[Xastir] Re: Wind Gusts

[Clay Jackson]

Yeah - what Curt (and Gerry) said!

I'm basically of a mind that the APRS standard should match the NOAA/ 
NWS standards; and that Xastir should attempt make whatever the  
station gives it match that.    I also agree w/Curt that the weather  
stuff should be redone - perhaps when my employment situation settles  
down I'll take a stab at it.   I think what we're going to wind up  
needing is some sort of modular design with a core that just takes  
some sort of generic input and translate it to APRS and then various  
modules for each weather station that do whatever translation it takes.

Clay
======

On Dec 15, 2006, at 9:30 AM, Curt, WE7U wrote:

> On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, Jason Jordan wrote:
>
>> Off-the-record, very little QC is done with the APRS weather data
>> we get (mainly through the Citizen Weather Observers Program and
>> other various sources) into our operational weather display
>> software .  There is a station near our office that consistently
>> has wind directions that are off anywhere from 60 to 150 degrees
>> from "official" and other APRS stations in the area and they have
>> done little to fix their data.  Due to the inconsistency and
>> questionable data quality, we decided to nix importing APRS sites
>> into any analysis products we do.  I cannot speak for other
>> offices across the U.S. and have heard of some NWS offices that do
>> collect, use, and display data for forecasting operations from the
>> CWOP program (which includes APRS weather stations).
>>
>> I'd strongly recommend that XASTIR and APRS try to meet NWS data
>> standards to encourage their use in operations.  Many forecasters
>> (O.K...at least myself) prefer more data rather than less.  We
>> already have the capability to import the data in our operational
>> display system, it's just a matter of quality!
>
> There's a club station south of here in Tacoma that was reporting
> wind speeds of 125 mph yesterday when everyone else near them was
> reporting perhaps 10% of that.  At least my brain could do the
> auto-reject based on quality for that station.
>
> I have no problem trying to adhere to standards (I'm an engineer
> BTW, BSEE).  It's just that all of these weather stations put out
> different standards, plus the APRS spec has standards listed in the
> spec and even those don't appear to match the NOAA standards if I've
> read the previous stuff in this thread correctly.
>
> Weather people:  Figure out what we want, get Bob Bruninga to bless
> it publicly on the APRS and perhaps APRSSPEC list (if it differs
> from the published APRS spec), and I'll help to meet those standards
> in Xastir.
>
> W.r.t. to the gust value for Clay, I'm not sure I'd want to do the
> calculation any differently in a global sense.  In particular I want
> to keep the gust calulation code the way it is now, but perhaps
> there's a different value your weather station provides that would
> make a better transmitted gust value.  Again, without changing the
> general code.
>
> --
> Curt, WE7U.   APRS Client Comparisons: http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
> "Lotto:    A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
> "Windows:  Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
> "The world DOES revolve around me:  I picked the coordinate system!"
> _______________________________________________
> Xastir mailing list
> Xastir at xastir.org
> http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir
>