Don't always believe the AWOS...

I supposed balloons were used only for atmospheric sounding anymore.
I didn't know they were still used *anywhere* as a substitute for =
ceilometers.
I'm pretty sure I remember ceilometers being deployed 45 or more years =
ago.

"J Haggerty" wrote in message =
news:Qk_Bd.4488$2_4.750@okepread06...
Most weather ceilings are now determined by machine (a laser=20
ceilometer), even if it's relayed by a human. The old balloon method=20
that determined ceilings by how long it took for the balloon to enter=20
the clouds is only used these days at those sites that don't have a=20
working ceilometer.
=20
JPH
=20

Was the "observer" a certified weather observer?

I believe so; his hourly reports went to the NWS.

vince norris

Machines are much better at precise measurements than people. I'm not
sure I could tell the difference between 200 OVC and 700 OVC by eye, and
I'm sure I couldn't between 1000 and 2000.

I don't claim to be expert at that, either, but when the previous a/c
reported breaking out at minimums, 200 feet, the observer continued to
report 700 feet.

vince norris

"John R. Copeland" wrote in
:

I supposed balloons were used only for atmospheric sounding anymore.
I didn't know they were still used *anywhere* as a substitute for
ceilometers. I'm pretty sure I remember ceilometers being deployed 45
or more years ago.

Nope, they're still around. Balloons are a lot cheaper than ceilometers,
especially if you only need an exact ceiling now and then.

--
Regards,

Stan

"vincent p. norris" wrote in message
...

I believe so; his hourly reports went to the NWS.


Where was this? When? How did he determine the ceiling?

"Stan Gosnell" wrote in message =
...
=20
Nope, they're still around. Balloons are a lot cheaper than =
ceilometers,=20
especially if you only need an exact ceiling now and then.
=20
Stan

Well, yes, a balloon is cheaper than a ceilometer.
But I'd have guessed that over the life cycle of a ceilometer,
the controlling costs would involve the time a meteorologist spends
watching and timing the rising balloons.
But what do I know? I'm an engineer, not an accountant.

John R. Copeland wrote:
Well, yes, a balloon is cheaper than a ceilometer.
But I'd have guessed that over the life cycle of a ceilometer,
the controlling costs would involve the time a meteorologist spends
watching and timing the rising balloons.

Not to mention that after you're done taking your measurement, you get
to use the ceiliometer again.

Where was this? When? How did he determine the ceiling?

About 15 years ago. I don't know how he arrived at the ceiling.

I'd rather not identify the field, since you sound like you intend to
pursue the matter. The field manager has changed since then, the
observer no doubt is also gone, and the statute of limitations has
expired.

vince norris

"John R. Copeland" wrote in
:

Well, yes, a balloon is cheaper than a ceilometer.
But I'd have guessed that over the life cycle of a ceilometer,
the controlling costs would involve the time a meteorologist spends
watching and timing the rising balloons.
But what do I know? I'm an engineer, not an accountant.

Then you know TANSTAAFL. For a heliport, which may be temporary or which
may be leased for a relatively short term, a ceilometer isn't always cost
effective. The weather observer (not a meterologist, which requires a
college degree) only uses the baloons when the ceiling is critical,
perhaps one day per month, and estimates it the rest of the time. When
not observing the weather (s)he does other work, usually dispatching or
working on aircraft. Not everyone flies from an airport with long paved
concrete runways, but they may still need accurate observations for
instrument approaches.

--
Regards,

Stan