I don't know if Channel 2 people read this but I hope this message gets to them. I would personally like to thank whoever signed the big fat check for their 3-D weather technology. I was right in the path of the storms and I was riveted for over 4 hours as Glen Burns and team showed exactly where it was headed, even down to the intersections in the path, spotting tornadoes as they ocurred almost in real time. The other guys could not compete.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Thank you WSB-TV
- Thread starter perfect storm
- Start date
K
kyscott
Guest
And......is there any way to stream your programming on the internet for Atlanta folks now living outside your coverage? I live in Louisville and was watching for the Georgia/Kentucky basketball game when it hit.
Please do not buy into the 3-D graphics.
With all of this new software television stations have available now, and graphics, ect, there have been some rumblings in meteorlogical circles that some television station meteorologists have "on-air" contradicted why the National Weather Service issued a warning, by saying "Well, we don't see why the NWS issued that warning.....we don't see anything on our radar.......
WSB came very close to doing that a couple of times.
Besides that, the big 3 stations were all right there.
With all of this new software television stations have available now, and graphics, ect, there have been some rumblings in meteorlogical circles that some television station meteorologists have "on-air" contradicted why the National Weather Service issued a warning, by saying "Well, we don't see why the NWS issued that warning.....we don't see anything on our radar.......
WSB came very close to doing that a couple of times.
Besides that, the big 3 stations were all right there.
I was also glued to the screen for over 4 hours as I had parents and kids in the path of those storms. For me not to buy into those fantastic graphics, you'll have to tell me they are wrong. Are you saying that if the software says one side of the rotation is going 60 mph away from the radar and the other side is going 50 mph towards it, that it's wrong? If it's right, it either is a tornado or so close I don't want to be there.
It wasn't just the graphics, which was far superior to the other 3, it was the data they used to show what was truly going on in the storm. Really, there was no contest, the other 3 were reduced to standing in front of their radar guessing.vpgrar said:Please do not buy into the 3-D graphics.
vpgrar said:Please do not buy into the 3-D graphics.
With all of this new software television stations have available now, and graphics, ect, there have been some rumblings in meteorlogical circles that some television station meteorologists have "on-air" contradicted why the National Weather Service issued a warning, by saying "Well, we don't see why the NWS issued that warning.....we don't see anything on our radar.......
WSB came very close to doing that a couple of times.
Besides that, the big 3 stations were all right there.
I have to disagree. Most of what they said what the NWS issued or what they were getting from eye-witness reports, confirmed what they were talking about and seeing in their radar. Now, I do know that news tends to sensationalize severe storms, and they go a bit ballistic about reporting storm/tornado warnings. What the problem is that the public doesn't know the difference between a "doppler indicated" tornado and a "spotted" tornado. A "doppler indicated" tornado is rotation in the storm, but not necessarily rotation that hits the ground. Nevertheless, it's a nasty storm. I've actually been through a couple "microbursts" that did not have the funnel cloud, but had enough damage to leave a path just like a tornado. In that, WSB Meteorologists did error. Once the warning was issued (I primarily watched Saturday afternoon) they confirmed through their 3-D graphics that a tornado was, in fact, on the ground. You cannot see that in the graphics. The graphics display the rotation, but do not confirm touchdown. With that being said, though, as I just mentioned, the rotation even without a funnel cloud is something one would not want to be in. And, the graphics gave great detail to very severe weather. For someone that's been in the business long enough to not freak out when the weatherguys are jumping out of their seats, I was quite impressed with WSB's system.
I have no problem with the NWS. They earned their money Friday and Saturday. My problem was the overuse of the graphics.
Do the graphics look cool?
Yup, no doubt about it.
Does the gerneral public know what they mean?
Probably not.
What good is showing a hook echo in 3-D mode over Rockdale County, when you're looking at the storm from the wrong angle, and can't see the hook echo that you're trying to talk about in the first place? That happened several times on Saturday afternoon.
It all comes down to algorithm's, and who wrote the software determines how it makes the best "educated guess" as to where there is a circulation. The 3-D is cool, but is it right? The only way they would have had an accurate picture is if "their" radar had made several passes at various elevations to come up with all the information for that 3-D graphics. Most television stations leave their radars to only scan at one elevation - when they do use their own doppler radars, and not pull the information form the NEXRAD in Peachtree City. Otherwise, the only other radar system that I know that scans at various elevations and have enough informaton to produce a complete 3-D image from top to bottom is the NWS system.
Trained doppler radar storm signature specialists, and storm spotters helped with the warnings, not the 3-D graphics.
Just wait until the National Weather Service rolls out it's "dual-pole" upgrade to the NEXRAD network. Then, I'll think about 3-D. All I'm trying to say is that the graphics are designed to catch you attention, and they did.
I'm not the only one that feels this way. It's kinda shocking to me, to see who else down on Peachtree Street feels the same way. Check out the link.... http://wsbradio.com/weather/WeatherCommentary.html
Do the graphics look cool?
Yup, no doubt about it.
Does the gerneral public know what they mean?
Probably not.
What good is showing a hook echo in 3-D mode over Rockdale County, when you're looking at the storm from the wrong angle, and can't see the hook echo that you're trying to talk about in the first place? That happened several times on Saturday afternoon.
It all comes down to algorithm's, and who wrote the software determines how it makes the best "educated guess" as to where there is a circulation. The 3-D is cool, but is it right? The only way they would have had an accurate picture is if "their" radar had made several passes at various elevations to come up with all the information for that 3-D graphics. Most television stations leave their radars to only scan at one elevation - when they do use their own doppler radars, and not pull the information form the NEXRAD in Peachtree City. Otherwise, the only other radar system that I know that scans at various elevations and have enough informaton to produce a complete 3-D image from top to bottom is the NWS system.
Trained doppler radar storm signature specialists, and storm spotters helped with the warnings, not the 3-D graphics.
Just wait until the National Weather Service rolls out it's "dual-pole" upgrade to the NEXRAD network. Then, I'll think about 3-D. All I'm trying to say is that the graphics are designed to catch you attention, and they did.
I'm not the only one that feels this way. It's kinda shocking to me, to see who else down on Peachtree Street feels the same way. Check out the link.... http://wsbradio.com/weather/WeatherCommentary.html
Yeah, I definitely agree with you that the gen public had no clue what they were talking about and took them at face value. And, like I said, I didn't take them completely at face value because I know how much they sensationalize stuff, as what TV is supposed to do (for some odd reason, something about that art imitating life, or the other way around). A lot of times the higher ups in TV mix news with entertainment, and that's where the sensationalizing comes from. "Let's turn their lives into a living soap opera!"
The newer systems do have multiple sweeps from a network of radars. I don't know how the network is created, whether it comes from accuweather, WSI, the NWS, or a combination. I think a lot of them came from stations when they were on the "doppler craze". Say, for example, WXIA's "power plus one million" or whatever they call it. You'll see sweeps come from their doppler somewhere near Douglasville, the Peachtree City NEXRAD, a sweep coming from Huntsville (it looks like) and another from Greenville. Is it just graphics? Maybe, but chances are it's the next gen of radar networks.
A little story about my old station's "Doppler" (not in this market). It was the "best thing since sliced bread", and marketed so much they had a 2 minute promo on the stupid thing. It was set near the airport, and the incoming storms were shadowed by the highest hill in the market! That one hill put a 20 - 50 mile gap in the Doppler! But, Joe Public was none the wiser.
Nevertheless, I skimmed through Mellish's blog. He's right. Even if there was a two hour warning given, nobody would've done anything because it's human nature not to react until there's a sense of imminent danger. But, he knows just as much as anybody else in the industry does, there are tons of echos that are even recorded at the NWS radar, but they don't issue a tornado warning for each and every one. Some are just microbursts that peeter out in a minute or two. Once it shows up, it's gone, and little to no damage done. The biggest thing is that the NWS knows the worst thing they can do is cry wolf, so they make darned sure they're on their p's and q's before sounding the alarm. Which brings me to another problem with news (then I'll jump off the soapbox): They're so darned anxious to be there "first" that they jump the gun too many times, and many of these weather guys hate when this happens because they want to tell you the truth, but their bosses (the News Director and GM) want them to prophesy Armageddon, and so soon that they can say they were there "first". The word that gets skewed in all this mess is "accurate".
The newer systems do have multiple sweeps from a network of radars. I don't know how the network is created, whether it comes from accuweather, WSI, the NWS, or a combination. I think a lot of them came from stations when they were on the "doppler craze". Say, for example, WXIA's "power plus one million" or whatever they call it. You'll see sweeps come from their doppler somewhere near Douglasville, the Peachtree City NEXRAD, a sweep coming from Huntsville (it looks like) and another from Greenville. Is it just graphics? Maybe, but chances are it's the next gen of radar networks.
A little story about my old station's "Doppler" (not in this market). It was the "best thing since sliced bread", and marketed so much they had a 2 minute promo on the stupid thing. It was set near the airport, and the incoming storms were shadowed by the highest hill in the market! That one hill put a 20 - 50 mile gap in the Doppler! But, Joe Public was none the wiser.
Nevertheless, I skimmed through Mellish's blog. He's right. Even if there was a two hour warning given, nobody would've done anything because it's human nature not to react until there's a sense of imminent danger. But, he knows just as much as anybody else in the industry does, there are tons of echos that are even recorded at the NWS radar, but they don't issue a tornado warning for each and every one. Some are just microbursts that peeter out in a minute or two. Once it shows up, it's gone, and little to no damage done. The biggest thing is that the NWS knows the worst thing they can do is cry wolf, so they make darned sure they're on their p's and q's before sounding the alarm. Which brings me to another problem with news (then I'll jump off the soapbox): They're so darned anxious to be there "first" that they jump the gun too many times, and many of these weather guys hate when this happens because they want to tell you the truth, but their bosses (the News Director and GM) want them to prophesy Armageddon, and so soon that they can say they were there "first". The word that gets skewed in all this mess is "accurate".
you guys are over-thinking whether the audience understands the graphics, etc. They don't have to. is it better than the others? Yes, that's all that matters. By the way, there's an article in Saturday's paper about the guy who invented the software used by channel 2. It's all explained there. And back to my original post...I wanted to thank the guy who wrote the big check for that software. It turns out to be not that expensive...read the story.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.