Key hurricane satellite could fail at any time

[BigO]

LINK

Wonder why I haven't heard about this before?

[secretforecaster]

Okay I am reading, but this really scared me when the heading was FALL instead of FAIL.

[tolakram]

I got it ... I got it ...

oops.

[mf_dolphin]

Another fine example of our government not at work...

[JonathanBelles]

If this is quiscat, I did not read the article, but This came out a while ago.

[artist]

I heard about this recently and my understanding is they have now been given the money to replace this satellite. Hopefully it will get done befoer this one does fail.

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

That would not be a good thing if we lossed the Quickscat. We would loss part of the data needed to upgrade systems out of recon area. We would be using t numbers and satellite. Thank god for the new buoys which will help...Yes we would have recon close to land so it would not be life threating but upgrading central and eastern Atlatnic systms would get more tricky. Also Eastern pacific systems to.

[BigO]

Okay I am reading, but this really scared me when the heading was FALL instead of FAIL.

Yeah, my bad. I misread the headline on the source.

[secretforecaster]

Okay I am reading, but this really scared me when the heading was FALL instead of FAIL.

Yeah, my bad. I misread the headline on the source.

It's okay...

[Windy]

I heard about this recently and my understanding is they have now been given the money to replace this satellite. Hopefully it will get done befoer this one does fail.

The article is two hours old on the AP wire. The replacement is scheduled for 2016. The money is not there. That's why the NHC is bitching.

Lotsa money to promote the "200th Anniversary" of NOAA, though! Even though NOAA was founded in 1970.

[HurricaneRobert]

We could've used it for Georges. Who knew where that thing would go?

[artist]

I heard about this recently and my understanding is they have now been given the money to replace this satellite. Hopefully it will get done befoer this one does fail.

The article is two hours old on the AP wire. The replacement is scheduled for 2016. The money is not there. That's why the NHC is bitching.

Lotsa money to promote the "200th Anniversary" of NOAA, though! Even though NOAA was founded in 1970.

Windy - this was reported here recently -
http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic ... t=quikscat
and Congressman Klein to make it 'top priority' to replace QuikSCAT satellite


see here from April 9-
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/weathe ... -hurricane

[Windy]

I heard about this recently and my understanding is they have now been given the money to replace this satellite. Hopefully it will get done befoer this one does fail.

The article is two hours old on the AP wire. The replacement is scheduled for 2016. The money is not there. That's why the NHC is bitching.

Lotsa money to promote the "200th Anniversary" of NOAA, though! Even though NOAA was founded in 1970.

Windy - this was reported here recently -
http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic ... t=quikscat
and Congressman Klein to make it 'top priority' to replace QuikSCAT satellite


see here from April 9-
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/weathe ... -hurricane

Exactly -- the money isn't there. Some random congressman from Florida says they're going to try to drum up the money via a bill or an earmark or something, but it hasn't happened yet, let alone been passed into law and apropriated. Even if it passes, it'll be four years, minimum, before launch.

[artist]

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/fl ... NOAA.shtml



Press Release
Klein, Melancon Urge Science Committee to Hold Hearings Regarding Imminent Loss of Hurricane Tracking Satellite
Dissatisfied with NOAA’s Apparent Lack of Mitigation Plan in the Event QuikSCAT Fails, and to Highlight Need to Launch New Satellite, Klein Urges Hearing

June 12, 1976

Washington, DC -- Concerned that a satellite used to track hurricanes is in danger of malfunctioning in the near future, and that the agency tasked with managing this satellite does not have an adequate back-up plan in place, U.S. Rep. Ron Klein (FL-22) and Rep. Charlie Melancon (LA-3) urged in a letter to the Chair and Vice Chair of the Science Committee today to immediately hold a hearing to address these issues.

After the Director of the National Hurricane Center, Bill Proenza announced that the QuikSCAT satellite, which an most accurate mechanism for forecasting hurricanes, was deteriorating and in danger of going offline, Klein immediately became concerned. He quickly convened a meeting with NOAA and the Air Force Reserves to make sure the two entities were communicating and that NOAA had a back-up plan in the event that QuikSCAT went off line. The Air Force plays a key roll in hurricane preparedness by operating the Hurricane Hunter Aircraft.

“Last month, I met with officials from NOAA and the Air Force Reserves to discuss their level of preparedness for hurricane season. During this meeting I asked NOAA to send me a back up plan in the likely event that the QuikSCAT satellite stops functioning,” said Klein. “I received a letter yesterday from NOAA regarding my request, and remain concerned that a short and long term solution is either not yet fully developed, or still does not exist. It is unacceptable to me that our ability to track and forecast hurricanes may be taking a step backwards.

“Congressman Melancon and I have sent a letter to Science Committee Chairman Bart Gordon and Vice Chairman Daniel Lipinksi today, urging them to hold a hearing on this issue. Given the urgency of this situation, we are hopeful Chairman Gordon and Vice Chairman Lipinksi will expedite our request for this hearing.”

NASA launched the QuikSCAT satellite in 1999. After its launch, The QuikSCAT satellite proved to provide valuable data that helps to more accurately track and forecast hurricanes and other deadly storms. Originally designed for a life expectancy of three years, QuikSCAT has now been operating for eight years with no replacement set to launch in the near future.

Since learning about the pending demise of the QuikSCAT satellite, Rep. Klein has made it a top priority to find a replacement. He has met with representatives from the National Weather Service, the National Hurricane Center, and the Air Force Reserve to discuss alternatives to QuikSCAT. Just last month, Klein and Melancon introduced the “Improved Hurricane Tracking and Forecasting Act of 2007,” which would authorize the necessary NASA funding to design and launch a replacement satellite for QuikSCAT. A companion bill was introduced in the Senate by Sen’s Mary Landrieau (D-LA), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Mel Martinez (R-FL), and John Kerry (D-MA).









Press Release List

[tailgater]

Yeah I read about this about 4 or 5 days ago in the Morning Advocate( Baton Rouge paper), I meant to post it but forgot.

[AJC3]

Well, I hope the satellite doesn't fail before our nation's bicentennial. Apparently the official congressional calendar already has.

[wjs3]

haha....I was wondering if anyone else noticed that date.

Seriously, though (and I am sure I am a lone voice on this one)...really, would loss of quickscat cause that big of a problem for hurricane landfall forecasts? We've been over this before...quickscat is awesome for closing off a circulation over the open ocean (outside of recon), but as far as determining intensity/windspeed, you always end up with rain contamination anyway, so can't trust the velocities. (someone here has to teach me if ambiguities can help you there, though).

you'd think that track forecasting would get more difficult with loss of quickscat based on these articles. I just don't buy that! Maybe I'm mistaken, and maybe QS winds go into model initializations and really help? Set me straight if that's the case. But otherwise, this seems overstated to em.

In my tour of the NHC with a forecaster there, I got into a deep discussion of intensity estimation, and what I heard fomr this forecaster in particular was that he thought that T numbers, recon and doppler velocities were way better tools for estimating intensity than quickscat. It was apparently a big battle he was having regarding a storm he was writing up...the T numbers and satellite presentation suggested 90 kts but other forecasters were arguing for a 65 kt storm (based on QS)--his point was that QS resolution (20 KM???) would often and likely miss the most intense winds in a tropical cyclone and did here.

Really, don't get me wrong. I love quickscat and scatterometrry is such a cool concept...I use it all the time and would hate it if it was gone...but...these doom and gloom statements about hurricane forecasts if quickscat were to go away...I don't buy them.

WJS3

[AJC3]

haha....I was wondering if anyone else noticed that date.

Seriously, though (and I am sure I am a lone voice on this one)...really, would loss of quickscat cause that big of a problem for hurricane landfall forecasts? We've been over this before...quickscat is awesome for closing off a circulation over the open ocean (outside of recon), but as far as determining intensity/windspeed, you always end up with rain contamination anyway, so can't trust the velocities. (someone here has to teach me if ambiguities can help you there, though).

you'd think that track forecasting would get more difficult with loss of quickscat based on these articles. I just don't buy that! Maybe I'm mistaken, and maybe QS winds go into model initializations and really help? Set me straight if that's the case. But otherwise, this seems overstated to em.

In my tour of the NHC with a forecaster there, I got into a deep discussion of intensity estimation, and what I heard fomr this forecaster in particular was that he thought that T numbers, recon and doppler velocities were way better tools for estimating intensity than quickscat. It was apparently a big battle he was having regarding a storm he was writing up...the T numbers and satellite presentation suggested 90 kts but other forecasters were arguing for a 65 kt storm (based on QS)--his point was that QS resolution (20 KM???) would often and likely miss the most intense winds in a tropical cyclone and did here.

Really, don't get me wrong. I love quickscat and scatterometrry is such a cool concept...I use it all the time and would hate it if it was gone...but...these doom and gloom statements about hurricane forecasts if quickscat were to go away...I don't buy them.

WJS3

I seem to recall MW posing this very question to Jack Beven on his last show. IIR Jack's answer correctly, apparently QS wind data is ingested into many of the dynamical hurricane prediction models and it was estimated that the removal of this data would negatively affect track forecasts from those models that do ingest the data.

[wjs3]

That's helpful...Any ideas how I can research this more? because that would change my position entirely. I did not at all hear that at the NHC.

Thanks. By the way, awesome MCS in your CWA today. Were you on duty?

WJS3

[wxmann_91]

haha....I was wondering if anyone else noticed that date.

Seriously, though (and I am sure I am a lone voice on this one)...really, would loss of quickscat cause that big of a problem for hurricane landfall forecasts? We've been over this before...quickscat is awesome for closing off a circulation over the open ocean (outside of recon), but as far as determining intensity/windspeed, you always end up with rain contamination anyway, so can't trust the velocities. (someone here has to teach me if ambiguities can help you there, though).

you'd think that track forecasting would get more difficult with loss of quickscat based on these articles. I just don't buy that! Maybe I'm mistaken, and maybe QS winds go into model initializations and really help? Set me straight if that's the case. But otherwise, this seems overstated to em.

In my tour of the NHC with a forecaster there, I got into a deep discussion of intensity estimation, and what I heard fomr this forecaster in particular was that he thought that T numbers, recon and doppler velocities were way better tools for estimating intensity than quickscat. It was apparently a big battle he was having regarding a storm he was writing up...the T numbers and satellite presentation suggested 90 kts but other forecasters were arguing for a 65 kt storm (based on QS)--his point was that QS resolution (20 KM???) would often and likely miss the most intense winds in a tropical cyclone and did here.

Really, don't get me wrong. I love quickscat and scatterometrry is such a cool concept...I use it all the time and would hate it if it was gone...but...these doom and gloom statements about hurricane forecasts if quickscat were to go away...I don't buy them.

WJS3

Perhaps the most important functions of QS are during the beginning stages of a storm, where the center could be hard to find (or even nonexistant), and that could affect model initializations. But for a well developed hurricane, it's not going to be rocket science to find where the center is, rendering QS fairly obsolete. So yes, while I think it's important, I agree, WJS3, that the article seems to be a bit exaggerative on the negative effects of losing QS.

EDIT: I just realized that QS also scans other portions of the earth outside TC's, so I guess that would be an area that QS would be extremely helpful (giving wind obs outside the traditional buoys, which can indeed help significantly with model initialization).