How do weather services get sky conditions above the surface?

buttman wrote in
:

On Jul 23, 9:20*am, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote:
Rocky Stevens wrote:
On Jul 23, 10:05 am, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 23, 9:37 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the
surface to measure wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what
is the normal way for meteorologists to measure these things
aloft? Do they depend on PIREPs, or expendable/recoverable
probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?
This is one of your poorest troll attempts, Anthony, you are a
disappointment. Please try to do better.
Do you folks that continue to respond to Mxsmanic, Bertie,
Maxwell, an
d the
other trolls realize that if you had simply ignored them this
would st
ill be
a useful forum?

It would also be a useful forum if people actually answered the
questions posed, regardless of *who* is asking it. The OP's
question is perefectly valid, and x number of years from now when
somebody Google's for the answer and gets this thread, all they
will see for an answer are insults. There is nothing more
frustrating than Googling for an anwer to something only to find
the response was "why don't you Google for it". If you have the
time to post such a response, you have the time to answer the
question.

You must be new here. Somebody will answer Anthony's question and
then he will tell them they are wrong and say he has studied the
issue in depth and that just because the person that answered the
question is a pilot does not mean that they know anything about
weather or how the information is collected.

And to top it all off the fact that I have posted the above in no way
lowers the chances of Anthony doing exactly what I've said he would
do.

oh god shut up. I've been frankly answering his questions for a while
now and I've yet to see him respond to me in that manner, or to other
people in that manner either. If it bothers you so much why don't you
just not read this place anymore? There are tons of people that post
here that I don't like. I cope with it by *gasp* ignoring them. Its
not as hard as it sounds.


Yeah, right. I believe you. Millions wouldn't but I do.

Bertie

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:57:53 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th' terraists
with the following claims :

buttman wrote in
:

On Jul 23, 9:20Â*am, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote:
Rocky Stevens wrote:
On Jul 23, 10:05 am, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 23, 9:37 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the
surface to measure wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what
is the normal way for meteorologists to measure these things
aloft? Do they depend on PIREPs, or expendable/recoverable
probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?

I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and the
aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they estimate
windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.


--
"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire

BTW, if anyone else would like to weigh in with a serious answer, I
would appreciate it. I can sort of see how they could use radar to
determine clound coverage, but the winds aloft thing is really
puzzling me. Take a look at http://www.navmonster.com/wx/KCDW-25; just
one Pirep (which does not even include winds aloft) but they have
winds aloft for various altitudes.

Rocky Stevens wrote:
BTW, if anyone else would like to weigh in with a serious answer, I
would appreciate it. I can sort of see how they could use radar to
determine clound coverage, but the winds aloft thing is really
puzzling me. Take a look at http://www.navmonster.com/wx/KCDW-25; just
one Pirep (which does not even include winds aloft) but they have
winds aloft for various altitudes.

RADAR, LIDAR, balloons, airplanes, among other things.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Rocky Stevens wrote in news:df844305-ac37-4d08-
:

BTW, if anyone else would like to weigh in with a serious answer, I
would appreciate it. I can sort of see how they could use radar to
determine clound coverage, but the winds aloft thing is really
puzzling me. Take a look at http://www.navmonster.com/wx/KCDW-25; just
one Pirep (which does not even include winds aloft) but they have
winds aloft for various altitudes.


They do it primarily from the pressure gradient. The steeper the gradient
the stronger the wind.

Actually, measuring between the isobars along your route regardless of the
angle they may form in relation to it, only counting the frequency, will
give you a very good idea of your head or tail and crosswind.

There's a scale on some types of detailed surface charts that directly give
the geostrophic wind speed based solely on isobar seperation.

Bertie

§ñühwØ£f writes:

I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and the
aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they estimate
windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.

That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights and
distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up with educated
guesses for these, but one might still be way off. Certainly experience would
be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and patterns.

One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten radiosondes
for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call high-resolution
measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane between radiosondes.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

§ñühwØ£f writes:

I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and the
aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they
estimate windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.

That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights and
distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up with
educated guesses for these, but one might still be way off. Certainly
experience would be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and
patterns.

One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten
radiosondes for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call
high-resolution measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane between
radiosondes.


You are an idiot.


Bertie

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:27:31 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th' terraists
with the following claims :

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

§ñühwØ£f writes:

I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and the
aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they
estimate windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.

That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights and
distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up with
educated guesses for these, but one might still be way off. Certainly
experience would be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and
patterns.

One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten
radiosondes for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call
high-resolution measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane between
radiosondes.


You are an idiot.

Bertie

Maybe they use dopplar radar to tell the height of the clouds, eh?
Otherwise I assume some sort of math involving triangulation and other
difficult things.


--
"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/16052

§ñühwØ£f wrote in
news
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:27:31 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
terraists
with the following claims :

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

§ñühwØ£f writes:

I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and
the
aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they
estimate windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.

That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights
and
distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up with
educated guesses for these, but one might still be way off.
Certainly
experience would be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and
patterns.

One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten
radiosondes for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call
high-resolution measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane
between
radiosondes.


You are an idiot.

Bertie

Maybe they use dopplar radar to tell the height of the clouds, eh?
Otherwise I assume some sort of math involving triangulation and other
difficult things.



Nah, it's easy. They compare the temperature to the dewpoint add in th
edry adiabatic lapse rate and voila, you get the cloudbase. Observation
is used for terminal areas, otherwise, though, it's still done the old
fashioned way for the most part. These days, al info is mixed together,
whihc gives a much better actual and forecasting capability.

bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
§ñühwØ£f wrote in
news
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:27:31 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
terraists
with the following claims :

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

§ñühwØ£f writes:

I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and
the
aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they
estimate windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.

That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights
and
distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up
with
educated guesses for these, but one might still be way off.
Certainly
experience would be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and
patterns.

One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten
radiosondes for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call
high-resolution measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane
between
radiosondes.


You are an idiot.

Bertie

Maybe they use dopplar radar to tell the height of the clouds, eh?
Otherwise I assume some sort of math involving triangulation and
other
difficult things.



Nah, it's easy. They compare the temperature to the dewpoint add in th
edry adiabatic lapse rate and voila, you get the cloudbase.
Observation
is used for terminal areas, otherwise, though, it's still done the old
fashioned way for the most part. These days, al info is mixed
together,
whihc gives a much better actual and forecasting capability.

bertie

Are you an ex weather observer or summat? I had a friend who was ex USAF
weather observer then he got a job in elko doing weather observation &
moved
He was always talking about clouds & stuff trying to explain what was
happening up there...