[wxqc] Use of data - Was: Pole For Wind Gauge

[Rich Brunnworth]

Oh I don't doubt that in many weather areas the CWOP data is used.

What did "amaze" me was that our radar comes out of Pueblo, and the NWS 
office there seemed rather astounded when I told them of the number of 
PW stations in the Colorado Springs area.  It's as if they didn't even 
know that weatherunderground existed.

Having the data available, evaluating the data, and using the data are 3 
separate things.  We had a microburst go through here earlier this year 
and the "official rainfall" was measured at .25 inches, which was at the 
airport on the southeast side of town.  On the northern side of town 
there was over 2 inches of rain recorded at several of the PW stations.

IMHO....... it's a bit frustrating that the overall amount of data is 
available, but may not be used to its fullest potential.

I wonder, out of curiosity, how much CWOP or weatherunderground data is 
used by The Weather Channel. Does anyone have a guess?

Rich
This email scanned with AVG antivirus program

Gerry Creager wrote:
>
>
> Actually, a large number of NWS WFO's do use APRS-wx and CWOP data for 
> their work.  It might not get all the recognition it should but it's 
> there.  Florida's WFOs have given a lot of recognition to these data.
>
> And, as recently as Friday afternoon, a TV station's chief of 
> meteorology in a major Texas market asked if she  and her colleagues 
> could use CWOP data or was it restricted.  The density of stations in 
> their area would be helpful to them, especially during severe weather 
> cut-ins.
>
> Adding to the interest, she also asked if we would accept her sites' 
> data.  I said I'd be glad to ingest it.
>   
>> I also realize that many amateur weather stations are CWOP stations and 
>> do upload their data to NWS for the enhancing of the overall NWS data.  
>> One thing to keep in mind in all of this is that the majority of amateur 
>> stations are in urban areas, not sitting on large lots, so the ideal 
>> placement of equipment is very hard to attain.  I do the best I can with 
>> what I have, and the restrictions of the area, and that is all that any 
>> of us can do or ask for.
>>     
>
> A couple of things happen when the data goes into MADIS.  One of the 
> bigger ones is, it's subjected to a quality check that helps determine 
> if it's consistent with reality (and nearby stations) or not.  That's 
> valuable.
>
> There's a publication written by Tim Oke for the World Meteorological 
> Organization on siting weather instruments in urban environments. 
> WMO-81 is referenced from the Resources page on www.wxqa.com, and can be 
> downloaded directly from 
> http://www.wmo.ch/web/www/IMOP/publications/IOM-81/IOM-81-UrbanMetObs.pdf 
> in PDF format.  It speaks to what should be done to address siting 
> problems arising from urban effect, and is applicable to siting in 
> residential yards, building tops, urban canyons, etc.  I found it an 
> excellent resource.
>
> I'll speak only briefly to metadata, and hope that whenever someone 
> changes their hardware they notify Russ so it can be updated, and when 
> they move something, there's some documentation to fall back on. 
> Metadata's important.  I tend to say that, "Without metadata, the 
> information you present is not data."  In other words, to understand the 
> data and correctly interpret it, it's vital to understand additional 
> information about how and where it's collected.
>
> Regards
> Gerry
>