AFWA no longer doing sat fixes on tropical cyclones

[senorpepr]

I've seen this pop up a few times, and it's been mentioned in the chatroom, so I'll post this here.

For those in the past that enjoyed viewing AFWA's satellite fixes for tropical cyclones... enjoy this:

http://www.ofcm.gov/homepage/text/spc_proj/ihc/action-items.pdf
Point 12

Due to recent personnel and funding cuts, the Air Force Weather Agency (AFWA) can no longer dedicate the resources needed to sustain tropical cyclone satellite imagery surveillance and analysis support to the National Hurricane Operations Plan. This cessation of support requires changes in the NHOP to reflect the AFWA termination but continuance of support on request, resources permitting, by the 17th Operational Weather Squadron Meteorological Satellite Operations (SATOPS) Flight (17 OWS/WXJ), Joint Typhoon Warning Center, Pearl Harbor, HI to the Central Pacific Hurricane Center.

[artist]

can you explain exactly how this will affect us? Thanks for sharing with us.

[WindRunner]

For the most part, it's just one less set of Dvorak numbers to look at for a system . . .

[Chacor]

The TCFA criteria includes a point regarding Dvorak fixes from KGWC, which might be a problem.

[senorpepr]

Yup, instead of three opinions on the strength (based on satellite) of tropical cyclones, we'll get just two.

[artist]

this is getting ridiculous in my opinion. The cuts are just going against the wrong things in my opinion.

[brunota2003]

Great...So now, wont that make sat estimates less reliable?

[WindRunner]

Not less reliable, just fewer in number. TAFB and SAB will still be putting them out as usual . . .

It's basically that we're left with two opinions on the storm's position/intensity instead of three.

[Chacor]

Although KGWC's fixes were useful for the WPac and IO storms...

[Derek Ortt]

when will we realise that hurricanes are NOT a science concern, but instead a national security concern. Cutting back on operational hurricane tracking during a multidecadal active cycle (and possibly a 1500 year active cycle if the LSU research is correct) makes as much sense as does cutting the size of the military when your country is being invaded

[Cyclenall]

when will we realise that hurricanes are NOT a science concern, but instead a national security concern. Cutting back on operational hurricane tracking during a multidecadal active cycle (and possibly a 1500 year active cycle if the LSU research is correct) makes as much sense as does cutting the size of the military when your country is being invaded

That is correct. I'm growing tired of reading these things about cutting back on "programs" that are even a little bit important, yes it does matter. I don't think National Security has much to do with this though, do you mean something similar?

[Aslkahuna]

National Security means more than just protecting against attack it also means protecting this Country and the population from major disasters which can be as detrimental economically societally and politically as an attack. Unfortunately, funding processes and the reasons for the funding shortfall at AFWA are very political in nature so I can't comment on them here.

Steve

[Derek Ortt]

cyclenall,

as steve said, NS has far more to do than Al Queda. A hurricane can absoluetely cripple our country, possibly more efficiently than an Al Queda attack can.

A major in NYC is going to be many times more destructive and deadly than 9/11. With this as the case, we need to treat it with the proper importance

[Cyclenall]

cyclenall,

as steve said, NS has far more to do than Al Queda. A hurricane can absoluetely cripple our country, possibly more efficiently than an Al Queda attack can.

A major in NYC is going to be many times more destructive and deadly than 9/11. With this as the case, we need to treat it with the proper importance

I figured that's what you meant by that but I never knew it was called NS.