How do weather services get sky conditions above the surface?

"Morgans" wrote in
:


"Rocky Stevens" wrote

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 not have kids, or if you do, they are brats.

All kids occasionally need to be ignored when they exibit undesirable
behavior, and rewarded for correct behavior. That is MX. He never
exibits desireable behavior, when the big picture has been taken into
account. What he has done is drive off posters by the droves.

I still do not understand how anyone with a brain can think that his
presence here is desireable, or why they would answer any post of his
for any reason.

Lots of things you can't understand, apparently


Bertie

On Jul 23, 10:12*am, "Morgans" wrote:

All kids occasionally need to be ignored when they exibit undesirable
behavior, and rewarded for correct behavior. *That is MX. *He never exibits
desireable behavior, when the big picture has been taken into account. *What
he has done is drive off posters by the droves.

I still do not understand how anyone with a brain can think that his
presence here is desireable, or why they would answer any post of his for
any reason.
--
Jim in NC

What, praytell, exactly do you find "undesirable" about posting an on-
topic question to a newsgroup?

The only thing "undesirable" about mxsmanic's postings are the idiots
like you who come out of the woodwork to help **** up this place more
than it already is.

On Jul 23, 12:12 pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"Rocky Stevens" wrote

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 not have kids, or if you do, they are brats.

All kids occasionally need to be ignored when they exibit undesirable
behavior, and rewarded for correct behavior. That is MX. He never exibits
desireable behavior, when the big picture has been taken into account. What
he has done is drive off posters by the droves.

I still do not understand how anyone with a brain can think that his
presence here is desireable, or why they would answer any post of his for
any reason.
--
Jim in NC

Jim, he amuses us. It's understandable if he does not amuse you, but
if that's the case, simply don't read threads he originates. This
topic is an especially bad troll attempt for someone whose world view
is via google.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
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?

Try Google, Simboi.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

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?

They lok out the window fjukktard.
Try it.

Bertie

On Jul 23, 7:37*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?

Theres a little "eye" that looks up at the sky at various points. It
detects if there is cloud, or sky. The sensor is prone to errors,
though. Sometimes if it's broken, it'll say its overcast because some
of the sensors are pointing diagonally and are sensing the side of the
cloud. I had an ATC college-style text book that had a very
informative diagram of how they worked, but that book is long gone.

http://www.cyanogen.com/products/cloud_main.htm

here is an example of one.

buttman writes:

Theres a little "eye" that looks up at the sky at various points. It
detects if there is cloud, or sky. The sensor is prone to errors,
though. Sometimes if it's broken, it'll say its overcast because some
of the sensors are pointing diagonally and are sensing the side of the
cloud. I had an ATC college-style text book that had a very
informative diagram of how they worked, but that book is long gone.

http://www.cyanogen.com/products/cloud_main.htm

here is an example of one.

Cool--I wouldn't mind having one (useful for photography as well as astronomy
and aviation). However, it's still a ground-based sensor, so it would only
see the first level of clouds. Conversely, a satellite would only see the top
layer of clouds. If there are three or four layers of clouds, how do weather
services discover them?

The same is true for temperature, humidity, and pressure. Pressure you can
probably infer from surface pressure, and temperature you can guess at in a
similar way. Humidity is more vague. I'm curious as to how all of these get
measured aloft.

And what about winds? Weather services seem to have awareness of winds aloft,
but where are they getting the measurements? Winds aloft may have no
correlation with surface winds and can change a lot over short distances. You
could set up probes, but that's a lot of probes to launch and recover even to
cover small areas. You could rely on PIREPs, but that seems kind of hit and
miss. So how is it really done?

How are the paths and speeds of jet streams determined?

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

buttman writes:

Theres a little "eye" that looks up at the sky at various points. It
detects if there is cloud, or sky. The sensor is prone to errors,
though. Sometimes if it's broken, it'll say its overcast because some
of the sensors are pointing diagonally and are sensing the side of
the cloud. I had an ATC college-style text book that had a very
informative diagram of how they worked, but that book is long gone.

http://www.cyanogen.com/products/cloud_main.htm

here is an example of one.

Cool--I wouldn't mind having one (useful for photography as well as
astronomy and aviation). However, it's still a ground-based sensor,
so it would only see the first level of clouds. Conversely, a
satellite would only see the top layer of clouds. If there are three
or four layers of clouds, how do weather services discover them?

The same is true for temperature, humidity, and pressure. Pressure
you can probably infer from surface pressure, and temperature you can
guess at in a similar way. Humidity is more vague. I'm curious as to
how all of these get measured aloft.

And what about winds? Weather services seem to have awareness of
winds aloft, but where are they getting the measurements? Winds aloft
may have no correlation with surface winds and can change a lot over
short distances. You could set up probes, but that's a lot of probes
to launch and recover even to cover small areas. You could rely on
PIREPs, but that seems kind of hit and miss. So how is it really
done?

Send me $300 and I'll tell you.


Bertie

On Jul 23, 12:47*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
buttman writes:
Theres a little "eye" that looks up at the sky at various points. It
detects if there is cloud, or sky. The sensor is prone to errors,
though. Sometimes if it's broken, it'll say its overcast because some
of the sensors are pointing diagonally and are sensing the side of the
cloud. I had an ATC college-style text book that had a very
informative diagram of how they worked, but that book is long gone.

http://www.cyanogen.com/products/cloud_main.htm

here is an example of one.

Cool--I wouldn't mind having one (useful for photography as well as astronomy
and aviation). *However, it's still a ground-based sensor, so it would only
see the first level of clouds. *Conversely, a satellite would only see the top
layer of clouds. *If there are three or four layers of clouds, how do weather
services discover them?

The same is true for temperature, humidity, and pressure. *Pressure you can
probably infer from surface pressure, and temperature you can guess at in a
similar way. *Humidity is more vague. *I'm curious as to how all of these get
measured aloft.

And what about winds? *Weather services seem to have awareness of winds aloft,
but where are they getting the measurements? *Winds aloft may have no
correlation with surface winds and can change a lot over short distances. *You
could set up probes, but that's a lot of probes to launch and recover even to
cover small areas. *You could rely on PIREPs, but that seems kind of hit and
miss. *So how is it really done?

How are the paths and speeds of jet streams determined?

When I was in college I took a meteorology class which was taught by a
grad student who spent the last summer doing an internship at a
weather station. She worked with the people who did the Upper Air
Charts. She said they release balloons at least every day, which is
how they get their measurements. From there they use the data to make
forecasts.

As far as in-between could layers, its only reported by pireps. Its
very common to ask ATC what the cloud tops are and get a response "I
don't know, no one has given any pireps yet" No one hardly ever flies
VFR between cloud layers, because its too easy to get stuck, therefore
no one bothers making a chart for multiple cloud layers.

buttman wrote in
:

On Jul 23, 12:47*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
buttman writes:
Theres a little "eye" that looks up at the sky at various points.
It detects if there is cloud, or sky. The sensor is prone to
errors, though. Sometimes if it's broken, it'll say its overcast
because some of the sensors are pointing diagonally and are sensing
the side of the cloud. I had an ATC college-style text book that
had a very informative diagram of how they worked, but that book is
long gone.

http://www.cyanogen.com/products/cloud_main.htm

here is an example of one.

Cool--I wouldn't mind having one (useful for photography as well as
astro
nomy
and aviation). *However, it's still a ground-based sensor, so it
would
only
see the first level of clouds. *Conversely, a satellite would only
see
the top
layer of clouds. *If there are three or four layers of clouds, how do
w
eather
services discover them?

The same is true for temperature, humidity, and pressure. *Pressure
you
can
probably infer from surface pressure, and temperature you can guess
at in
a
similar way. *Humidity is more vague. *I'm curious as to how all of t
hese get
measured aloft.

And what about winds? *Weather services seem to have awareness of
winds
aloft,
but where are they getting the measurements? *Winds aloft may have no
correlation with surface winds and can change a lot over short
distances.
*You
could set up probes, but that's a lot of probes to launch and recover
eve
n to
cover small areas. *You could rely on PIREPs, but that seems kind of
hi
t and
miss. *So how is it really done?

How are the paths and speeds of jet streams determined?

When I was in college I took a meteorology class which was taught by a
grad student who spent the last summer doing an internship at a
weather station. She worked with the people who did the Upper Air
Charts. She said they release balloons at least every day, which is
how they get their measurements. From there they use the data to make
forecasts.

As far as in-between could layers, its only reported by pireps.

Nope, wrong again, fjukktard.

Not that it matters, since your "student" will never ever fly.


Bertie