|
Post by rich on Nov 6, 2015 10:32:59 GMT -5
Para 2.3 of the SOW says: Certified contract observer personnel must monitor the automated weather observations and perform a Basic Weather Watch as defined in FAAO 7900.5.
|
|
|
Post by skobie on Nov 6, 2015 10:38:10 GMT -5
Wow! That's news to me. I wonder when that was changed. There's no reason we shouldn't be under a CWW. Sneaky FAA.....but there are a bunch of other non-answers and misinformation in that FAQ meant to deceive people.
skobie
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 6, 2015 10:44:57 GMT -5
You're right skobie definition of a CWW describes what a CWO does better then the definition of a BWW
e. Basic Weather Watch. During a Basic Weather Watch, the observer may be required to perform other duties as their observing workload permits. Because of this and other restrictions (station location, structural design, etc.) that may limit the observer’s capability to continuously view and evaluate weather conditions, observers performing a Basic Weather Watch cannot be expected to detect and report all weather changes as they occur. In addition to taking and disseminating required observations, facilities performing a Basic Weather Watch must recheck weather conditions to determine if a new observation (SPECI) is required when advised by any reliable source (for example, tower controller) that existing conditions differ from those reported in the last disseminated observation.
f. Continuous Weather Watch. At facilities performing a Continuous Weather Watch, the observer must monitor weather conditions on a continuous basis. In addition to METAR observations, observers must take and disseminate observations as conditions meeting criteria for SPECI observations occur.
|
|
|
Post by weatheri on Nov 6, 2015 10:45:05 GMT -5
According to 7900.5D draft, the only "mandatory" remark at a LAWRS site is VIRGA. The rest, although required by FMH-1, are at the discretion of the controller if considered operationally significant. So how in blue blazes is that not degradation of service.
The LAWRS observer does not go outside. The plan is to have the airport pay to have someone go outside when notified to determine the precipitation type. How many minutes/hours will pass before that happens?
We have an FLSA that states under certain conditions the weather must be evaluated at least once every 5 minutes. That means going to the observing point and taking a weather observation. If conditions warrant, a SPECI or Local SPECI will be recorded and transmitted. Once again, I guess they will toss the FLSA out the window. It seems it was only a requirement for us.
Training at a LAWRS site is the one time computer based training and an observation once a month. The monthly requirement was noted on this site.
There is no recurring training that I could see. Once again it appears all that mandatory training required by the FAA is only for us. LAWRS sites don't appear to have any requirement for seasonal training. Maybe I missed it, but I could not find anything that states a LAWRS observer has a quarterly or annual training requirement.
QC requirements are vague for a LAWRS site. I still do not know who is responsible for the QC of a LAWRS observation. It was NWS. I do not know if that requirement went away on April 01, 2015 when the observing certification passed to the FAA.
The algorithm for ALDARS to report LTG DSNT ALQDS is not really all quadrants. Several occasions at this airport where the storm is moving through that the ALDARS goes DSNT ALQDS when there is no lightning NE-S. I'm guessing, yes guessing, that the algorithm goes ALQDS at half or more. Cannot find that information.
My rant is over. I have to get back to my top 10 list that can be verified.
We are not one of the 57 but know if we don't stop the idiocy now, the lunatics will continue with the destruction of the entire weather observing program. We are all in this.
|
|
|
Post by TCU 2U2 on Nov 6, 2015 10:52:11 GMT -5
You're right skobie definition of a CWW describes what a CWO does better then the definition of a BWW e. Basic Weather Watch. During a Basic Weather Watch, the observer may be required to perform other duties as their observing workload permits. Because of this and other restrictions (station location, structural design, etc.) that may limit the observer’s capability to continuously view and evaluate weather conditions, observers performing a Basic Weather Watch cannot be expected to detect and report all weather changes as they occur. In addition to taking and disseminating required observations, facilities performing a Basic Weather Watch must recheck weather conditions to determine if a new observation (SPECI) is required when advised by any reliable source (for example, tower controller) that existing conditions differ from those reported in the last disseminated observation. f. Continuous Weather Watch. At facilities performing a Continuous Weather Watch, the observer must monitor weather conditions on a continuous basis. In addition to METAR observations, observers must take and disseminate observations as conditions meeting criteria for SPECI observations occur. ... Basic weather watch is such as you may be required to perform other duties. We can't even run the admin shift without another observer on hand to perform observing duties. We are a CWW plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by luvsnow on Nov 6, 2015 12:01:42 GMT -5
QC requirements are vague for a LAWRS site. I still do not know who is responsible for the QC of a LAWRS observation. It was NWS. I do not know if that requirement went away on April 01, 2015 when the observing certification passed to the FAA.
[/quote] One can assume there will be no QC at the ATC level.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE 1325 East-West Highway Silver Spring, Maryland 20910-3283 THE DIRECTOR
JUL 1 5 2015
This letter is in response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request entered into FOIA online in which you requested copies of all documentation that relates to the National Weather Service Quality Control Assurance Program as it pertains to monitoring the Limited Aviation Weather Reporting Station or LAWRS Weather Observation Program conducted by Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) at air traffic control towers by air traffic controllers and/or FAA contract air traffic controllers.
Our search of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration records failed to identify any records in our files that are responsive to your request. However, we suggest for you to contact the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). I regret we are unable to assist you.
Although no records were located during our search, you have the right to appeal a '·no document found" response. Your appeal must be received within 30 calendar days of the date of the initial denial letter by the Assistant General Counsel for Administration. Address your appeal to the following office:
Assistant General Counsel for Administration Room 5898-C U.S. Department of Commerce 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20230
|
|
|
Post by skobie on Nov 6, 2015 12:53:47 GMT -5
I'm not surprised. No one has been doing it anyway. We might be able to use this document to our advantage though.
skobie
|
|
|
Post by snowwx on Nov 10, 2015 7:20:34 GMT -5
ok...we got word that the FAA is going to try to pull a fast one by doing multiple CWOs in one SRM at a regional site where ever that is...They want to make it difficult for users and concerned airports to attend...thats their bottom line goal... make it difficult for push back and get it done quick and get out ...in other words ignore the facts and everyone...this is nothing but a kangaroo court/meeting with the results already premeditated...
|
|
|
Post by gftlwx on Nov 10, 2015 13:22:45 GMT -5
Right. There are some "suggested" site pairings that I know of for the Western SRM Panels...
RNO (Reno) & SMF (Sacramento) SJC (San Jose) & FAT (Fresno)
I don't know where those combined panels will take place, but it looks like individual SRM Panel visits are suggested for BIL, GEG, COS and SAN.
The schedule isn't out yet, but Western SRMPs are supposed to be completed by Jan 15th, 2016. To those on the list, be ready.
|
|
|
Post by alstein on Nov 10, 2015 13:43:27 GMT -5
Posted something on another forum- got a response from an ATC who thinks it's bullshit. Apparently ATC's are already 30% undermanned (need 15k have 10.8k), and 30% of the current 10.8k are eligible to retire.
That's a massive issue.
|
|
|
Post by skobie on Nov 10, 2015 14:52:53 GMT -5
Does anyone have a suggested list of pairings for the eastern SRM panels? PM me if you do please. I really hope these panels aren't just a dog and pony show, but I'm afraid they will be. So we will probably have to rely more on Industry Groups and Congress to put an end to this crap.
skobie
|
|
|
Post by lostsheep on Nov 10, 2015 17:28:49 GMT -5
I'll have to keep my ears perked up. We have the Regional manager in the same building as our office.
|
|
auto
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by auto on Nov 20, 2015 2:33:16 GMT -5
Our SRM panel scheduled for Jan 5. Sounds like anyone that wants to attend will be allowed as long as they give notice that they are attending. Unfortunately though, you will not be allowed to speak.
|
|