|
|
Post by tornado on Sept 22, 2014 8:42:04 GMT -5
That's what I thought too. But when I searched the 7900.5C (we have a .pdf copy so I used the CTRL+F function), I could find no definition of "overhead". Unless I missed something; do you have a reference for "Within 5SM is OHD"? |
|
|
|
Post by wxmatrix on Sept 23, 2014 12:58:59 GMT -5
Your references are FAAO 7900.5C, paragraph 10.7 and FMH-1, Section 8.5. Lightning observed within 5SM of the point of observation shall be reported as "occurring at the station", e.g. OHD. This has been verified with FAA HQ and NWS HQ.
|
|
|
|
Post by fu on Sept 23, 2014 14:12:11 GMT -5
Heres an example of how poorly written the 7900.5C is:
10.29.Beginning and/or Ending of a Thunderstorm. A thunderstorm is considered to begin at the
station when thunder is heard, overhead lightning is observed and the local noise level is such as might
prevent hearing thunder, or lightning is detected by an automated sensor within 10 miles of the airport.
There should be an "or" between heard, and overhead. It should read: when thunder is heard, OR overhead lightning is observed and the local noise level is such as might prevent hearing thunder.
The part about TS considered to begin AT THE STATION when lightning is detected by an automated sensor within 10 miles of the airport is wrong as well. What that means is that if lightning is detected within 10 miles of the station by ALDARS TS should be reported in present weather (TS at station). ASOS will enter VCTS in present weather if ALDARS detects lightning 6-10 miles from the station and TS if it detects lightning 5 miles or less from the station.
|
|
|
|
Post by fu on Sept 23, 2014 14:28:30 GMT -5
Following up on the above. A question for NWS/FAA HQ's: Are you saying that at a non-ALDARS site if an observer hears thunder that is 12 miles away and starts a TS, which indicates TS is at the station (10.29) they are supposed to report the storm as OHD?
|
|
|
|
Post by hlsto2 on Sept 24, 2014 0:20:57 GMT -5
according to the flawed 7900...DSNT is only reported in remarks. to me that means a TS beyond 10 miles...no TS in present wx...but a DSNT TS remark.
|
|
|
|
Post by TCU 2U2 on Sept 24, 2014 3:50:43 GMT -5
How can you have a TS in remarks but not in present weather?
If you hear thunder, regardless if it is overhead or 13 miles away, you still must carry TS in present weather. The proximity will further describe in remarks where the cell is located.
Of note: Many years during national QC scans we would come across some sites (mainly C, but some B & A) that would carry TS in remarks, but not in present weather. This action actually had an affect on your TS counts when the service standards began in 1996 (1961-1990 data was used when the standards began - currently being used is 1981-2010 data). When computing TS in the bad weather equation, those times that TS never appeared in present weather never received "credit" for a TS event for the day.
However now it seems that will be a moot point, if the bad weather score will truly remove TS (and low VIS) from future service standard computations.
|
|
coco
Full Member
Posts: 111
|
Post by coco on Sept 24, 2014 8:59:34 GMT -5
Why don't we just put this TS bullsh** to rest? A thunderstorm is a thunderstorm is a thunderstorm. I don't care what the "manuals" say. When you hear thunder you should report TS in present weather. Who the hell cares if it is beyond 10 miles, within 10 miles, 5-10 miles or whatever. If you have a TS within 5-10 miles west of the station moving east and you report VCTS....by the time the SPECI transmits it has probably already moved to within 5 miles anyway. So why not just forget about the VCTS crap and report TS....PERIOD!!!!!!! The main reason we report the TS is to alert the pilots that a TS is occurring. Who the hell cares about the distance? By the time you observe, record and transmit....the sucker has moved anyway....my two cents.....
|
|
|
|
Post by TCU 2U2 on Sept 24, 2014 9:11:40 GMT -5
Rock on Coco ... !!!
Sure would make things uniform, instead of everyone trying to decipher & decode a manual that is so very poorly written, and with each revision it seems the guidelines become more and more confusing.
|
|
|
|
Post by hlsto2 on Sept 24, 2014 11:00:36 GMT -5
How can you have a TS in remarks but not in present weather? If you hear thunder, regardless if it is overhead or 13 miles away, you still must carry TS in present weather. The proximity will further describe in remarks where the cell is located. Of note: Many years during national QC scans we would come across some sites (mainly C, but some B & A) that would carry TS in remarks, but not in present weather. This action actually had an affect on your TS counts when the service standards began in 1996 (1961-1990 data was used when the standards began - currently being used is 1981-2010 data). When computing TS in the bad weather equation, those times that TS never appeared in present weather never received "credit" for a TS event for the day. However now it seems that will be a moot point, if the bad weather score will truly remove TS (and low VIS) from future service standard computations. 7900 page 68 10.7.a. last sentence indicates wether beyond 10 miles is reported in remarks. I have seen dsnt TS reported only in remarks at CWO's and according to this paragraph...that is the correct procedure. this doesn't happen very often as usually you won't hear thunder that is more than 10 miles away. I see the day coming when we may be forced to let ALDARS handle everything. I believe this is why TS has been taken out of the service standards criteria. |
|
coco
Full Member
Posts: 111
|
Post by coco on Sept 25, 2014 0:24:14 GMT -5
Anyone out there (I'm sure there are many) that remember how thunderstorms were reported in remarks 30 years ago? I will refresh your memories....TSB15 SW MOVG NE OCNL LTGCG....which was interpreted to mean there is a thunderstorm, with occasional lightning cloud to ground, that began at 15 minutes past the hour, southwest of the airport moving northeast. Simply stated and to the point. The way we report the remarks today has so much redundancy it's pathetic. We say that a "TS" began at 15 minutes past the hour, so why report lightning and it's location first followed by "TS" and it's location second? We already said a "TS" began at 15 minutes past the hour so why say "TS" again? And why give the location of the lightning AND the thunderstorm, which is almost always the same anyway? In my opinion that is unnecessary redundancy. In the old days we would get harped on for sending unnecessary and redundant information because it took up "circuit time" and could cause WMSC to get backed up. I just noticed I typed in a bunch of redundant crap in this message....lol...through ranting. Going to bed....
|
|
|
|
Post by hlsto2 on Sept 25, 2014 1:15:06 GMT -5
this is what happens when the FAA gets involved in something they don't have a clue about.
there was even a rule if the ltg was located only with the T you didn't have to also give the LTG location....T SW MOVG E OCNL LTGIC. and...any precip not falling in the gauge was RWU or TRWU...there was no in the vicinity crap. partial obscuration was -X...with the amount of obscuration in 10ths in remarks...F7. total was W0X for example. FEW CU was only in remarks. you didn't have to give high cloud heights.../-SCT (high thin scattered U OVC if it was an overcast ceiling... unknown overcast. wish I could do the sct...bkn...ovc symbols we used first.
but we also had a bunch of pressure remarks...PRESFR..PRESRR..PRESSURE JUMP...BAROGRAM V (LOWEST PRESSURE)..PRESSURE UNSTEADY
|
|
coco
Full Member
Posts: 111
|
Post by coco on Sept 25, 2014 8:23:37 GMT -5
One of my favorite sayings....."Anyone get their WOXOF today"? lol.....
|
|
|
|
Post by tejefferson on Jul 7, 2016 22:34:13 GMT -5
I just received two errors regarding this because apparently my locations don't match. My remarks:
FRQ LTGICCG ALQDS TS OHD MOV N
My argument is that since lightning is unpredictable and can strike up to 10 miles from the cloud it's more accurate to put ALQDS. This lets anybody know that lightning could strike anywhere 10 miles from the airport. TS ALQDS implies to me that there is a synoptic event like a front or the remnants of a tropical depression and a much larger area should be aware. Anyway, I've resolved to retire ALQDS because I can't find it in the 7900.5c. It's a shame because I feel I can be a little more accurate describing the weather in my observations with it. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by skobie on Jul 8, 2016 13:01:11 GMT -5
As far as actual observing goes, ALDARS is almost always unrepresentative Sometimes because it puts in LTG unrealistically distant that no observer could possibly see under the best conditions (even >100 SM at times) and other times because it can only pick up CG LTG (not to mention no frequency). In other words, at many of the stations I've worked at, it is unrepresentative about 98% of the time and who has time to correct it when the real action hits. It's an albatross. Leave it OFF and make everyone happy. It's was built for and only supposed to be used at unmanned stations (including in some places where there is no sort of observer at night).
We all already know the FAA memo writers have no clue, as evidenced by their "Safety Risk Management" meetings. It was like trying to educate a 3 year old on what our job actually entails, not what some part-time weather clowns do at a LAWRS site (and I mean that with no respect, sort of).
By the way, I've been instructed by several of the last contractors at our site that LTG location MUST match TS location. I'm not saying that I like it because LTG has been known to arc as far as 30 miles away from a parent TS (and even strike people "out of the blue"), but that is what I've been instructed to do for about the last 10-12 years now. As far as putting movement on a DSNT TS, I believe we're all covered if we put that in under "any remarks the observer thinks are significant" as part of the RMKS of our observations. Should not be an error if you do put it in, but not required either and may no be always be possible to tell.
skobie
|
|
|
|
Post by skobie on Jul 8, 2016 13:06:02 GMT -5
And KIAG is not an FAA contracting station Tornado. It falls under a Base Operating Service (BOS) Contract for the Air Force and there are many others like it across the US, as well as Navy contracts of this sort. They amend "rules" as they see fit and have different Air Force manuals that the Air Force weather people write and the observers have to follow. Similar stuff to our obs, but not exact, partly because they keep track of some different verification statistics and partly just because (and the observers that work there are all civilian like us). When their weather higher ups come to inspect, they don't just send some clown in a suit from DC, they send an actual experienced weather guy who is there to make sure the Air Force weather manuals are being followed and, if not, there is hell to pay.
skobie
|
|
