FAA plans to terminate Contract Weather Observer program

[famartin]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDcQFjAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdl.dropbox.com%2Fu%2F6609288%2F3513CWOClosureStatus%25201.ppt&ei=htNVUdmPLdKFyQGt3YHICg&usg=AFQjCNFfmjb9coTQegmCUvP-s5THK0F0rQ&bvm=bv.44442042,d.aWc&cad=rja

 

Or download...

3513CWOClosureStatus 1.ppt

[FL510]

That's a shame as air traffic controllers typically do not have a good track record at augmenting ASOS within service level standards.  Now even METARs at large airports will have to be treated with a "grain of salt" and no more cloud observations above 12,000 ft. anywhere.

[Stebo]

We have been hearing about this for a month now with nothing official, obviously for my personal sake I hope that they do not go forward with this as it would be a terrible mistake done by those higher up in FAA. Right now air traffic controllers are projected to take furlough days starting April 1st. So they will be understaffed and to expect the controllers to take over the weather observing as well or go to straight automated would cause a great denigration of services. For example lets say there is a MCS bearing down on an airport at peak evening travel times, what will the controllers worry about more, the weather or the in/outbound traffic? Furthermore anyone who has dealt with ASOS knows this machine has several things it has trouble with or flat out gets wrong.  I mean what will happen in a mixed precip event where ASOS is spitting out UP when it might be -FZRA or PL (which ASOS doesn't auto detect). All the local airports here where the controllers do the weather do not correct the UP in the present weather which gives a wrong observation.  Realistically one might expect increased delays due to incorrect weather observing whether it is the controllers or ASOS itself.

[Stebo]

That's a shame as air traffic controllers typically do not have a good track record at augmenting ASOS within service level standards.  Now even METARs at large airports will have to be treated with a "grain of salt" and no more cloud observations above 12,000 ft. anywhere.

 

Yeah and should observations be treated with a "grain of salt"?  I say they shouldn't because this is a critical piece of information that is needed upon landing/taking off.

[vortex95]

Does anyone have a list of all CWO sties?  Only WSA sites are listed.  I would think these

are the larger airports like LGA/JFK/EWR.

 

Some airports are really good for augmenting their METARs.  OKC is one of them.  Look

at this observation from 5/29/12.

 

SPECI KOKC 300119Z 24031G55KT 1/2SM R35R/3000VP6000FT +TSRAGR FG

    FEW005 BKN033 BKN050 OVC250 21/19 A2982 RMK AO2 PK WND

    24055/0113 WSHFT 0101 TSB12RAB13GRB18 PRESRR OCNL LTGICCGCA N-NE

    S-W TS N-NE S-W MOV NE GR 3 P0000 PNO $

 

So this would mean no more tornado/funnel cloud/waterspout remarks, LTG, TS/CB

directions and movement, hail size, SNINCR, snow depth reports, and visibilities less than

1/4 SM to name a few?

[famartin]

Does anyone have a list of all CWO sties?  Only WSA sites are listed.  I would think these

are the larger airports like LGA/JFK/EWR.

 

128 sites are listed here as service level A or B.  Taking out the Alaska ones and you get 119, which is close to the 109 number quoted, though still 10 higher.  Maybe a typo in the Power Point?  Not sure.

http://apps.avmet.com/awad/SvcLvl.cfm

 

Some airports are really good for augmenting their METARs.  OKC is one of them.  Look

at this observation from 5/29/12.

 

SPECI KOKC 300119Z 24031G55KT 1/2SM R35R/3000VP6000FT +TSRAGR FG

    FEW005 BKN033 BKN050 OVC250 21/19 A2982 RMK AO2 PK WND

    24055/0113 WSHFT 0101 TSB12RAB13GRB18 PRESRR OCNL LTGICCGCA N-NE

    S-W TS N-NE S-W MOV NE GR 3 P0000 PNO $

 

So this would mean no more tornado/funnel cloud/waterspout remarks, LTG, TS/CB

directions and movement, hail size, SNINCR, snow depth reports, and visibilities less than

1/4 SM to name a few?

 

All such remarks would depend on ATC personnel who would be taking over the duties of the contract weather observers. 

[vortex95]

One other thing, some major airport ASOS, like BOS I believe, are not tied into the automatic LTG detection network.
All TS obs are taken manually, and if there is no observer present, then no TS gets reported.  This has happened

at BOS during the overnight hours a number of times over the past several years.  I posed the question below after

an obvious no TS event in BOS on 10/20/12.  

 

IMHO, This is unacceptable at a major airport given how significant TS is for aviation.

 

-----------

 

 

In the past few hours, there have been two tstm areas that moving S to N across BOS.  The

ASOS is augmented, but there has been never any TS reports or even LTG remarks.  In the past 45 min

there have been a number CGs no more than 2-3 miles W of the airport, so LTG has to be

visible and thunder audible.

 

KBOS 200654Z 15005KT 10SM BKN017 BKN022 17/16 A2971 RMK AO2 RAE13 SLP059 P0005 T01720161
KBOS 200651Z 15005KT 10SM BKN017 BKN022 18/17 A2970 RMK AO2 RAE13 P0005
KBOS 200554Z 16012KT 3SM R04R/5500VP6000FT +RA BR SCT035 BKN050 OVC110 18/17 A2975 RMK AO2 SLP072 P0008 60009 T01830172 10200 20156 58005
KBOS 200533Z 13011KT 4SM -RA BR SCT010 BKN070 OVC110 18/17 A2976 RMK AO2 CIG 025 E P0005
KBOS 200524Z 11009KT 2 1/2SM RA BR SCT008 BKN010 OVC090 17/16 A2976 RMK AO2 P0004
KBOS 200454Z 13005KT 7SM -RA BKN010 OVC090 18/17 A2976 RMK AO2 RAB35 SLP076 P0000 T01780167 402000117
KBOS 200354Z 18007KT 10SM OVC012 19/17 A2977 RMK AO2 SLP079 T01890172
KBOS 200254Z 17009KT 10SM BKN016 OVC020 19/18 A2976 RMK AO2 SLP078 60001 T01890178 53006
KBOS 200154Z 19009KT 7SM BKN016 OVC022 19/18 A2975 RMK AO2 DZE25 SLP073 P0000 T01890178

 

My understanding is that at service level 1 ASOS sites at major airports, they are not part of the

NALDN so no auto remarks of TS, VCTS, or LTG.  Ok, that's fine, but if the METAR says it is human

augmented (i.e. no AUTO in the body of the METAR) and no TS or LTG is report, isn't that misleading?

Not only for climo, but more importantly flights incoming and outbound from BOS?  Also, how does

the NWS TAF that has TS forecast verify? 

 

There is no TSNO in the body of the METAR to indicate TS n/a, but I think TSNO applies only to sites

that have automated LTG/TS reports.

 

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

 

 

[famartin]

There is no TSNO in the body of the METAR to indicate TS n/a, but I think TSNO applies only to sites

that have automated LTG/TS reports.

 

TSNO only shows up if there is no one logged into the ASOS, i.e. if its in Service Level D (auto) mode.  If someone is logged in, the assumption is that they will add TS to the observation, so TSNO doesn't get included in the observation.

[vortex95]

TSNO only shows up if there is no one logged into the ASOS, i.e. if its in Service Level D (auto) mode.  If someone is logged in, the assumption is that they will add TS to the observation, so TSNO doesn't get included in the observation.

 

Thanks for the clarification.  In the BOS case I presented, there was never any TSNO remark, and AUTO was not present in the METAR, so that means someone was logged in, correct?

[famartin]

Thanks for the clarification.  In the BOS case I presented, there was never any TSNO remark, and AUTO was not present in the METAR, so that means someone was logged in, correct?

Correct.

[Stebo]

One other thing, some major airport ASOS, like BOS I believe, are not tied into the automatic LTG detection network.

All TS obs are taken manually, and if there is no observer present, then no TS gets reported.  This has happened

at BOS during the overnight hours a number of times over the past several years.  I posed the question below after

an obvious no TS event in BOS on 10/20/12.  

 

IMHO, This is unacceptable at a major airport given how significant TS is for aviation.

 

-----------

 

 

In the past few hours, there have been two tstm areas that moving S to N across BOS.  The

ASOS is augmented, but there has been never any TS reports or even LTG remarks.  In the past 45 min

there have been a number CGs no more than 2-3 miles W of the airport, so LTG has to be

visible and thunder audible.

 

KBOS 200654Z 15005KT 10SM BKN017 BKN022 17/16 A2971 RMK AO2 RAE13 SLP059 P0005 T01720161

KBOS 200651Z 15005KT 10SM BKN017 BKN022 18/17 A2970 RMK AO2 RAE13 P0005

KBOS 200554Z 16012KT 3SM R04R/5500VP6000FT +RA BR SCT035 BKN050 OVC110 18/17 A2975 RMK AO2 SLP072 P0008 60009 T01830172 10200 20156 58005

KBOS 200533Z 13011KT 4SM -RA BR SCT010 BKN070 OVC110 18/17 A2976 RMK AO2 CIG 025 E P0005

KBOS 200524Z 11009KT 2 1/2SM RA BR SCT008 BKN010 OVC090 17/16 A2976 RMK AO2 P0004

KBOS 200454Z 13005KT 7SM -RA BKN010 OVC090 18/17 A2976 RMK AO2 RAB35 SLP076 P0000 T01780167 402000117

KBOS 200354Z 18007KT 10SM OVC012 19/17 A2977 RMK AO2 SLP079 T01890172

KBOS 200254Z 17009KT 10SM BKN016 OVC020 19/18 A2976 RMK AO2 SLP078 60001 T01890178 53006

KBOS 200154Z 19009KT 7SM BKN016 OVC022 19/18 A2975 RMK AO2 DZE25 SLP073 P0000 T01890178

 

My understanding is that at service level 1 ASOS sites at major airports, they are not part of the

NALDN so no auto remarks of TS, VCTS, or LTG.  Ok, that's fine, but if the METAR says it is human

augmented (i.e. no AUTO in the body of the METAR) and no TS or LTG is report, isn't that misleading?

Not only for climo, but more importantly flights incoming and outbound from BOS?  Also, how does

the NWS TAF that has TS forecast verify? 

 

There is no TSNO in the body of the METAR to indicate TS n/a, but I think TSNO applies only to sites

that have automated LTG/TS reports.

 

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

 

DTW is another airport that isn't connected to the lightning detection network as well.

[Stebo]

128 sites are listed here as service level A or B.  Taking out the Alaska ones and you get 119, which is close to the 109 number quoted, though still 10 higher.  Maybe a typo in the Power Point?  Not sure.

http://apps.avmet.com/awad/SvcLvl.cfm

 

 

All such remarks would depend on ATC personnel who would be taking over the duties of the contract weather observers. 

 

All local stations that have changed over already, like Lansing or Flint forgo these remarks which to me is a critical error in information.

[MN Transplant]

Another interesting/sad FAA sequestration development

 

http://www.mankato-mn.gov/upload/contents/416/March%202013%20City%20Manager%20Update.pdf

 

As many of you are aware, some local and twin cities weather stations are no longer reporting Mankato temperatures as a part of their newscasts. For some time the computer modem that transfers

weather information from the FAA’s Automated Weather Observation Station (AWOS) at the Airport has not been operating. The modem takes the weather information from the AWOS and transfers it to the computer and the National Weather Service. We have asked repeatedly that the FAA send out field technicians to address the problem. They have indicated that they have reached their budget levels and because of Federal Sequestration they will not address the problem at this time. We have attempted to address and clarify this matter with the media, but the real goal is to get the AWOS Reporting System working. Years ago, AWOS, which its primary purpose is to provide flight information to pilots, was adapted as a reporting system for the weather service. We suspect the problem is in the “black box/modem” that pushes the information to the National Weather Service. Incoming planes can access the information; the information can also be accessed via phone. Temperature readings appear to be the only exception. Because this is a FAA System, the city has no authority to access the AWOS System.

 

And here's where gov't bureaucracy rears its ugly head

 

 

I had a conference call with FAA staff yesterday(Joe Potter and Greg Ingraham). They knew what I was calling about because they too have been pestered by the Media. I let them know that the City of Mankato would pay for the parts needed to repair our AWOS (Automated Weather Observation Station) if within reason. They appreciated our offer, but declined stating that they wouldn’t know how to process such a request, as

they have never received an offer for help before.

 

 

 

[Stebo]

Another interesting/sad FAA sequestration development

 

http://www.mankato-mn.gov/upload/contents/416/March%202013%20City%20Manager%20Update.pdf

 

 

And here's where gov't bureaucracy rears its ugly head

 

 

 

 

Declining help, the ignorance of some in the government is just incredible.

[isohume]

At least KAVL isn't losing their savvy tower folks. 

 

KAVL 081754Z 19017G23KT 10SM +FC CLR 22/08 A3012 RMK 1740Z 19016G22KT 10SM BKN060 22/09 A3014 RWY CLOSED DUE TO ACFT GEAR COLLAPSE ON RWY 16 AO2 SLP186 T02170083 10228 20067 58013

[Ed Lizard]

At least KAVL isn't losing their savvy tower folks. 

 

KAVL 081754Z 19017G23KT 10SM +FC CLR 22/08 A3012 RMK 1740Z 19016G22KT 10SM BKN060 22/09 A3014 RWY CLOSED DUE TO ACFT GEAR COLLAPSE ON RWY 16 AO2 SLP186 T02170083 10228 20067 58013

 

 

weather.gov    Asheville Regional Airport Enter Your "City, ST" or zip code      metric  en español D

a

t

e Time

(edt) Wind

(mph) Vis.

(mi.) Weather Sky Cond. Temperature (ºF) Relative

Humidity Wind

Chill

(°F) Heat

Index

(°F) Pressure Precipitation (in.) Air Dwpt 6 hour altimeter

(in) sea level

(mb) 1 hr 3 hr 6 hr

 

 

 

08 14:54 SW 18 G 26 10.00 Fair CLR 72 49     44% NA NA 30.12 1018.3       08 13:54 S 20 G 26 10.00 Tornado/Water Spout CLR 71 47 73 44 42% NA NA 30.12 1018.6       08 12:54 S 18 G 25 10.00 Mostly Cloudy BKN060 71 47     42% NA NA 30.14 1019.0    

[famartin]

Found this on a weather observer chat:

 

The FAA has notified NATCA that ALL CWO will be closed by July 31. Beginning June 15th, June 30, July 15, and July 31. The will be closures on each of these dates.

 

Table 8 lists the 24 airports included in Group 1 that must transition from the CWO no later than June 15, 2013.

o ABQ Albuquerque International Sunport Albuquerquo

o AFW Fort Worth Alliance Fort Worth TX
o AKN King Salmon King Salmon AK
o APA Centennial Denver CO
o BDL Bradley International Windsor Locks CT
o BET Bethel Bethel AK
o BGR Bangor International Bangor ME
o BIL Billings Logan International Billings MT
o BTV Burlington International Burlington VT
o CHA Lovell Field Chattanooga TN
o DAY James M Cox Dayton International Dayton OH
o FAI Fairbanks International Fairbanks AK
o GFK Grand Forks International Grand Forks ND
o ISP Long Island Mac Arthur Islip NY
o JAN Jackson International Jackson MS
o JNU Juneau International Juneau AK
o MHT Manchester Manchester NH
o MRI Merrill Field Anchorage AK
o OMA Eppley Airfield Omaha NE
o ONT Ontario International Ontario CA
o PTK Oakland County International Pontiac MI
o SJU Luis Munoz Marin International San Juan PR
o SMF Sacramento International Sacramento CA
o TRI Tri-Cities Regional TN/VA Bristol/Johnson/Kingsport TN

o Table 9 lists the 24 airports included in Group 2 that must transition from the CWO no later than June 30, 2013.

 

o ALB Albany International Albany NY
o BUF Buffalo Niagara International Buffalo NY
o CAE Columbia Metropolitan Columbia SC
o CHS Charleston AFB/International Charleston SC
o CRW Yeager Charleston WV
o DSM Des Moines International Des Moines IA
o ELP El Paso International El Paso TX
o EUG Mahlon Sweet Field Eugene OR
o FAT Fresno Yosemite International Fresno CA
o GRR Gerald R Ford International Grand Rapids MI
o GSO Piedmont Triad International Greensboro NC
o HSV Huntsville International Huntsville AL
o MDT Harrisburg International Harrisburg PA
o MSN Dane County Regional-Truax Field Madison WI
o MSY New Orleans International New Orleans LA
o PVD Theodore Francis Green State Providence RI
o PWM Portland International Jetport Portland ME
o RFD Greater Rockford Rockford IL
o ROA Roanoke Regional/Woodrum Field Roanoke VA
o ROC Greater Rochester International Rochester NY
o SNA John Wayne-Orange County Santa Ana CA
o SYR Syracuse Hancock International Syracuse NY
o TUL Tulsa International Tulsa OK
o TYS McGhee Tyson Knoxville TN

o Table 10 lists the 24 airports included in Group 3 that must transition from the CWO no later than July 15, 2013.

· ANC Ted Stevens Anchorage International Anchorage AK
· AUS Austin-Bergstrom International Austin TX
· BNA Nashville International Nashville TN
· CLE Cleveland-Hopkins International Cleveland OH
· CMH Port Columbus International Columbus OH
· CRP Corpus Christi International Corpus Christi TX
· DAB Daytona Beach International Daytona Beach FL
· DTW Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Detroit MI
· EWR Newark International Newark NJ
· HNL Honolulu International Honolulu HI
· ICT Wichita Mid-Continent Wichita KS
· IND Indianapolis International Indianapolis IN
· JAX Jacksonville International Jacksonville FL
· LAS McCarran International Las Vegas NV
· LGA La Guardia New York NY·
· MCI Kansas City International Kansas City MO
· MKE General Mitchell International Milwaukee WI
· MSP Minneapolis-St Paul International Minneapolis MN
· OKC Will Rogers World Oklahoma City OK
· PBI Palm Beach International West Palm Beach FL
· PHX Phoenix Sky Harbor International Phoenix AZ
· RDU Raleigh-Durham International Raleigh/Durham NC
· SAT San Antonio International San Antonio TX
· SDF Louisville International Louisville KY

 

Table 11 lists the 35 airports included in Group 4 that must transition from the CWO no later than July 31, 2013.

o ATL Atlanta International Atlanta GA
o BOS Logan International Boston MA
o BWI Baltimore-Washington International Baltimore MD
o CLT Charlotte/Douglas International Charlotte NC
o CVG Cincinnati International Covington/Cincinnati KY
o DAL Dallas Love Field Dallas TX
o DCA Ronald Reagan Washington National Washington DC
o DEN Denver International Denver CO
o DFW Dallas/Fort Worth International Dallas-Fort Worth TX
o FLL Fort Lauderdale International Fort Lauderdale FL
o GEG Spokane International Spokane WA
o HOU William P Hobby Houston TX
o IAD Washington Dulles International Washington VA
o IAH George Bush Intercontinental Houston TX
o JFK John F Kennedy International New York NY
o LAX Los Angeles International Los Angeles CA
o LIT Adams Field Little Rock AR
o MCO Orlando International Orlando FL
o MDW Chicago Midway Chicago IL
o MEM Memphis International Memphis TN
o MIA Miami International Miami FL
o OAK Metropolitan Oakland International Oakland CA
o ORD Chicago O'Hare International Chicago IL
o PDX Portland International Portland OR
o PHL Philadelphia International Philadelphia PA
o PIT Pittsburgh International Pittsburgh PA
o RIC Richmond International Richmond VA
o RNO Reno/Tahoe International Reno NV
o SAN San Diego International San Diego CA
o SEA Seattle-Tacoma International Seattle WA
o SFO San Francisco International San Francisco CA
o SJC San Jose International San Jose CA
o SLC Salt Lake City International Salt Lake City UT
o STL Lambert-St Louis International St Louis MO
o TPA Tampa International Tampa FL

 

http://wxobservers.freeforums.net/index.cgi?board=faa&action=display&thread=62&page=39#ixzz2QBFmqGh8

[isohume]

Found this on a weather observer chat:

 

The FAA has notified NATCA that ALL CWO will be closed by July 31. Beginning June 15th, June 30, July 15, and July 31. The will be closures on each of these dates.

 

 

 

Not good. I hate this move and I'm not looking forward to FAA tower folks augmenting the obs at CLT. It rarely works at GSP and they really need to be trained better. 

[Stebo]

Not good. I hate this move and I'm not looking forward to FAA tower folks augmenting the obs at CLT. It rarely works at GSP and they really need to be trained better. 

 

It isn't about training, the air traffic is their chief concern and weather takes a back seat. There has been several times where they would question my observations because it is riding a level where if I rise my vis or ceiling their job gets easier. The problem is I am going to correctly observe the weather no matter what, where as my fear is that they would fudge the obs to get planes into the air which could potentially be extremely dangerous depending on the conditions. Not to mention that for example the tower at DTW is over 300' in the air, how can they correctly do surface observations especially visibility/ceiling or precip types. Lord knows an ASOS is not going to do either of those correctly on its own.

[rockchalk83]

As a weather observer here in Wichita, I can say this move thoroughly sucks, if it is confirmed by the FAA. It is a complete disservice to the air traffic controllers and to the pilots flying the airplanes. If the FAA were really serious about cutting money, there are any number of ways it could be done. To me, and likely most weather observers who do this, it reeks of a cop-out.

 

The mere notion that air traffic controllers are expected to double as weather observers is laughable. Most air traffic controllers will completely rely on what the ASOS output is, but will fail to realize that the ASOS program does not observe thunderstorms at a distance and other adverse weather (ZR, IP, hail) at some sites, information that is vital to pilots. The ASOS is great, but has severe limitations that will be greatly exposed by this move.

 

I hate to say this, but my fear is that it will take an aircraft mishap with a large loss of life due to weather, to entertain the idea of having weather observers back again.

[isohume]

It isn't about training, the air traffic is their chief concern and weather takes a back seat. 

 

 

Well, when the tower folks can't log in without turning off report processing...ie: pressure sensors and ALDARS, suddenly weather takes a front seat. AVL and GSP are famous for this. They then scramble to call us to get it turned back on. This generally occurs once or twice a month. Also, representitive augmentation either doesn't occur or it's even more unrepresentitive. They need to pass an exam we give them every year...but I'm not sure this gets passed onto the new folks or the staff which didn't take the test. Certainly better training is needed. Imo...the FAA had no business taking over ASOS. It just doesn't work into their mission and it shows. 

[Stebo]

Well, when the tower folks can't log in without turning off report processing...ie: pressure sensors and ALDARS, suddenly weather takes a front seat. AVL and GSP are famous for this. They then scramble to call us to get it turned back on. This generally occurs once or twice a month. Also, representitive augmentation either doesn't occur or it's even more unrepresentitive. They need to pass an exam we give them every year...but I'm not sure this gets passed onto the new folks or the staff which didn't take the test. Certainly better training is needed. Imo...the FAA had no business taking over ASOS. It just doesn't work into their mission and it shows. 

 

Well I guess it is training to an extent, though air traffic is a primary focus as well. I completely agree with the bold part however.

 

Another aspect that people I think are overlooking is that this essentially could make climatic data less useful, I know personally at least once a month there is some sort of augmentation to a daily climatology output here locally.  Plus factor in all these locations that take snow data, potentially there might not be anymore snow measurements. These are factors that are imperative for climatic data.

[baroclinic_instability]

As a weather observer here in Wichita, I can say this move thoroughly sucks, if it is confirmed by the FAA. It is a complete disservice to the air traffic controllers and to the pilots flying the airplanes. If the FAA were really serious about cutting money, there are any number of ways it could be done. To me, and likely most weather observers who do this, it reeks of a cop-out.

 

The mere notion that air traffic controllers are expected to double as weather observers is laughable. Most air traffic controllers will completely rely on what the ASOS output is, but will fail to realize that the ASOS program does not observe thunderstorms at a distance and other adverse weather (ZR, IP, hail) at some sites, information that is vital to pilots. The ASOS is great, but has severe limitations that will be greatly exposed by this move.

 

I hate to say this, but my fear is that it will take an aircraft mishap with a large loss of life due to weather, to entertain the idea of having weather observers back again.

 

I agree wholly. I used to weather observe at KGFK when I first started my private weather career, and ASOS, for a lack of a better word, sucked. Few who have never actually observed understand how poor ASOS is at precipitation types, cloud ceilings and coverage, and visiblity. This is a bad move.

[Stebo]

I agree wholly. I used to weather observe at KGFK when I first started my private weather career, and ASOS, for a lack of a better word, sucked. Few who have never actually observed understand how poor ASOS is at precipitation types, cloud ceilings and coverage, and visiblity. This is a bad move.

 

Some of these things are not even auto detected by ASOS, especially precipitation types like FZDZ and PL. Plus not to mention when you have mixed precipitation more than likely what ASOS will pump out is UP because it is too stupid to realize what the precipitation type really is.

[isohume]

Well I guess it is training to an extent, though air traffic is a primary focus as well. I completely agree with the bold part however.

 

Another aspect that people I think are overlooking is that this essentially could make climatic data less useful, I know personally at least once a month there is some sort of augmentation to a daily climatology output here locally.  Plus factor in all these locations that take snow data, potentially there might not be anymore snow measurements. These are factors that are imperative for climatic data.

 

Yeah we QC the monthly climate data for false tips, avg temps, hdd/cdd, etc, for all 3 of our official climate sites. Since CLT has observers that know how to augment, we normally have little to QC for CLT at the end of the month. It'll will be a huge disservice to lose the snowfall climatology at CLT as well. I wonder if something is in place for at least continued snowfall measurements of this historical record.    

[Stebo]

Yeah we QC the monthly climate data for false tips, avg temps, hdd/cdd, etc, for all 3 of our official climate sites. Since CLT has observers that know how to augment, we normally have little to QC for CLT at the end of the month. It'll will be a huge disservice to lose the snowfall climatology at CLT as well. I wonder if something is in place for at least continued snowfall measurements of this historical record.    

 

Yeah I am wondering if it might end up causing NWS offices to recruit volunteer observers to help take snow measurements such as one of the local CoCoRaHS in the area. Still that would be a lot to ask of a volunteer observer.

[famartin]

The NWS snow-paid program has allowed the NWS to maintain timely snowfall observations for the climate record at LCD airports where FAA or NWS observers are no longer located.  We have two such observers, one for WMC and one for ELY, while the NWS office provides the snowfall measurements for EKO.  However... I've heard rumors that CWO may not be the only observing program getting the funding axe by the start of the next fiscal year, if you get my drift...

[FL510]

Unfortunately there are some CWO locations that don't produce very good observations.  Just last week I was flying at a station that kept a "TS" in the observation with IFR conditions a good 40-minutes after the weather improved to VFR.  Can't do a visual approach unless the reported visibility is at least 3 miles, so even though I could clearly see the airport 10 miles away and the TS was over for some time, ATC had to vector planes to instrument approaches.  Not sure why it took the observer so long to send a SPECI, the time stamp of the SPECI ending the TS was a good 40 minutes after it actually ended.  

 

KCAK 101751Z 23010KT 1SM TSRA SCT016 OVC032CB 18/17 A2990 RMK AO2 SFC VIS 2
SLP121 OCNL LTGCGICCA ALQDS TS ALQDS MOV E 8/3// P0014 60014 T01830167 10244
20172 55000=
KCAK 101851Z 19006KT 6SM -RA FEW014 BKN038 OVC100 18/17 A2988 RMK AO2 TSE50
SLP111 TS MOV E P0062 T01830172=

 

This thunderstorm ended probably around 18:10 Z and the weather was 10+ miles soon after that.  It's a service level A station.

 

The LAWRS program to ATC augmentation of ASOS is horrible.  Some controllers stations are O.K./most or not.  Some don't even know how to log into the ASOS properly and there is little standards or continuity from station to station.

 

The FAA should not be in the weather observing business.  It was much better when the NWS had Met Techs at various airport WSOs decades ago.

 

ASOS and AWOS units slowly improve as time goes on.  At least with automated stations most of the equipment and technology is the same, so one can learn in what conditions the station reports well and what conditions it doesn't.  With a observer logged in, goodness knows what they are going to augment and when.  Canada still has a lot of great manual weather observations.  

[FL510]

I just realized KCAK is one of the stations that is closing the contract weather observer office on May 1st and the FAA Air Traffic Control Tower will be responsible for augmenting ASOS.  That is likely the reason why the observations from CAK have been "questionable" lately?  Perhaps the observer is looking for a new career...unfortunately.  

[FL510]

http://www.wchstv.com/newsroom/eyewitness/130418_15417.shtml