DCA Snowfall Total Controversy

[Deck Pic]

Pretty sure it's an official WH location. South Lawn somewhere.

 

yeah make sense...you can see it on the map...Its at 30'....Maybe he is a weenie...

[Ian]

Looked back, made a 16" pavement measurement yesterday at 6:45a. DCA was 14" depth at 12z. So basically I got 2x as much snow as them the rest of the day.

[PrinceFrederickWx]

Did BWI adjust their total down? The daily report and preliminary monthly climate report had 25.5" for yesterday. but this page has 24.5"

 

http://www.weather.gov/lwx/bwinme

[Deck Pic]

CNN reporting on controversy....lol

[spf]

This is probably a dumb question but why can't a city have more than 1 "official" measuring spot. DC is a big city and snow depths can vary. Have 4 "official" spots - one in each section of the city and average them.

[ennepe68]

This is probably a dumb question but why can't a city have more than 1 "official" measuring spot. DC is a big city and snow depths can vary. Have 4 "official" spots - one in each section of the city and average them.

 

NYC reports on Central Park ... and JFK and LGA right? And maybe a couple others. (not counting EWR)

[haudidoody]

Liars. It's only two feet if they can use it as an excuse.

 

Runways are expected to remain closed through Sunday, January 24. Flights are canceled.

Snow crews are making good progress clearing the nearly 2 feet of snow from the airfield and the roadways at the airport. We will continue to evaluate conditions and provide updates here.

 

But Reagan National Airport experienced significant snowfall and high winds, with nearly 2 feet accumulating through Sunday morning, making snow removal on the runways, roadways and parking lots difficult. Coupled with the continued closure through the weekend of roads and public transportation in surrounding communities, the airport remains closed to flight operations.

 

As a general rule, all flights are canceled today. Passengers should contact their airline directly for specific flight information and to re-book any flights if necessary.Whenever information on our airport "flight search" webpage is in conflict, your airline is the best source of the most up-to-date flight status.

 

Our priority is protecting the safety of passengers and employees who will travel to the airports when flights resume. Snow teams have been working, and will continue to work, around the clock at both airports to remove snow from runways, taxiways, gates and roadways.

[MacintoshPro]

 

Liars. It's only two feet if they can use it as an excuse.

 

Runways are expected to remain closed through Sunday, January 24. Flights are canceled.

Snow crews are making good progress clearing the nearly 2 feet of snow from the airfield and the roadways at the airport. We will continue to evaluate conditions and provide updates here.

 

But Reagan National Airport experienced significant snowfall and high winds, with nearly 2 feet accumulating through Sunday morning, making snow removal on the runways, roadways and parking lots difficult. Coupled with the continued closure through the weekend of roads and public transportation in surrounding communities, the airport remains closed to flight operations.

 

As a general rule, all flights are canceled today. Passengers should contact their airline directly for specific flight information and to re-book any flights if necessary.Whenever information on our airport "flight search" webpage is in conflict, your airline is the best source of the most up-to-date flight status.

 

Our priority is protecting the safety of passengers and employees who will travel to the airports when flights resume. Snow teams have been working, and will continue to work, around the clock at both airports to remove snow from runways, taxiways, gates and roadways.

 

 

 

Lol.  They say its 17.8" when they're paying for each inch, but say its "nearly two feet" when making excuses for why they're not open. Hmmmm

[Deck Pic]

DCA current snow depth 18"..lol

[Geos]

CNN reporting on controversy....lol

 

TWC and  few other news outlets this afternoon. 

 

There's something off when you've got a really low reading in the middle of a bunch of 20"+ measurements! Chicago messed up on a big snowstorm on 1/1/14, due to the regular NWS crew not being there because of the holiday.

 

[MacintoshPro]

DCA current snow depth 18"..lol

 

wut. do they round up or is that an actual measurement? If they round up, are you telling me that they lost less than 0.4" in the melting/compaction today?

[Ian]

DCA current snow depth 18"..lol

Snow depth is done at 12z so that must be when the number is from.

[Ian]

wut. do they round up or is that an actual measurement? If they round up, are you telling me that they lost less than 0.4" in the melting/compaction today?

It's rounded.

[Ian]

Though apparently yesterday they couldn't find that kind of depth heh.

[ennepe68]

Per Angela, CWG --

 

The reason, it turns out, may be partly due to the improvised technique used by a small team of weather observers at the airport who lost their snow-measuring device to the elements midway through the blizzard. It was buried by the very snow it was supposed to measure.

 

[RIC Airport]

Who can we contact to request rescission of this policy where FAA observers measure snow at the airports? Who provides the equipment, who trains them and enforce standards? It clearly isn't working everywhere as we are dealing with the exact same thing, once again, at the Richmond airport.

[Kingstonian]

Who can we contact to request rescission of this policy where FAA observers measure snow at the airports? Who provides the equipment, who trains them and enforce standards? It clearly isn't working everywhere as we are dealing with the exact same thing, once again, at the Richmond airport.

Find a Congressman (or Congressional staffer) on Science, Space and Technology or Senator (or Senate staffer) on Commerce, Science , and Transportation willing to take up the cause?

[WxUSAF]

I'm on the USAF Weather Facebook group and the CWG article was posted there. A man named Charles Crump claims to be one of the observers at DCA and says they stand by their work. Says they follow COCORAHS guidelines and FAA rules. Also a general tone of "if you don't like it, come and do it yourself" and/or "suck deez nuts".

[87storms]

Even when I was like 12 years old I thought to myself how the hell is dca always measuring so little. They're doing something wrong, period. I don't even pay attention to their amounts.

[Ian]

sign the petition! https://www.change.org/p/national-weather-service-change-the-location-for-dc-weather-observations?recruiter=378485500&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink

[Ian]

I'm on the USAF Weather Facebook group and the CWG article was posted there. A man named Charles Crump claims to be one of the observers at DCA and says they stand by their work. Says they follow COCORAHS guidelines and FAA rules. Also a general tone of "if you don't like it, come and do it yourself" and/or "suck deez nuts".

Sounds like USAF.

[RodneyS]

DCA current snow depth 18"..lol

What's interesting about that figure is that on the day after Snowmageddon (February 7, 2010 -- also a Sunday), DCA snow depth was also listed as 18" after the same alleged two-day snowfall of 17.8".  However, the snow depth at IAD on that day was shown as only 21" inches after an alleged snowfall of 32.4".  Further, today's snow depth at IAD is listed as seven inches greater than the day after Snowmageddon-- 28" inches, after an alleged lesser snowfall of 29.3".

[gymengineer]

What's interesting about that figure is that on the day after Snowmageddon (February 7, 2010 -- also a Sunday), DCA snow depth was also listed as 18" after the same alleged two-day snowfall of 17.8". However, the snow depth at IAD on that day was shown as only 21" inches after an alleged snowfall of 32.4". Further, today's snow depth at IAD is listed as seven inches greater than the day after Snowmageddon-- 28" inches, after an alleged lesser snowfall of 29.3".

I posted about the mismatch between IAD's snow depth and snow total during 2/5-6/10 in this thread earlier. During the storm itself the PNS's noted that the snow measurement was being taken at the Sterling office, not at the airport. I'm pretty sure the 12Z snow depth was still at the airport, hence the big discrepancy.

[MidlothianWX]

I'm on the USAF Weather Facebook group and the CWG article was posted there. A man named Charles Crump claims to be one of the observers at DCA and says they stand by their work. Says they follow COCORAHS guidelines and FAA rules. Also a general tone of "if you don't like it, come and do it yourself" and/or "suck deez nuts".

The response we've gotten from AKQ boils down to "FAA contractors suck and there is nothing we can do about it lol."

 

I've sent email after email. Made post after post on the Wakefield FB page. No one seems to care. The 96 total at KRIC is egregious enough (there is a mother effing hole on the NESIS map over the airport). Someone once saw a tower observer taking a measurement under a tree, or so the story goes. Sad thing is, it's completely plausible.

[wxdude64]

I'm on the USAF Weather Facebook group and the CWG article was posted there. A man named Charles Crump claims to be one of the observers at DCA and says they stand by their work. Says they follow COCORAHS guidelines and FAA rules. Also a general tone of "if you don't like it, come and do it yourself" and/or "suck deez nuts".

If they are not using a snowboard and cleaning every 6 hours and adding the totals together for a 24 hour total, no they are NOT following CoCoRaHS guidelines. Snow depth on ground is NOT the same as snowfall.

[wxdude64]

The response we've gotten from AKQ boils down to "FAA contractors suck and there is nothing we can do about it lol."

 

I've sent email after email. Made post after post on the Wakefield FB page. No one seems to care. The 96 total at KRIC is egregious enough (there is a mother effing hole on the NESIS map over the airport). Someone once saw a tower observer taking a measurement under a tree, or so the story goes. Sad thing is, it's completely plausible.

I have the same issue up here, CO-OP under reporting, or not reporting at all during storms. The bigger the storm the more likely they reported 0 or NA. It is same, you can look at snowfall maps and see a huge 10 mile radius 'hole' of more than 15 inches off everybody else's yearly  total around the city of Covington. I 'ratted' them out to NWS last year after they reported a 0 for snowfall when I had 1 inch, and all the other CO-OP's and CoCoRaHS obs had 0.5 to 1.5 inches reported for the morning within 30 miles. Drove by the site and took a pic of about .7 on ground several hours after obs and explained that no new snow had fallen since 7 am that morning (heck the sun was out and melting snow by time I took pic), amazingly the rest of year they were within 10-20% of all other sites. Too bad their data has skewed records and maps for years.

[AlaskaETC]

The response we've gotten from AKQ boils down to "FAA contractors suck and there is nothing we can do about it lol."

 

I've sent email after email. Made post after post on the Wakefield FB page. No one seems to care. The 96 total at KRIC is egregious enough (there is a mother effing hole on the NESIS map over the airport). Someone once saw a tower observer taking a measurement under a tree, or so the story goes. Sad thing is, it's completely plausible.

 

That about says it all. I'm pretty damn sure that's intentional.

[Stebo]

As a fellow weather observer at DTW, this snowfall measurement issue is very concerning. First off losing a snowboard in a snowstorm tells me they weren't checking the snow as often as they should. The other issue is having only one snowboard on site with no backup. Furthermore there were other issues with their observations during the storm beyond the snowfall. Serious mistakes that in normal observing such as 1/4SM with SN and BR when it should be +SN and FZFG or carrying FG while below freezing. Those are very bad and careless errors combined with this poor measuring of the snowfall.

[Eskimo Joe]

...except that they apparently lost a key piece of the measuring equipment. I said this before in banter but I'll say it here: there's no reason for the defensiveness. No one is saying they intentionally did something wrong, and most aren't even saying they suck at their job. But when there are indications that you messed up during one of the most important weather events in DC history, you should be prepared to show your work whether you're right or not, and do it without contempt for the people who question you.

Yes, there are weenies that want a higher total just because, but most of us just want a quality record. That effects everything from history to how we calculate climo (I think) to how emergency funds are doled out.

This "I do this everyday" and condescension coming from those guys make me trust what they do even less. We all make mistakes, and even when we don't and are still questioned I imagine most of us don't take the tone that some of them have.

This

[RIC Airport]

As a fellow weather observer at DTW, this snowfall measurement issue is very concerning. First off losing a snowboard in a snowstorm tells me they weren't checking the snow as often as they should. The other issue is having only one snowboard on site with no backup. Furthermore there were other issues with their observations during the storm beyond the snowfall. Serious mistakes that in normal observing such as 1/4SM with SN and BR when it should be +SN and FZFG or carrying FG while below freezing. Those are very bad and careless errors combined with this poor measuring of the snowfall

I made this exact point to NWS Wakefield when monitoring the raw METARs for KRIC on Saturday. In particular, SNINCR remarks and BLSN were not consistently included with the +SN FZFG during the height of the event. They waited until the snow started to wind down to annotate BLSN even though winds gusted between 30 and 40mph for like 8 hours straight. Hourly obs where QPF for the previous hour was around .10" did not have a SNINCR when clearly ratios were greater than 10:1.