|
Post by tornado on Mar 10, 2016 18:02:59 GMT -5
Recently there has been discussion about how the NWS is not supporting some sites, in gaining access to past edit logs, so that they can be printed. It seems like we will have to do this ourselves. The above screenshot highlights a recent foggy morning. The duty observers were well ahead of what ASOS would have reported. At 0602, while ASOS was recording CLR, the sky condition was actually VV001. The duty observer determined that from past experience, not from any "taps" in the raw ASOS data. While ASOS was determining the visibility to be 8SM at 0602, the duty observer edited the VIS field to record 1/4SM. At 0606, the total obscuration lifted, revealing some cirrus; the duty observer edited the sky condition to show BKN000; yet ASOS was recording CLR at that time. At 0614, when ASOS finally began dropping the VIS- to 6SM- the observer reported 1/2SM. At 0627, ASOS finally recorded a total obscuration, but as VV016. The duty observer was reporting VV002 at that time. The next screen shot shows the raw data. ASOS did not record a "tap" under 1,000 feet until 0630. That was 27 minutes after the CWO sent a SPECI including 1/4SM VV001 ! The obscuration eventually settled in at 160-230 feet, or a reportable value of 200 feet, according to ASOS. Yet the CWO reported VV002 as early as 0628. The human eye and brain, are just better and faster than ASOS, with regards to fog!
|
|
|
Post by tornado on May 14, 2016 19:26:57 GMT -5
From a thunderstorm day, when ASOS couldn't keep up with the rapid drop to IFR visibility: From a foggy day: ASOS was slow in keeping up with both ceiling and visibility that day. ASOS even would have reported CLR, when the CWO edited to report OVC002. Later, when ASOS would have reported 2SM visibility, the CWO edited to report 1/4SM!
|
|
|
Post by hlsto2 on May 15, 2016 11:23:50 GMT -5
not to worry...when 57 more CWOs go to the tower...the obstroller will be lockstep with ASOS...
|
|
|
Post by alstein on May 15, 2016 15:53:51 GMT -5
I think this stuff might be more important than error logs in the future- (major errors like TS CLR should be noted). This shows directly the impact of our work, and the inability of ASOS on some important parts of aviation safety.
|
|
|
Post by tornado on Aug 19, 2016 15:40:25 GMT -5
RVR glitch:
The actual visibility during that time, was 5 miles.
If anyone has any screen shots they'd like to share, please post them here. Or you can send me a private message, and I can post the shots here. I can edit out the locations for the sake of anonymity.
|
|
|
Post by tornado on Nov 25, 2016 15:10:39 GMT -5
Screen shots from a recent fog event: Above, it can be seen that while the observer was reporting 1/4SM visibility, ASOS would have reported 4SM. While the observer reported VV001 for sky condition, ASOS would have reported CLR. Below, while the observer was reporting 1/2SM and 3/4SM, ASOS would have reported 5SM visibility. While the observer reported partial obscurations of SCT000 and BKN000, ASOS would have reported CLR: ASOS eventually caught up to the human observer, and reported the dense fog event. That was about 20 minutes after the observer had already reported it.
|
|
|
Post by tornado on Apr 19, 2017 9:14:29 GMT -5
Not from the edit log, but from the SYSLOG. Every day at midnight, ASOS tracks the number of Ice Free Wind (IFW) Samples that were rejected in the past 24 hours. Usually the number is less than 100. But 4,605 seems excessive!
|
|
|
Post by northwx on Apr 19, 2017 14:33:46 GMT -5
and they took away our backup wind instruments... try telling 4605 IFWus dropouts to the guy landing a heliocourier in gusty variable wind.
|
|