9/18 19:00 0.30
> 9/19 07:00 0.20
> 9/20 07:00 0.10
>
> Using the above calculations, I get the following probabilities for 
> the 24 hour periods following those same times:
>
> 9/14 07:00 0.34
> 9/15 07:00 0.57
> 9/17 13:00 0.93
> 9/18 07:00 0.98
> 9/18 19:00 0.90
> 9/19 07:00 0.83
> 9/20 07:00 ----
>
> The last line is blank because the projection does not go that far. 
> Now I show the probabilities that it will rain sometime BY the time 
> listed (these times are 3 hours later, because the times in the 
> numbers above are for subsequent periods).
>
> 9/14 10:00 0.05
> 9/15 10:00 0.40
> 9/17 13:00 0.92
> 9/18 07:00 0.99
> 9/18 19:00 1.00
> 9/19 07:00 1.00
> 9/20 07:00 1.00
>
> In other words, given the numbers on the site, it's a virtual 
> certainty that it will rain by 7PM on Monday.
>
> This analysis is very sensitive to error, especially at the low end. 
> Suppose, for example, I change all the 5% probabilities to 1% instead. 
> Then we get the following:
>
> 9/14 10:00 0.01
> 9/15 10:00 0.17
> 9/17 13:00 0.89
> 9/18 07:00 0.98
> 9/18 19:00 1.00
> 9/19 07:00 1.00
> 9/20 07:00 1.00
>
> Anyone see a problem in my analysis?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.

From brillig at gmail.com  Thu Sep 14 17:46:12 2006
From: brillig at gmail.com (Victor Engel)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 16:46:12 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Rain Forecast
In-Reply-To: <4509C07F.8080806@noaa.gov>
References: <e0e999680609141322x3d1b2670o4caa110fa0be2ac9@mail.gmail.com>
	<4509C07F.8080806@noaa.gov>
Message-ID: <e0e999680609141446p2f4f4fa4vb96fa68d2d6f1dca@mail.gmail.com>

On 9/14/06, Evan Bookbinder <Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov> wrote:
>
> Victor,
>
> In terms of the NWS, the zone forecasts imply the probability that 0.01"
> (measurable) precipitation will occur in a 12 hour time frame covering
> that period (today, tonight, etc...). That time frame is understood to
> be 12Z to 00Z and 00Z to 12Z.
>
> With respect to the graphical forecasts used in the link below, those
> are 6 hourly pops covering time periods 00Z to 06Z, 06Z-12Z, 12Z-18Z,
> and 18Z-00Z. You'll notice the numbers remain constant in those 6 hour
> blocks. Again, the forecast is the chance that 0.01" (measurable)
> precipitation will be observed at that location in that 6 hour window.


OK. Thanks. That certainly changes things when the period of time covered is
different.


With respect to your calculations below, this is incorrect. This is a
> matter of statistics equations (which I unfortunately don not have handy
> at the moment). You're assuming the events are cumulative, which they
> are not.


I'm not sure what you mean by cumulative. Certainly you don't add them up.
That's not what I was doing.

Each 6 hour window is mutually exclusive from other events. In
> other words, the chance of rain in a 24 hour or 48 hour period is not
> the highest 6-hour number, not a sum of 6 hour numbers, nor an average
> of them.


Right. It's the formula I used. Think of it as the odds that it will NOT
rain. Then you can simply multiply the odds. If there is a 50% chance (0.5)
it will rain today and a 60% chance (0.6) it will rain tomorrow, then the
odds it will rain on either day is equal to 100% minus the odds that it
won't rain at all.

The odds that it won't rain at all is just the product of the odds it won't
rain on each day, or 50% times 40% (20%). So there is an 80% chance it will
rain on one of the two days. This is straightforward probability.

Victor
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060914/8ffb6855/attachment.html 

From brillig at gmail.com  Thu Sep 14 18:09:59 2006
From: brillig at gmail.com (Victor Engel)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 17:09:59 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Rain Forecast
In-Reply-To: <e0e999680609141322x3d1b2670o4caa110fa0be2ac9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e0e999680609141322x3d1b2670o4caa110fa0be2ac9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e0e999680609141509r512f843ag216051dbe2b9dddf@mail.gmail.com>

OK. So using 6 hours instead of 3, I get the following revised
probabilities:

On 9/14/06, Victor Engel <brillig at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Date/Time Probability
> 9/14 07:00 0.05
> 9/15 07:00 0.10
> 9/17 13:00 0.20
> 9/18 07:00 0.50
> 9/18 19:00 0.30
> 9/19 07:00 0.20
> 9/20 07:00 0.10
>
> Using the above calculations, I get the following probabilities for the 24
> hour periods following those same times:
>
> 9/14 07:00 0.19
> 9/15 07:00 0.34
> 9/17 13:00 0.74
> 9/18 07:00 0.88
> 9/18 19:00 0.69
> 9/19 07:00 0.59
> 9/20 07:00 ----
>
> The last line is blank because the projection does not go that far. Now I
> show the probabilities that it will rain sometime BY the time listed (these
> times are 3 hours later, because the times in the numbers above are for
> subsequent periods).
>
> 9/14 13:00 0.05
> 9/15 13:00 0.27
> 9/17 16:00 0.75
> 9/18 10:00 0.92
> 9/18 22:00 0.97
> 9/19 10:00 0.98
> 9/20 10:00 0.99
>

These new numbers were calculated assuming the probabilities in the link
were 6 hour probabilities.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060914/72a72754/attachment.html 

From chris.proulx at gmail.com  Fri Sep 15 13:30:27 2006
From: chris.proulx at gmail.com (Chris Proulx)
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 13:30:27 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] Rain Forecast
Message-ID: <d8cbf25c0609151030l78645e9dx3b6f4790b82273@mail.gmail.com>

>
> I did a lot of searching around the NOAA website, and it looks like their
> numbers are not entered by computer, but are entered by people. The
> numbers
> seem to be forecast probabilities for the covered time periods. The time
> periods I looked at seemed to be three hours. This seems to be confirmed
> by
> the chart given at the following URL (I really like this chart, by the
> way):


I would question whether this is an actual probability that is subject to
the type of statistical analysis you are performing, or is it rather the
forecaster's confidence in the precipitation forecast.

In other words, when the forecast is a "30% chance of rain" is the
forecaster actually saying, "My confidence is low that: some location in the
zone (area) for which this forecast is being prepared will receive .01 of
rain in the forecast time period."

A true probablilty would require the forecaster to have a historical data
set of conditions that match or closely similar to the forecast conditions
from which he/she could derive the probability.  Seems unlikely. (Which is
why the POP is entered by a human and not derived by a computer.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060915/7d4f7a5a/attachment.html 

From lemonfrjoy at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 15 14:25:27 2006
From: lemonfrjoy at yahoo.com (Joy)
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 11:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [wxqc] Rain probability
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1158336001.3463.wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net>
Message-ID: <20060915182528.39455.qmail@web39713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I always thought that instead of being an odds percentage of rain, that the probability of rain meant in  a given area during a specific period of time.
In other words that at any time in the forecast period, 30% of the land area could expect some rain.  (or whatever percentage was forecast)

Joy Lemmons 
KB0YUP



 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060915/c2b9cd43/attachment.html 

From Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov  Fri Sep 15 14:38:17 2006
From: Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov (Evan Bookbinder)
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 13:38:17 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Rain probability
In-Reply-To: <20060915182528.39455.qmail@web39713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20060915182528.39455.qmail@web39713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <450AF319.9080507@noaa.gov>

The Probability of Precipitation is the forecaster's confidence that 
0.01" or more of precipitation will fall at a given location in that 
time frame. Note that the forecast says "chance of precipitation" or 
"chance of measurable precipitation" and not "areal coverage of 
precipitation".

Evan



Joy wrote:
> I always thought that instead of being an odds percentage of rain, 
> that the probability of rain meant in  a given area during a specific 
> period of time.
> In other words that at any time in the forecast period, 30% of the 
> land area could expect some rain.  (or whatever percentage was forecast)
>
> Joy Lemmons
> KB0YUP
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.

From brillig at gmail.com  Fri Sep 15 15:19:23 2006
From: brillig at gmail.com (Victor Engel)
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 14:19:23 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Rain probability
In-Reply-To: <20060915182528.39455.qmail@web39713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.1.1158336001.3463.wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net>
	<20060915182528.39455.qmail@web39713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <e0e999680609151219i21f14a9dj7d9090ef057d8306@mail.gmail.com>

That is the definition that the local TV station uses. The link I gave is
for a point forecast, not an area, though. I'm going to have to find the
link again, but I read somewhere on the NOAA website that the number refers
to the likelihood of measurable rain at the location for the relevant
timespan. In order to be meaningful, the timespan assumed and the location
must be known.

On 9/15/06, Joy <lemonfrjoy at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I always thought that instead of being an odds percentage of rain, that
> the probability of rain meant in  a given area during a specific period of
> time.
> In other words that at any time in the forecast period, 30% of the land
> area could expect some rain.  (or whatever percentage was forecast)
>
> Joy Lemmons
> KB0YUP
>
> **
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060915/b003ed61/attachment.html 

From cflory at comcast.net  Sat Sep 16 23:09:47 2006
From: cflory at comcast.net (Chris Flory)
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 22:09:47 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
Message-ID: <002401c6da06$bb6894d0$4564a8c0@chris>

Hello,

I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station world.  I have
just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am really
excited about getting this going and sending my data to help in whatever way
I can.

A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I recently bought
my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get out to the
site is next week (9/23 at the latest):

1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated again?
2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, should I send
data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this would skew the
historical data.  
	
	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
some ideas):
	
3.	The station CW6489
<http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, and does not
register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's website, it
is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the requirements to
have a town listed in the search database?

Thanks in advance for any assistance!

-Chris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 8434 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060916/29a59ad2/attachment.bin 

From wa4ikq at nevets.oau.org  Sun Sep 17 00:07:20 2006
From: wa4ikq at nevets.oau.org (Geoffrey Dick)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 00:07:20 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [wxqc] Another spike in data at 2150 UTC
Message-ID: <m1GOnw8-000prOC@nevets.oau.org>

Saturday, September 16, 2006 2150 UTC

This evening at, approximately 2150, a computer spike 
in CWOP Analysis data for Barometric Pressure and 
Temperature was simultaneously recorded for AP008.  
This is not my station, but I know this weather station
did not have a problem.  I know from local findU APRS
data, that this event did not occur in the source data
from the originating weather station.   

I expect other stations will also report in that the 
same event has occurred in in their CWOP analysis data. 

Does anyone know the origin of these CWOP analysis spikes? 

Geoffrey Dick
Winter Park, FL



From Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov  Sun Sep 17 00:12:19 2006
From: Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov (Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 04:12:19 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
Message-ID: <14e50151f5.151f514e50@noaa.gov>

Chris,

It takes over 6 months of not receiving any data before a registered
CWOP station is classified as inactive.

CW6489, located in Murray, TX is listed in the APRSWXNETStation.txt file
and so is registered so that data will flow to NOAA

http://www.wxqa.com/APRSWXNETStation.txt

When you say "NOAA's website", what URL are you referring to?

Russ

----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:09 am
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)

> Hello,
> 
> I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station world. 
> I have
> just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am really
> excited about getting this going and sending my data to help in 
> whatever way
> I can.
> 
> A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I 
> recently bought
> my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get 
> out to the
> site is next week (9/23 at the latest):
> 
> 1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
> being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated again?
> 2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, should I send
> data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this would 
> skew the
> historical data.  
> 	
> 	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
> some ideas):
> 	
> 3.	The station CW6489
> <http://www.findu.com/cgi-
> bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
> located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, and 
> does not
> register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's 
> website, it
> is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the 
> requirements to
> have a town listed in the search database?
> 
> Thanks in advance for any assistance!
> 
> -Chris
> 
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
wxqc mailing list
Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc

The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.

From cflory at comcast.net  Sun Sep 17 02:57:19 2006
From: cflory at comcast.net (Chris Flory)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 01:57:19 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
In-Reply-To: <14e50151f5.151f514e50@noaa.gov>
Message-ID: <004b01c6da26$84ec5110$4564a8c0@chris>

Good to know, thanks for the info!

The site I was referring to, is:

Link

I guess I could have said NWS as well.  Sorry for the confusion.

Regards,

Chris



-----Original Message-----
From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 11:12 PM
To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)

Chris,

It takes over 6 months of not receiving any data before a registered
CWOP station is classified as inactive.

CW6489, located in Murray, TX is listed in the APRSWXNETStation.txt file
and so is registered so that data will flow to NOAA

http://www.wxqa.com/APRSWXNETStation.txt

When you say "NOAA's website", what URL are you referring to?

Russ

----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:09 am
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)

> Hello,
> 
> I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station world. 
> I have
> just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am really
> excited about getting this going and sending my data to help in 
> whatever way
> I can.
> 
> A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I 
> recently bought
> my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get 
> out to the
> site is next week (9/23 at the latest):
> 
> 1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
> being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated again?
> 2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, should I send
> data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this would 
> skew the
> historical data.  
> 	
> 	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
> some ideas):
> 	
> 3.	The station CW6489
> <http://www.findu.com/cgi-
> bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
> located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, and 
> does not
> register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's 
> website, it
> is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the 
> requirements to
> have a town listed in the search database?
> 
> Thanks in advance for any assistance!
> 
> -Chris
> 


From cflory at comcast.net  Sun Sep 17 12:31:28 2006
From: cflory at comcast.net (Chris Flory)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 11:31:28 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
In-Reply-To: <004b01c6da26$84ec5110$4564a8c0@chris>
Message-ID: <00d701c6da76$bc214190$4564a8c0@chris>

Guess that didn't work...here is the full link:

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=
FWD

This is for Graham, TX...the nearest town.

-----Original Message-----
From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Chris Flory
Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:57 AM
To: 'Discussion of weather data quality issues'
Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)

Good to know, thanks for the info!

The site I was referring to, is:

Link

I guess I could have said NWS as well.  Sorry for the confusion.

Regards,

Chris



-----Original Message-----
From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 11:12 PM
To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)

Chris,

It takes over 6 months of not receiving any data before a registered
CWOP station is classified as inactive.

CW6489, located in Murray, TX is listed in the APRSWXNETStation.txt file
and so is registered so that data will flow to NOAA

http://www.wxqa.com/APRSWXNETStation.txt

When you say "NOAA's website", what URL are you referring to?

Russ

----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:09 am
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)

> Hello,
> 
> I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station world. 
> I have
> just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am really
> excited about getting this going and sending my data to help in 
> whatever way
> I can.
> 
> A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I 
> recently bought
> my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get 
> out to the
> site is next week (9/23 at the latest):
> 
> 1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
> being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated again?
> 2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, should I send
> data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this would 
> skew the
> historical data.  
> 	
> 	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
> some ideas):
> 	
> 3.	The station CW6489
> <http://www.findu.com/cgi-
> bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
> located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, and 
> does not
> register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's 
> website, it
> is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the 
> requirements to
> have a town listed in the search database?
> 
> Thanks in advance for any assistance!
> 
> -Chris
> 

_______________________________________________
wxqc mailing list
Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc

The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.


From Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov  Sun Sep 17 14:54:08 2006
From: Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov (Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 18:54:08 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
Message-ID: <12d31133b3.133b312d31@noaa.gov>

Chris,

I don't know what the requirements are to get a certain town listed in
the web site you mention below.  I suggest that you contact the
webmaster for that web page.

Russ

----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:31 pm
Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)

> Guess that didn't work...here is the full link:
> 
>
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=
> FWD
> 
> This is for Graham, TX...the nearest town.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> [mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Chris 
> FlorySent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:57 AM
> To: 'Discussion of weather data quality issues'
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
> 
> Good to know, thanks for the info!
> 
> The site I was referring to, is:
> 
> Link
> 
> I guess I could have said NWS as well.  Sorry for the confusion.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> [mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
> Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov
> Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 11:12 PM
> To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
> 
> Chris,
> 
> It takes over 6 months of not receiving any data before a registered
> CWOP station is classified as inactive.
> 
> CW6489, located in Murray, TX is listed in the APRSWXNETStation.txt 
> fileand so is registered so that data will flow to NOAA
> 
> http://www.wxqa.com/APRSWXNETStation.txt
> 
> When you say "NOAA's website", what URL are you referring to?
> 
> Russ
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
> Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:09 am
> Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
> 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station 
> world. 
> > I have
> > just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am 
> really> excited about getting this going and sending my data to 
> help in 
> > whatever way
> > I can.
> > 
> > A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I 
> > recently bought
> > my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get 
> > out to the
> > site is next week (9/23 at the latest):
> > 
> > 1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
> > being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated 
> again?> 2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, 
> should I send
> > data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this 
> would 
> > skew the
> > historical data.  
> > 	
> > 	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
> > some ideas):
> > 	
> > 3.	The station CW6489
> > <http://www.findu.com/cgi-
> > bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
> > located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, 
> and 
> > does not
> > register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's 
> > website, it
> > is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the 
> > requirements to
> > have a town listed in the search database?
> > 
> > Thanks in advance for any assistance!
> > 
> > -Chris
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
> 
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
> 
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
> 

From DeerTrail131 at aol.com  Sun Sep 17 17:49:30 2006
From: DeerTrail131 at aol.com (DeerTrail131 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 17:49:30 EDT
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
Message-ID: <c21.48ec2de.323f1cea@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 9/17/2006 10:41:31 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time,  
cflory at comcast.net writes:

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=



You have entered an invalid station id. An error has occurred. Exiting the  
script! 
Opps!
 
Ron wd0bdq
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060917/51f146c9/attachment.html 

From cflory at comcast.net  Sun Sep 17 18:10:00 2006
From: cflory at comcast.net (Chris Flory)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 17:10:00 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
In-Reply-To: <c21.48ec2de.323f1cea@aol.com>
Message-ID: <002701c6daa6$0555c050$4564a8c0@chris>

Yeah, you have to append 'FWD' to the end of that URL.outlook truncates it.

 

  _____  

From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
DeerTrail131 at aol.com
Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:50 PM
To: wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)

 

In a message dated 9/17/2006 10:41:31 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time,
cflory at comcast.net writes:

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=

You have entered an invalid station id. An error has occurred. Exiting the
script! 
Opps!

 

Ron wd0bdq

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060917/83e1d704/attachment.html 

From DeerTrail131 at aol.com  Sun Sep 17 18:42:37 2006
From: DeerTrail131 at aol.com (DeerTrail131 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 18:42:37 EDT
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
Message-ID: <516.75bda00.323f295d@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 9/17/2006 10:41:31 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time,  
cflory at comcast.net writes:

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=
FWD



_http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=F
WD_ 
(http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=FWD) 
 
Opps MY Error....................Sorry Guys hihi Too Much Bronco Football? 
 
Ron wd0bdq
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060917/1202dbf8/attachment.html 

From kdmiller at oldsgmail.com  Sun Sep 17 23:06:55 2006
From: kdmiller at oldsgmail.com (kdmiller at oldsgmail.com)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 21:06:55 -0600
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
Message-ID: <1d0e9d9ed78547b498d283dc6b9fcfed@oldsgmail.com>

-------- Original Message --------
> From: Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov
> Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 12:54 PM
> To: Discussion of weather data quality issues <wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net>
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
> 
> Chris,
> 
> I don't know what the requirements are to get a certain town listed in
> the web site you mention below.  I suggest that you contact the
> webmaster for that web page.
> 

I believe it goes by whatever name is assigned to a zip code.

NWS offers point forcasts these days, rather than using a placename,
use latitude and longitude.


Keith
--




From gerry.creager at tamu.edu  Sun Sep 17 23:44:04 2006
From: gerry.creager at tamu.edu (Gerry Creager N5JXS)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 22:44:04 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
In-Reply-To: <12d31133b3.133b312d31@noaa.gov>
References: <12d31133b3.133b312d31@noaa.gov>
Message-ID: <450E1604.4090404@tamu.edu>

Inclusion in the AWIPS database.  I'm checking to see if that's really 
the case.  Otherwise it's connected to the NDFD database of places...

gerry

Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov wrote:
> Chris,
> 
> I don't know what the requirements are to get a certain town listed in
> the web site you mention below.  I suggest that you contact the
> webmaster for that web page.
> 
> Russ
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
> Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:31 pm
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
> 
> 
>>Guess that didn't work...here is the full link:
>>
>>
> 
> http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=
> 
>>FWD
>>
>>This is for Graham, TX...the nearest town.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Chris 
>>FlorySent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:57 AM
>>To: 'Discussion of weather data quality issues'
>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>
>>Good to know, thanks for the info!
>>
>>The site I was referring to, is:
>>
>>Link
>>
>>I guess I could have said NWS as well.  Sorry for the confusion.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Chris
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
>>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov
>>Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 11:12 PM
>>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>
>>Chris,
>>
>>It takes over 6 months of not receiving any data before a registered
>>CWOP station is classified as inactive.
>>
>>CW6489, located in Murray, TX is listed in the APRSWXNETStation.txt 
>>fileand so is registered so that data will flow to NOAA
>>
>>http://www.wxqa.com/APRSWXNETStation.txt
>>
>>When you say "NOAA's website", what URL are you referring to?
>>
>>Russ
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:09 am
>>Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>
>>
>>>Hello,
>>>
>>>I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station 
>>
>>world. 
>>
>>>I have
>>>just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am 
>>
>>really> excited about getting this going and sending my data to 
>>help in 
>>
>>>whatever way
>>>I can.
>>>
>>>A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I 
>>>recently bought
>>>my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get 
>>>out to the
>>>site is next week (9/23 at the latest):
>>>
>>>1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
>>>being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated 
>>
>>again?> 2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, 
>>should I send
>>
>>>data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this 
>>
>>would 
>>
>>>skew the
>>>historical data.  
>>>	
>>>	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
>>>some ideas):
>>>	
>>>3.	The station CW6489
>>><http://www.findu.com/cgi-
>>>bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
>>>located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, 
>>
>>and 
>>
>>>does not
>>>register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's 
>>>website, it
>>>is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the 
>>>requirements to
>>>have a town listed in the search database?
>>>
>>>Thanks in advance for any assistance!
>>>
>>>-Chris
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> 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
Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843

From cflory at comcast.net  Mon Sep 18 01:08:43 2006
From: cflory at comcast.net (Chris Flory)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 00:08:43 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
In-Reply-To: <450E1604.4090404@tamu.edu>
Message-ID: <008d01c6dae0$83536d10$4564a8c0@chris>

Thanks for looking!

-----Original Message-----
From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Gerry Creager
N5JXS
Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 10:44 PM
To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)

Inclusion in the AWIPS database.  I'm checking to see if that's really 
the case.  Otherwise it's connected to the NDFD database of places...

gerry

Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov wrote:
> Chris,
> 
> I don't know what the requirements are to get a certain town listed in
> the web site you mention below.  I suggest that you contact the
> webmaster for that web page.
> 
> Russ
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
> Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:31 pm
> Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
> 
> 
>>Guess that didn't work...here is the full link:
>>
>>
> 
>
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=
> 
>>FWD
>>
>>This is for Graham, TX...the nearest town.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Chris 
>>FlorySent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:57 AM
>>To: 'Discussion of weather data quality issues'
>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>
>>Good to know, thanks for the info!
>>
>>The site I was referring to, is:
>>
>>Link
>>
>>I guess I could have said NWS as well.  Sorry for the confusion.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Chris
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
>>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov
>>Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 11:12 PM
>>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>
>>Chris,
>>
>>It takes over 6 months of not receiving any data before a registered
>>CWOP station is classified as inactive.
>>
>>CW6489, located in Murray, TX is listed in the APRSWXNETStation.txt 
>>fileand so is registered so that data will flow to NOAA
>>
>>http://www.wxqa.com/APRSWXNETStation.txt
>>
>>When you say "NOAA's website", what URL are you referring to?
>>
>>Russ
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:09 am
>>Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>
>>
>>>Hello,
>>>
>>>I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station 
>>
>>world. 
>>
>>>I have
>>>just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am 
>>
>>really> excited about getting this going and sending my data to 
>>help in 
>>
>>>whatever way
>>>I can.
>>>
>>>A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I 
>>>recently bought
>>>my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get 
>>>out to the
>>>site is next week (9/23 at the latest):
>>>
>>>1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
>>>being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated 
>>
>>again?> 2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, 
>>should I send
>>
>>>data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this 
>>
>>would 
>>
>>>skew the
>>>historical data.  
>>>	
>>>	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
>>>some ideas):
>>>	
>>>3.	The station CW6489
>>><http://www.findu.com/cgi-
>>>bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
>>>located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, 
>>
>>and 
>>
>>>does not
>>>register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's 
>>>website, it
>>>is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the 
>>>requirements to
>>>have a town listed in the search database?
>>>
>>>Thanks in advance for any assistance!
>>>
>>>-Chris
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> 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
Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843
_______________________________________________
wxqc mailing list
Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc

The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.


From dshelms at comcast.net  Mon Sep 18 08:25:40 2006
From: dshelms at comcast.net (Dave Helms)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 08:25:40 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :).... station
 name-place convention in CWOP database
In-Reply-To: <450E1604.4090404@tamu.edu>
References: <12d31133b3.133b312d31@noaa.gov> <450E1604.4090404@tamu.edu>
Message-ID: <450E9044.30604@comcast.net>

Hi Chris,

CWOP data are available on local AWIPS if the WFO requests distribution 
from MADIS.  MADIS distribution of CWOP observations includes your 
station's metadata, along with its geo-poliyical or geo-physical 
location, "Murray" Texas.  It doesn't matter if the Zip Code Gazateer 
includes the place-name in the CWOP station metadata, all we care about 
is that the name is recognized by the people living in your local area.  
By example, in Alaska we have used highway mile markers, elsewhere we 
use mountain peaks, lakes, etc., and one of these have zip codes.  
Names-places are for people; zip codes and lat/lons are for computers.  
CWOP documents and validates all three of these geo-location parameters 
(as Russ and I did with you).

For the most part, WFOs do not include CWOP stations on 
"observations/current conditions" section of the WFO web pages.  These 
observations are typically ASOS/AWOS at airports.  Many times, the COOP 
max/min temps and precip are also available.  The exception is the 
Western Region which uses Mesowest web links to show mesonet 
observations which include APRSWXNET/CWOP stations.  Mesowest includes 
all CWOP/APRSWXNET stations in North America so your data are can be 
viewed through the Mesowest web links, here is your station's:
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/mesowest/getobext.php?wfo=&sid=C6489&num=168&raw=0&banner=off
http://www.met.utah.edu/cgi-bin/droman/mesomap.cgi?state=TX
... selected "all networks" to see CWOP/APRSWXNET reports (your is not 
on the map because you are not transmitting recently)


Dave
CW0351

Gerry Creager N5JXS wrote:

>Inclusion in the AWIPS database.  I'm checking to see if that's really 
>the case.  Otherwise it's connected to the NDFD database of places...
>
>gerry
>
>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov wrote:
>  
>
>>Chris,
>>
>>I don't know what the requirements are to get a certain town listed in
>>the web site you mention below.  I suggest that you contact the
>>webmaster for that web page.
>>
>>Russ
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:31 pm
>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Guess that didn't work...here is the full link:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=
>>
>>    
>>
>>>FWD
>>>
>>>This is for Graham, TX...the nearest town.
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Chris 
>>>FlorySent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:57 AM
>>>To: 'Discussion of weather data quality issues'
>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>Good to know, thanks for the info!
>>>
>>>The site I was referring to, is:
>>>
>>>Link
>>>
>>>I guess I could have said NWS as well.  Sorry for the confusion.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
>>>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov
>>>Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 11:12 PM
>>>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>Chris,
>>>
>>>It takes over 6 months of not receiving any data before a registered
>>>CWOP station is classified as inactive.
>>>
>>>CW6489, located in Murray, TX is listed in the APRSWXNETStation.txt 
>>>fileand so is registered so that data will flow to NOAA
>>>
>>>http://www.wxqa.com/APRSWXNETStation.txt
>>>
>>>When you say "NOAA's website", what URL are you referring to?
>>>
>>>Russ
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:09 am
>>>Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>world. 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I have
>>>>just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>really> excited about getting this going and sending my data to 
>>>help in 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>whatever way
>>>>I can.
>>>>
>>>>A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I 
>>>>recently bought
>>>>my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get 
>>>>out to the
>>>>site is next week (9/23 at the latest):
>>>>
>>>>1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
>>>>being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>again?> 2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, 
>>>should I send
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>would 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>skew the
>>>>historical data.  
>>>>	
>>>>	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
>>>>some ideas):
>>>>	
>>>>3.	The station CW6489
>>>><http://www.findu.com/cgi-
>>>>bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
>>>>located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>and 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>does not
>>>>register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's 
>>>>website, it
>>>>is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the 
>>>>requirements to
>>>>have a town listed in the search database?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks in advance for any assistance!
>>>>
>>>>-Chris
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>wxqc mailing list
>>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>>
>>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>wxqc mailing list
>>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>>
>>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>    
>>
>
>  
>


From gerry.creager at tamu.edu  Mon Sep 18 08:33:51 2006
From: gerry.creager at tamu.edu (Gerry Creager N5JXS)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:33:51 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :).... station
 name-place convention in CWOP database
In-Reply-To: <450E9044.30604@comcast.net>
References: <12d31133b3.133b312d31@noaa.gov> <450E1604.4090404@tamu.edu>
	<450E9044.30604@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <450E922F.3060305@tamu.edu>

http://mesonet.tamu.edu/currentwx.html also shows all CWOP and AWOS/ASOS 
sites.

Dave Helms wrote:
> Hi Chris,
> 
> CWOP data are available on local AWIPS if the WFO requests distribution 
> from MADIS.  MADIS distribution of CWOP observations includes your 
> station's metadata, along with its geo-poliyical or geo-physical 
> location, "Murray" Texas.  It doesn't matter if the Zip Code Gazateer 
> includes the place-name in the CWOP station metadata, all we care about 
> is that the name is recognized by the people living in your local area.  
> By example, in Alaska we have used highway mile markers, elsewhere we 
> use mountain peaks, lakes, etc., and one of these have zip codes.  
> Names-places are for people; zip codes and lat/lons are for computers.  
> CWOP documents and validates all three of these geo-location parameters 
> (as Russ and I did with you).
> 
> For the most part, WFOs do not include CWOP stations on 
> "observations/current conditions" section of the WFO web pages.  These 
> observations are typically ASOS/AWOS at airports.  Many times, the COOP 
> max/min temps and precip are also available.  The exception is the 
> Western Region which uses Mesowest web links to show mesonet 
> observations which include APRSWXNET/CWOP stations.  Mesowest includes 
> all CWOP/APRSWXNET stations in North America so your data are can be 
> viewed through the Mesowest web links, here is your station's:
> http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/mesowest/getobext.php?wfo=&sid=C6489&num=168&raw=0&banner=off
> http://www.met.utah.edu/cgi-bin/droman/mesomap.cgi?state=TX
> ... selected "all networks" to see CWOP/APRSWXNET reports (your is not 
> on the map because you are not transmitting recently)
> 
> 
> Dave
> CW0351
> 
> Gerry Creager N5JXS wrote:
> 
> 
>>Inclusion in the AWIPS database.  I'm checking to see if that's really 
>>the case.  Otherwise it's connected to the NDFD database of places...
>>
>>gerry
>>
>>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov wrote:
>> 
>>
>>
>>>Chris,
>>>
>>>I don't know what the requirements are to get a certain town listed in
>>>the web site you mention below.  I suggest that you contact the
>>>webmaster for that web page.
>>>
>>>Russ
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:31 pm
>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>
>>>>Guess that didn't work...here is the full link:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>
>>>
>>>http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>
>>>>FWD
>>>>
>>>>This is for Graham, TX...the nearest town.
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Chris 
>>>>FlorySent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:57 AM
>>>>To: 'Discussion of weather data quality issues'
>>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>>
>>>>Good to know, thanks for the info!
>>>>
>>>>The site I was referring to, is:
>>>>
>>>>Link
>>>>
>>>>I guess I could have said NWS as well.  Sorry for the confusion.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>
>>>>Chris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
>>>>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov
>>>>Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 11:12 PM
>>>>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>>
>>>>Chris,
>>>>
>>>>It takes over 6 months of not receiving any data before a registered
>>>>CWOP station is classified as inactive.
>>>>
>>>>CW6489, located in Murray, TX is listed in the APRSWXNETStation.txt 
>>>>fileand so is registered so that data will flow to NOAA
>>>>
>>>>http://www.wxqa.com/APRSWXNETStation.txt
>>>>
>>>>When you say "NOAA's website", what URL are you referring to?
>>>>
>>>>Russ
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:09 am
>>>>Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>>I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station 
>>>>>       
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>world. 
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I have
>>>>>just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am 
>>>>>       
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>really> excited about getting this going and sending my data to 
>>>>help in 
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>whatever way
>>>>>I can.
>>>>>
>>>>>A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I 
>>>>>recently bought
>>>>>my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get 
>>>>>out to the
>>>>>site is next week (9/23 at the latest):
>>>>>
>>>>>1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
>>>>>being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated 
>>>>>       
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>again?> 2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, 
>>>>should I send
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this 
>>>>>       
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>would 
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>skew the
>>>>>historical data.  
>>>>>	
>>>>>	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
>>>>>some ideas):
>>>>>	
>>>>>3.	The station CW6489
>>>>><http://www.findu.com/cgi-
>>>>>bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
>>>>>located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, 
>>>>>       
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>and 
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>does not
>>>>>register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's 
>>>>>website, it
>>>>>is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the 
>>>>>requirements to
>>>>>have a town listed in the search database?
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks in advance for any assistance!
>>>>>
>>>>>-Chris
>>>>>
>>>>>       
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>wxqc mailing list
>>>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>>>
>>>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>wxqc mailing list
>>>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>>>
>>>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>wxqc mailing list
>>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>>
>>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>>   
>>>
>>
>> 
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> 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
Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843

From dshelms at comcast.net  Mon Sep 18 08:37:52 2006
From: dshelms at comcast.net (Dave Helms)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 08:37:52 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)... Murray is on the
 Map!
In-Reply-To: <008d01c6dae0$83536d10$4564a8c0@chris>
References: <008d01c6dae0$83536d10$4564a8c0@chris>
Message-ID: <450E9320.4060907@comcast.net>

Murray is on the map:
http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/MM/hnm75.html

Population 29, say-lute!!!  Anyway, that is the cool thing about CWOP, 
we hope to get weather reports from every village or where ever there is 
power and communication available.

Dave
CW0351


Chris Flory wrote:

>Thanks for looking!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Gerry Creager
>N5JXS
>Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 10:44 PM
>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>
>Inclusion in the AWIPS database.  I'm checking to see if that's really 
>the case.  Otherwise it's connected to the NDFD database of places...
>
>gerry
>
>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov wrote:
>  
>
>>Chris,
>>
>>I don't know what the requirements are to get a certain town listed in
>>the web site you mention below.  I suggest that you contact the
>>webmaster for that web page.
>>
>>Russ
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:31 pm
>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Guess that didn't work...here is the full link:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>    
>>
>http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site=
>  
>
>>>FWD
>>>
>>>This is for Graham, TX...the nearest town.
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Chris 
>>>FlorySent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:57 AM
>>>To: 'Discussion of weather data quality issues'
>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>Good to know, thanks for the info!
>>>
>>>The site I was referring to, is:
>>>
>>>Link
>>>
>>>I guess I could have said NWS as well.  Sorry for the confusion.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
>>>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov
>>>Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 11:12 PM
>>>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>Chris,
>>>
>>>It takes over 6 months of not receiving any data before a registered
>>>CWOP station is classified as inactive.
>>>
>>>CW6489, located in Murray, TX is listed in the APRSWXNETStation.txt 
>>>fileand so is registered so that data will flow to NOAA
>>>
>>>http://www.wxqa.com/APRSWXNETStation.txt
>>>
>>>When you say "NOAA's website", what URL are you referring to?
>>>
>>>Russ
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:09 am
>>>Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>world. 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I have
>>>>just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>really> excited about getting this going and sending my data to 
>>>help in 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>whatever way
>>>>I can.
>>>>
>>>>A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I 
>>>>recently bought
>>>>my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get 
>>>>out to the
>>>>site is next week (9/23 at the latest):
>>>>
>>>>1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
>>>>being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>again?> 2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, 
>>>should I send
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>would 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>skew the
>>>>historical data.  
>>>>	
>>>>	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
>>>>some ideas):
>>>>	
>>>>3.	The station CW6489
>>>><http://www.findu.com/cgi-
>>>>bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
>>>>located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>and 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>does not
>>>>register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's 
>>>>website, it
>>>>is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the 
>>>>requirements to
>>>>have a town listed in the search database?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks in advance for any assistance!
>>>>
>>>>-Chris
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>wxqc mailing list
>>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>>
>>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>wxqc mailing list
>>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>>
>>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>    
>>
>
>  
>


From cflory at comcast.net  Mon Sep 18 11:33:10 2006
From: cflory at comcast.net (Chris Flory)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:33:10 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :).... station
	name-place convention in CWOP database
In-Reply-To: <450E9044.30604@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <012a01c6db37$bf9a4300$4564a8c0@chris>

Dave, 

I appreciate the information.

Regards,

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Dave Helms
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 7:26 AM
To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :).... station
name-place convention in CWOP database

Hi Chris,

CWOP data are available on local AWIPS if the WFO requests distribution 
from MADIS.  MADIS distribution of CWOP observations includes your 
station's metadata, along with its geo-poliyical or geo-physical 
location, "Murray" Texas.  It doesn't matter if the Zip Code Gazateer 
includes the place-name in the CWOP station metadata, all we care about 
is that the name is recognized by the people living in your local area.  
By example, in Alaska we have used highway mile markers, elsewhere we 
use mountain peaks, lakes, etc., and one of these have zip codes.  
Names-places are for people; zip codes and lat/lons are for computers.  
CWOP documents and validates all three of these geo-location parameters 
(as Russ and I did with you).

For the most part, WFOs do not include CWOP stations on 
"observations/current conditions" section of the WFO web pages.  These 
observations are typically ASOS/AWOS at airports.  Many times, the COOP 
max/min temps and precip are also available.  The exception is the 
Western Region which uses Mesowest web links to show mesonet 
observations which include APRSWXNET/CWOP stations.  Mesowest includes 
all CWOP/APRSWXNET stations in North America so your data are can be 
viewed through the Mesowest web links, here is your station's:
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/mesowest/getobext.php?wfo=&sid=C6489&num=168&raw=0&b
anner=off
http://www.met.utah.edu/cgi-bin/droman/mesomap.cgi?state=TX
... selected "all networks" to see CWOP/APRSWXNET reports (your is not 
on the map because you are not transmitting recently)


Dave
CW0351

Gerry Creager N5JXS wrote:

>Inclusion in the AWIPS database.  I'm checking to see if that's really 
>the case.  Otherwise it's connected to the NDFD database of places...
>
>gerry
>
>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov wrote:
>  
>
>>Chris,
>>
>>I don't know what the requirements are to get a certain town listed in
>>the web site you mention below.  I suggest that you contact the
>>webmaster for that web page.
>>
>>Russ
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:31 pm
>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Guess that didn't work...here is the full link:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&sit
e=
>>
>>    
>>
>>>FWD
>>>
>>>This is for Graham, TX...the nearest town.
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Chris 
>>>FlorySent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:57 AM
>>>To: 'Discussion of weather data quality issues'
>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>Good to know, thanks for the info!
>>>
>>>The site I was referring to, is:
>>>
>>>Link
>>>
>>>I guess I could have said NWS as well.  Sorry for the confusion.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
>>>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov
>>>Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 11:12 PM
>>>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>Chris,
>>>
>>>It takes over 6 months of not receiving any data before a registered
>>>CWOP station is classified as inactive.
>>>
>>>CW6489, located in Murray, TX is listed in the APRSWXNETStation.txt 
>>>fileand so is registered so that data will flow to NOAA
>>>
>>>http://www.wxqa.com/APRSWXNETStation.txt
>>>
>>>When you say "NOAA's website", what URL are you referring to?
>>>
>>>Russ
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:09 am
>>>Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>world. 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I have
>>>>just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>really> excited about getting this going and sending my data to 
>>>help in 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>whatever way
>>>>I can.
>>>>
>>>>A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I 
>>>>recently bought
>>>>my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get 
>>>>out to the
>>>>site is next week (9/23 at the latest):
>>>>
>>>>1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
>>>>being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>again?> 2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, 
>>>should I send
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>would 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>skew the
>>>>historical data.  
>>>>	
>>>>	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
>>>>some ideas):
>>>>	
>>>>3.	The station CW6489
>>>><http://www.findu.com/cgi-
>>>>bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
>>>>located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>and 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>does not
>>>>register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's 
>>>>website, it
>>>>is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the 
>>>>requirements to
>>>>have a town listed in the search database?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks in advance for any assistance!
>>>>
>>>>-Chris
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>wxqc mailing list
>>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>>
>>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>wxqc mailing list
>>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>>
>>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

_______________________________________________
wxqc mailing list
Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc

The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.


From cflory at comcast.net  Mon Sep 18 11:33:23 2006
From: cflory at comcast.net (Chris Flory)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:33:23 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)... Murray is on the
	Map!
In-Reply-To: <450E9320.4060907@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <012b01c6db37$c7611370$4564a8c0@chris>

Yes, it is a thriving metropolis isn't it?  Good find...thanks!

-----Original Message-----
From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Dave Helms
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 7:38 AM
To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)... Murray is on the
Map!

Murray is on the map:
http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/MM/hnm75.html

Population 29, say-lute!!!  Anyway, that is the cool thing about CWOP, 
we hope to get weather reports from every village or where ever there is 
power and communication available.

Dave
CW0351


Chris Flory wrote:

>Thanks for looking!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Gerry Creager
>N5JXS
>Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 10:44 PM
>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>
>Inclusion in the AWIPS database.  I'm checking to see if that's really 
>the case.  Otherwise it's connected to the NDFD database of places...
>
>gerry
>
>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov wrote:
>  
>
>>Chris,
>>
>>I don't know what the requirements are to get a certain town listed in
>>the web site you mention below.  I suggest that you contact the
>>webmaster for that web page.
>>
>>Russ
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:31 pm
>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Guess that didn't work...here is the full link:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>    
>>
>http://www.srh.noaa.gov/forecast/MapClick.php?CityName=Graham&state=TX&site
=
>  
>
>>>FWD
>>>
>>>This is for Graham, TX...the nearest town.
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Chris 
>>>FlorySent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:57 AM
>>>To: 'Discussion of weather data quality issues'
>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>Good to know, thanks for the info!
>>>
>>>The site I was referring to, is:
>>>
>>>Link
>>>
>>>I guess I could have said NWS as well.  Sorry for the confusion.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of
>>>Russell.B.Chadwick at noaa.gov
>>>Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2006 11:12 PM
>>>To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
>>>Subject: Re: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>Chris,
>>>
>>>It takes over 6 months of not receiving any data before a registered
>>>CWOP station is classified as inactive.
>>>
>>>CW6489, located in Murray, TX is listed in the APRSWXNETStation.txt 
>>>fileand so is registered so that data will flow to NOAA
>>>
>>>http://www.wxqa.com/APRSWXNETStation.txt
>>>
>>>When you say "NOAA's website", what URL are you referring to?
>>>
>>>Russ
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: Chris Flory <cflory at comcast.net>
>>>Date: Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:09 am
>>>Subject: [wxqc] I'm a newbie...you've been warned :)
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I am new to this mailing list and new to the weather station 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>world. 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I have
>>>>just joined CWOP, and have a weather station ID (CW6489).  I am 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>really> excited about getting this going and sending my data to 
>>>help in 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>whatever way
>>>>I can.
>>>>
>>>>A few questions if you don't mind responding to any/all.   I 
>>>>recently bought
>>>>my VP2 and set it up at my house to test.  The quickest I can get 
>>>>out to the
>>>>site is next week (9/23 at the latest):
>>>>
>>>>1.	What is the length of time that the weather station can go before
>>>>being regarded as inactive?  Any problems getting it activated 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>again?> 2.	If, for example, number 1 question is a week or so, 
>>>should I send
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>data from another location to keep it active?  I figure this 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>would 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>skew the
>>>>historical data.  
>>>>	
>>>>	A question for the NOAA persons on the list (perhaps you might have
>>>>some ideas):
>>>>	
>>>>3.	The station CW6489
>>>><http://www.findu.com/cgi-
>>>>bin/wxpage.cgi?call=CW6489&last=48&radar=***>  is
>>>>located in Murray, TX.  However, this location has no zip code, 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>and 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>does not
>>>>register when I enter it as a search for Murray, Texas in NOAA's 
>>>>website, it
>>>>is not found.  The closest town is Graham, TX.  What are the 
>>>>requirements to
>>>>have a town listed in the search database?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks in advance for any assistance!
>>>>
>>>>-Chris
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>wxqc mailing list
>>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>>
>>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>wxqc mailing list
>>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>>
>>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wxqc mailing list
>>Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
>>To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
>>http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>>
>>The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

_______________________________________________
wxqc mailing list
Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
http://pond1.gladstonefamily.net:8080/mailman/listinfo/wxqc

The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.


From philip at gladstonefamily.net  Thu Sep 21 20:48:42 2006
From: philip at gladstonefamily.net (Philip Gladstone)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:48:42 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
Message-ID: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>

I have moved the list onto a new machine that is not in my basement and 
is in a properly hosted environment. The lists and the archives appear 
to have transitioned over OK, but if there any problems, then please 
tell me.

I'm also thinking of disabling the ability of people who are not on the 
list to send messages. Currently, these messages are all held for my 
review, and there are not many of them (less than 1 per week). However, 
there are around 200-300 messages advertising products and services of a 
dubious nature that I have to wade through. Comments?

Philip
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3389 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://server.gladstonefamily.net/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060921/f979f983/attachment.bin 

From steve at dimse.com  Thu Sep 21 20:53:53 2006
From: steve at dimse.com (Steve Dimse)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:53:53 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
In-Reply-To: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
References: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
Message-ID: <222D3F9F-A717-41BA-AFBB-200779E51C27@dimse.com>


On Sep 21, 2006, at 9:48 PM, Philip Gladstone wrote:

> I'm also thinking of disabling the ability of people who are not on  
> the list to send messages. Currently, these messages are all held  
> for my review, and there are not many of them (less than 1 per  
> week). However, there are around 200-300 messages advertising  
> products and services of a dubious nature that I have to wade  
> through. Comments?

My only concern is that I send email from several different accounts,  
can you put all my email addresses in the allowed list, or is it  
limited to those email addresses that are subscribed? I don't want to  
have to get 5 copies of every message so I can be sure my replies  
will get through.

Steve K4HG

From shell at shellware.com  Thu Sep 21 20:55:39 2006
From: shell at shellware.com (Shell Shrader)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:55:39 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
In-Reply-To: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
References: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
Message-ID: <A5A56639-B912-4F50-844B-4690B25241E5@mimectl>

> there are around 200-300 messages advertising products and 
> services of a dubious nature that I have to wade through.

My motto is death to all spam.  If that means disabling an anonymous function then so be it.  I'm sure you've got enough to keep up with.  

Shell




From: Philip Gladstone
Sent: Thu 9/21/2006 9:48 PM
To: Discussion of data quality issues
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia


_______________________________________________
wxqc mailing list
Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc

The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://server.gladstonefamily.net/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060921/48638cd0/attachment.html 

From Weather at JaxWeather.net  Thu Sep 21 21:02:21 2006
From: Weather at JaxWeather.net (Bob Johnson)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:02:21 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
In-Reply-To: <A5A56639-B912-4F50-844B-4690B25241E5@mimectl>
References: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
	<A5A56639-B912-4F50-844B-4690B25241E5@mimectl>
Message-ID: <fdcaeff70609211902m531e3ab7p53031fd97fe0b153@mail.gmail.com>

Many of today's Discussion Lists have added the ability to restrict messages
to only those that are on the list just for this reason.  The reason for it
being added in most instances was List owners requests to prevent spamming
of the list as well as make the management of the list, well manageable...

I would vote to restrict to addresses only on the list, FWIW.

Bob

On 9/21/06, Shell Shrader <shell at shellware.com> wrote:
>
>  > there are around 200-300 messages advertising products and
> > services of a dubious nature that I have to wade through.
>
> My motto is death to all spam.  If that means disabling an anonymous
> function then so be it.  I'm sure you've got enough to keep up with.
>
> Shell
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Philip Gladstone
> *Sent:* Thu 9/21/2006 9:48 PM
> *To:* Discussion of data quality issues
> *Subject:* [wxqc] Administrivia
>
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>
>


-- 
JaxWeather.net
Jacksonville, Fl (Lakeshore, 32205) Local Weather
http://JaxWeather.net
-- 
JaxFountain.com
Dedicated to showcasing and preserving Friendship Fountain
http://JaxFountain.com
--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://server.gladstonefamily.net/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060921/11101a21/attachment.html 

From ikishk+wxqc at gmail.com  Thu Sep 21 21:12:36 2006
From: ikishk+wxqc at gmail.com (Isaac Kishk (CW6261))
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:12:36 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
In-Reply-To: <222D3F9F-A717-41BA-AFBB-200779E51C27@dimse.com>
References: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
	<222D3F9F-A717-41BA-AFBB-200779E51C27@dimse.com>
Message-ID: <f1559b000609211912k1f695f2mf46a32a74836ff84@mail.gmail.com>

with mailman you have the ability to suspend emails while still being
on the list.  just subscribe each account, log in and change the
options.

On 9/21/06, Steve Dimse <steve at dimse.com> wrote:
>
> On Sep 21, 2006, at 9:48 PM, Philip Gladstone wrote:
>
> > I'm also thinking of disabling the ability of people who are not on
> > the list to send messages. Currently, these messages are all held
> > for my review, and there are not many of them (less than 1 per
> > week). However, there are around 200-300 messages advertising
> > products and services of a dubious nature that I have to wade
> > through. Comments?
>
> My only concern is that I send email from several different accounts,
> can you put all my email addresses in the allowed list, or is it
> limited to those email addresses that are subscribed? I don't want to
> have to get 5 copies of every message so I can be sure my replies
> will get through.
>
> Steve K4HG
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc
>
> The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
>


-- 
www.kishk.org

From steve at dimse.com  Thu Sep 21 21:20:02 2006
From: steve at dimse.com (Steve Dimse)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:20:02 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
In-Reply-To: <A5A56639-B912-4F50-844B-4690B25241E5@mimectl>
References: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
	<A5A56639-B912-4F50-844B-4690B25241E5@mimectl>
Message-ID: <DBDD732A-FD1A-4602-AFF7-2B5020B94790@dimse.com>


On Sep 21, 2006, at 9:55 PM, Shell Shrader wrote:

> My motto is death to all spam.  If that means disabling an  
> anonymous function then so be it.  I'm sure you've got enough to  
> keep up with.
>
Philip should do what he needs to do, but I do have a wild hair about  
all the "improvements" people make to cut out spam. Maybe if they  
worked, it would not bother me.

Unfortunately, very few of the anti-spam techniques actually result  
in decreased spam, more often they often just result in increased  
workloads for people like me that work heavily on the internet.

For example, when findU began it was hosted on my home DSL line. A  
well meaning user reported every spam message he got to an automated  
spam processor also had an email signature file that said something  
like "See where I am at http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi? 
call=k4hg". This line was automatically appended to every email he  
sent, including the spam reports. The automatic spam site was too  
stupid to recognize that this was a signature, and sent an abuse  
message to my DSL provider claiming that I was spamvertising my web  
site. Four times message were sent to my ISP, the first time there  
was just a warning message, the other three times my service was  
automatically suspended. I spent an average of a dozen hours on the  
phone for each of these four episodes trying to get my name cleared.

Another example... I get something like 50 messages a day from people  
asking questions. Most are just people too lazy to google for an  
answer (my favorite is a few times a year I get something from a  
college student that says I need to do a GIS project, will you do it  
for me!), and I have a one-button reply that says I am too busy to  
answer such questions. A handful of messages are either something I  
know is not available on the web or is phrased in a way I feel  
compelled to answer. It might take me 10 or 15 minutes to compose a  
typical reply. I cannot begin to express my anger when I get an  
automatic reply stating my email has been blocked by some spam-blocker.

I have an excellent Bayesian spam filter, it puts the roughly 1000  
spam messages I get every day in their place, and does not shift the  
burden to other people. If everyone did that, spam would really  
decrease, because it would not get through to people!

Steve K4HG

From gerry.creager at tamu.edu  Thu Sep 21 22:15:45 2006
From: gerry.creager at tamu.edu (Gerry Creager N5JXS)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:15:45 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
In-Reply-To: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
References: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
Message-ID: <45135561.9000502@tamu.edu>

All the lists I administer are configured so that only subscribers can 
post.  I got past wanting to read all that spam a long time ago.  If 
you're still wading thru it, I admire you, sir.

gerry

Philip Gladstone wrote:
> I have moved the list onto a new machine that is not in my basement and 
> is in a properly hosted environment. The lists and the archives appear 
> to have transitioned over OK, but if there any problems, then please 
> tell me.
> 
> I'm also thinking of disabling the ability of people who are not on the 
> list to send messages. Currently, these messages are all held for my 
> review, and there are not many of them (less than 1 per week). However, 
> there are around 200-300 messages advertising products and services of a 
> dubious nature that I have to wade through. Comments?
> 
> Philip
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://server.gladstonefamily.net/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
Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843

From sooner44 at valornet.com  Fri Sep 22 06:36:22 2006
From: sooner44 at valornet.com (Richard Engle)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 06:36:22 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] wxqc Digest, Vol 23, Issue 15
References: <mailman.6.1158894951.5057.wxqc@lists.gladstonefamily.net>
Message-ID: <003001c6de3b$54504020$6400a8c0@richardr55aq30>

Philip:

I would agree to what you said. This forum should be for active members 
only. I know one time, there were some ads with a letter that were not g 
rated. This has beenone of the best forums I have ever seen. Keep it up!

Richard Engle
CW 4378 



From shell at shellware.com  Fri Sep 22 06:43:21 2006
From: shell at shellware.com (Shell Shrader)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 07:43:21 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
In-Reply-To: <DBDD732A-FD1A-4602-AFF7-2B5020B94790@dimse.com>
References: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
	<A5A56639-B912-4F50-844B-4690B25241E5@mimectl>,
	<DBDD732A-FD1A-4602-AFF7-2B5020B94790@dimse.com>
Message-ID: <4E86BE74-D5A0-4F76-B2D3-74778017B37C@mimectl>

I host my own SMTP server (Microsoft Exchange 2003) and use their new Intelligent Message Filter.  It does an amazing job cutting down spam coming into my domain.  It is very rare for it to get a false positive.




From: Steve Dimse
Sent: Thu 9/21/2006 10:20 PM
To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
Subject: Re: [wxqc] Administrivia


On Sep 21, 2006, at 9:55 PM, Shell Shrader wrote:

> My motto is death to all spam.  If that means disabling an  
> anonymous function then so be it.  I'm sure you've got enough to  
> keep up with.
>
Philip should do what he needs to do, but I do have a wild hair about  
all the "improvements" people make to cut out spam. Maybe if they  
worked, it would not bother me.

Unfortunately, very few of the anti-spam techniques actually result  
in decreased spam, more often they often just result in increased  
workloads for people like me that work heavily on the internet.

For example, when findU began it was hosted on my home DSL line. A  
well meaning user reported every spam message he got to an automated  
spam processor also had an email signature file that said something  
like "See where I am at http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi? 
call=k4hg". This line was automatically appended to every email he  
sent, including the spam reports. The automatic spam site was too  
stupid to recognize that this was a signature, and sent an abuse  
message to my DSL provider claiming that I was spamvertising my web  
site. Four times message were sent to my ISP, the first time there  
was just a warning message, the other three times my service was  
automatically suspended. I spent an average of a dozen hours on the  
phone for each of these four episodes trying to get my name cleared.

Another example... I get something like 50 messages a day from people  
asking questions. Most are just people too lazy to google for an  
answer (my favorite is a few times a year I get something from a  
college student that says I need to do a GIS project, will you do it  
for me!), and I have a one-button reply that says I am too busy to  
answer such questions. A handful of messages are either something I  
know is not available on the web or is phrased in a way I feel  
compelled to answer. It might take me 10 or 15 minutes to compose a  
typical reply. I cannot begin to express my anger when I get an  
automatic reply stating my email has been blocked by some spam-blocker.

I have an excellent Bayesian spam filter, it puts the roughly 1000  
spam messages I get every day in their place, and does not shift the  
burden to other people. If everyone did that, spam would really  
decrease, because it would not get through to people!

Steve K4HG
_______________________________________________
wxqc mailing list
Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc

The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://server.gladstonefamily.net/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060922/05ee5fcf/attachment.html 

From jrobinson at emwin.hcad.org  Fri Sep 22 07:00:59 2006
From: jrobinson at emwin.hcad.org (Jim Robinson)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 07:00:59 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
In-Reply-To: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
References: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060922070006.0218f3c8@emwin.hcad.org>

I'd recommend that you limit postings to list subscribers.

Jim

At 08:48 PM 9/21/2006, you wrote:
>I have moved the list onto a new machine that is not in my basement 
>and is in a properly hosted environment. The lists and the archives 
>appear to have transitioned over OK, but if there any problems, then 
>please tell me.
>
>I'm also thinking of disabling the ability of people who are not on 
>the list to send messages. Currently, these messages are all held 
>for my review, and there are not many of them (less than 1 per 
>week). However, there are around 200-300 messages advertising 
>products and services of a dubious nature that I have to wade 
>through. Comments?
>
>Philip


From ken at ubh.com  Fri Sep 22 08:20:46 2006
From: ken at ubh.com (Ken Whelan)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 08:20:46 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
Message-ID: <4C7058FCA5307C4BBE440C692631B12783AB50@pig.uhc.cc>

I also agree with this.     I have been running lists since 1994 and BBS
message boards before that.    You will be able to remove the approval
mechanism if you do limit to just users.  One thing you might look at is
www.lsoft.com they have a list hosting service that is fantastic as well
as having software that is fantastic.   Unfortunantely it is not free,
however I'm quite sure that there are costs associated already with
running CWOP.   If you host the list on your own hardware I would guess
it is pretty reasonably priced.   If you need help financing such a
project,  I'm sure most of us on this list would be willing to pitch in
and help a bit. 

I'm on a couple of Listserv hosted lists and I don't think I have ever
gotten a spam that was sent through the list. 

Thanks
kw

-----Original Message-----
From: wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net
[mailto:wxqc-bounces at lists.gladstonefamily.net] On Behalf Of Jim
Robinson
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 7:01 AM
To: Discussion of weather data quality issues
Subject: Re: [wxqc] Administrivia

I'd recommend that you limit postings to list subscribers.

Jim

At 08:48 PM 9/21/2006, you wrote:
>I have moved the list onto a new machine that is not in my basement and

>is in a properly hosted environment. The lists and the archives appear 
>to have transitioned over OK, but if there any problems, then please 
>tell me.
>
>I'm also thinking of disabling the ability of people who are not on the

>list to send messages. Currently, these messages are all held for my 
>review, and there are not many of them (less than 1 per week). However,

>there are around 200-300 messages advertising products and services of 
>a dubious nature that I have to wade through. Comments?
>
>Philip

_______________________________________________
wxqc mailing list
Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net To unsubcribe or change
delivery options, please go to:
http://server.gladstonefamily.net/mailman/listinfo/wxqc

The contents of this message are the responsibility of the author.


From patn at n-js.net  Fri Sep 22 09:00:01 2006
From: patn at n-js.net (patn at n-js.net)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 07:00:01 -0700
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
In-Reply-To: <45135561.9000502@tamu.edu>
References: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net> <45135561.9000502@tamu.edu>
Message-ID: <20060922070001.qv6zza1d07c4c0g0@webmail.wolfpaw.net>

I too wade through this stuff for a few lists that I administer.  While 
I understand the convenience for folks who like to post from several 
different addresses I am quickly becoming tired of accommodating this 
luxury.

I would vote for saying to those who want to use more than one address, 
pls subscribe from those addresses as well and deal with the extra mail 
or use a web client and only send from one address.

Phil, I would say that you should feel free to stop looking at the 
extra stuff.

- pat


> Philip Gladstone wrote:
>> I have moved the list onto a new machine that is not in my basement and
>> is in a properly hosted environment. The lists and the archives appear
>> to have transitioned over OK, but if there any problems, then please
>> tell me.
>>
>> I'm also thinking of disabling the ability of people who are not on the
>> list to send messages. Currently, these messages are all held for my
>> review, and there are not many of them (less than 1 per week). However,
>> there are around 200-300 messages advertising products and services of a
>> dubious nature that I have to wade through. Comments?
>>
>> Philip
>>



From gerry.creager at tamu.edu  Fri Sep 22 13:45:22 2006
From: gerry.creager at tamu.edu (Gerry Creager)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 13:45:22 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Administrivia
In-Reply-To: <20060922070001.qv6zza1d07c4c0g0@webmail.wolfpaw.net>
References: <451340FA.3010704@gladstonefamily.net> <45135561.9000502@tamu.edu>
	<20060922070001.qv6zza1d07c4c0g0@webmail.wolfpaw.net>
Message-ID: <45142F42.3080500@tamu.edu>

I do accommodate the folks with 'n' addresses.  I subscribe the all then 
either they, or I set them up for the no mail options.  Works pretty 
well and doesn't add to my workload that often.

gerry

patn at n-js.net wrote:
> I too wade through this stuff for a few lists that I administer.  While 
> I understand the convenience for folks who like to post from several 
> different addresses I am quickly becoming tired of accommodating this 
> luxury.
> 
> I would vote for saying to those who want to use more than one address, 
> pls subscribe from those addresses as well and deal with the extra mail 
> or use a web client and only send from one address.
> 
> Phil, I would say that you should feel free to stop looking at the 
> extra stuff.
> 
> - pat
> 
> 
>> Philip Gladstone wrote:
>>> I have moved the list onto a new machine that is not in my basement and
>>> is in a properly hosted environment. The lists and the archives appear
>>> to have transitioned over OK, but if there any problems, then please
>>> tell me.
>>>
>>> I'm also thinking of disabling the ability of people who are not on the
>>> list to send messages. Currently, these messages are all held for my
>>> review, and there are not many of them (less than 1 per week). However,
>>> there are around 200-300 messages advertising products and services of a
>>> dubious nature that I have to wade through. Comments?
>>>
>>> Philip
>>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wxqc mailing list
> Post messages to wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
> To unsubcribe or change delivery options, please go to:
> http://server.gladstonefamily.net/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

From nmupdraft at gmail.com  Fri Sep 22 18:37:14 2006
From: nmupdraft at gmail.com (jody radzik)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 17:37:14 -0600
Subject: [wxqc] my rain collector vs. the birds
Message-ID: <ee8522780609221637s6850ecbfv49835a68bcd27a5b@mail.gmail.com>

Hey all.

I have a Davis Vantage Pro2 that seemed to be missing a lot of the
rain that was falling.  I just got back off the roof where I found
that birds had crapped in the collector, blocking the outlet hole.
Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I can prevent this from
happening in the future.  In other words, how do I keep the birds off
the collector?

Thanks.

--jody.

CW6266
http://nmupdraft.blogspot.com

From bweybrecht at bellsouth.net  Fri Sep 22 18:49:48 2006
From: bweybrecht at bellsouth.net (Bob)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:49:48 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] my rain collector vs. the birds
In-Reply-To: <ee8522780609221637s6850ecbfv49835a68bcd27a5b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <005301c6dea1$ca558120$0a5a210a@wsr88d>


-----Original Message-----
To: wxqc at lists.gladstonefamily.net
Subject: [wxqc] my rain collector vs. the birds

Hey all.

I have a Davis Vantage Pro2 that seemed to be missing a lot of the rain that
was falling.  I just got back off the roof where I found that birds had
crapped in the collector, blocking the outlet hole.
Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I can prevent this from happening
in the future.  In other words, how do I keep the birds off the collector?

Thanks.

--jody.

Leave the ladder there, then teach a couple of neighborhood cats how to
climb the ladder.



From steve at dimse.com  Fri Sep 22 18:53:50 2006
From: steve at dimse.com (Steve Dimse)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:53:50 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] my rain collector vs. the birds
In-Reply-To: <ee8522780609221637s6850ecbfv49835a68bcd27a5b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ee8522780609221637s6850ecbfv49835a68bcd27a5b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4CD7AE0A-93E4-41B6-BD9C-50DB4473E3A9@dimse.com>


On Sep 22, 2006, at 7:37 PM, jody radzik wrote:

> I have a Davis Vantage Pro2 that seemed to be missing a lot of the
> rain that was falling.  I just got back off the roof where I found
> that birds had crapped in the collector, blocking the outlet hole.
> Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I can prevent this from
> happening in the future.  In other words, how do I keep the birds off
> the collector?
>
Surprisingly effective is to string monofilament above the gauge.  
Birds can't see it, they bang into it and quickly learn to avoid the  
area. A fake hawk is also quite effective...

Steve

From Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov  Fri Sep 22 19:00:11 2006
From: Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov (Evan Bookbinder)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:00:11 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] my rain collector vs. the birds
References: <ee8522780609221637s6850ecbfv49835a68bcd27a5b@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CD7AE0A-93E4-41B6-BD9C-50DB4473E3A9@dimse.com>
Message-ID: <00e501c6dea3$3dabc2a0$6701a8c0@stormalerthp>

A fake cat also works. In all seriousness, birds became a HUGE problem with 
the new NWS Ultrasonic wind sensors -- hawks in fact. The 3 pronged sensor 
made a perfect perch for the birds, causing erroneous wind gusts (in some 
cases near hurricane force) to be observed when the bird was active on his 
perch.

Several attempts to remove the birds by providing alternate landing areas 
were unsuccessful -- they prefer the 10m perch to scout out their prey. The 
solution that works ended up being a auto-motion sensor attached to a strobe 
light and a blaring siren. Two days of that and the sites have not had any 
bird problems :)

Evan

> Birds can't see it, they bang into it and quickly learn to avoid the
> area. A fake hawk is also quite effective...
>
> Steve 


From brillig at gmail.com  Sun Sep 24 02:09:57 2006
From: brillig at gmail.com (Victor Engel)
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 02:09:57 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Rainfall Rate
Message-ID: <e0e999680609240009o57fd4c3fwfb2c07090784ce0e@mail.gmail.com>

Today, my weather station had its first real storm. It measured 1.66 inches
in 40 minutes. The rainfall amounts during the storm went like this:

 17:16 0  17:21 0.16  17:26 0.43  17:30 0.79  17:35 1  17:41 1.29  17:46
1.53  17:50 1.64  17:56 1.66
where the second column shows the daily total.

Weather Display reported a rainfall rate matching these numbers. I suppose
that is accurate if the rainfall rate is meant to be an average rate over
the past hour. But obviously, if what we really want to know is how hard it
was raining while it was coming down, then the rate should be the new
accumulation divided by the elapsed time. That gives the following chart:

 17:16
 17:21 1.92  17:26 3.24  17:30 5.4  17:35 2.52  17:41 2.9  17:46 2.88  17:50
1.65  17:56 0.2
This is more impressive. It also more accurately reflects how hard it was
raining at the time. Are either or both of these calculation methods
standards? Which is preferred?

Victor

P.S. The rest of town received anywhere from 0 to 1.44 inches, with common
amounts being under 0.1 inch. I didn't realize the whole town wasn't
unundated until the storm had passed and internet access was restored so I
could check around.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://server.gladstonefamily.net/pipermail/wxqc/attachments/20060924/aaa2102e/attachment.html 

From steve at dimse.com  Sun Sep 24 06:56:19 2006
From: steve at dimse.com (Steve Dimse)
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 07:56:19 -0400
Subject: [wxqc] Rainfall Rate
In-Reply-To: <e0e999680609240009o57fd4c3fwfb2c07090784ce0e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e0e999680609240009o57fd4c3fwfb2c07090784ce0e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BF2CB664-0A11-4DE2-A13E-648245B34672@dimse.com>


On Sep 24, 2006, at 3:09 AM, Victor Engel wrote:

> This is more impressive. It also more accurately reflects how hard  
> it was raining at the time. Are either or both of these calculation  
> methods standards? Which is preferred?
>
If you are asking about the data as sent to the APRS Internet System,  
it is based on amounts, not rates. There are three values that may be  
reported, last hour, last 24 hours, and since midnight local time.  
The 1 hour and 24 hour totals are forward through MADIS.

Steve K4HG

From Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov  Sun Sep 24 07:57:40 2006
From: Evan.Bookbinder at noaa.gov (Evan Bookbinder)
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 07:57:40 -0500
Subject: [wxqc] Rainfall Rate
References: <e0e999680609240009o57fd4c3fwfb2c07090784ce0e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <003201c6dfd9$05010cd0$6601a8c0@HPLAPTOP>

Sounds like a bug in Weather Display??? The Davis VP reports a separate rainfall rate which would have numbers that you calculated in the second listing. The second is the standard for rainfall rate, which as you surmised, is different from hourly rainfall accumulation.

Evan


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Victor Engel 
  To: Discussion of weather data quality issues 
  Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 2:09 AM
  Subject: [wxqc] Rainfall Rate


  Today, my weather station had its first real storm. It measured 1.66 inches in 40 minutes. The rainfall amounts during the storm went like this:

        17:16 0 
        17:21 0.16 
        17:26 0.43 
        17:30 0.79 
        17:35 1 
        17:41 1.29 
        17:46 1.53 
        17:50 1.64 
        17:56 1.66 

  where the second column shows the daily total.

  Weather Display reported a rainfall rate matching these numbers. I suppose that is accurate if the rainfall rate is meant to be an average rate over the past hour. But obviously, if what we really want to know is how hard it was raining while it was coming down, then the rate should be the new accumulation divided by the elapsed time. That gives the following chart: 

        17:16 
       
        17:21 1.92 
        17:26 3.24 
        17:30 5.4 
        17:35 2.52 
        17:41 2.9 
        17:46 2.88 
        17:50 1.65 
        17:56 0.2 

  This is more impressive. It also more accurately reflects how hard it was raining at the time. Are either or both of these calculation methods standards? Which is preferred?

  Victor

  P.S. The rest of town received anywhere from 0 to 1.44 inches, with common amounts being under 0.1 inch. I didn't realize the whole town wasn't unundated until the storm had passed and internet access was restored so I could check around.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  wxqc mailing list
  Post messages