Hurricane reasearch flights grounded (NOAA)

[phantom power]

:banghead:

For the first time since NOAA began flying research aircraft into hurricane in the 1950's, there is no money to fund airborne hurricane research for an upcoming hurricane season. NOAA's state-of-the-art flying weather research laboratories, the two P-3 Orion hurricane hunter aircraft, may sit idle this hurricane season due to a lack of funding. NOAA's Hurricane Research Division (HRD) usually receives several million dollars each year to perform hurricane research using the P-3's. However, funding for HRD has steadily declined over the past decade, forcing HRD to reduce staff and cut back on hurricane research. Now, this key form of hurricane research has been zeroed out by NOAA.

(...)

With zero money allocated to fund one of the most important types of hurricane research, one has to wonder--what are NOAA and Congress thinking? Advancements in hurricane science due to the research flights performed by the P-3s are a huge reason hurricane track forecasts have improved 43% in the past 15 years. For example, the now routine flights by the NOAA high-altitude jet to sample the large-scale environment around a hurricane improves tracks forecasts by perhaps 20% on its own. This advancement grew out of a multi-year research project conducted by the P-3s in the 1980s and 1990s. Continued hurricane research by aircraft is essential if we are to continue improving track forecasts, and do a better job at forecasting intensity--which has only improved 17% in the past 15 years. The National Science Board, in a report issued September 29, 2006, called for an increase of $300 million per year in hurricane research funding. The National Hurricane Research Initiative Act, was introduced in the Senate in September to fully fund the National Science Board's recommendations. I presented a long report on these initiatives in a blog in October.

Given the huge return on our investment the NOAA P-3s have already paid, and the critical need to improve our understanding of hurricanes, it is imperative that we not let NOAA's hurricane research aircraft sit idle. It's like signing Roger Clemens to get you to the World Series, then deciding to use him just to pitch batting practice. I urge you to write your Representatives to approve more funding for hurricane research, and ask your Senators to support S. 4005, the National Hurricane Research Initiative Act of 2006. The act is co-sponsored by all four of Louisiana and Florida's senators. When the bill comes before committee or the full Senate, I will be sure to post a follow-up blog urging you to write your Senators again.

http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=622&tstamp=200702

[soothsayer]

1. ruh roh.

[hunter]

2. If you close your eyes you are invisible!

Everybody knows that.

Just don't look at the hurricane and everything will be okay.

:silly:

[nickyt]

3. Appalling. Unconscionable. Let's see, NY and DC stripped of "Homeland Security" funds, now

the entire Gulf and East Coasts will be 43% LESS safe if these planes are grounded.
WTF.

[nickyt]

4. "I'm on a mission from God" - I'm sending this to every single elected official and news outlet

I can find in VA, NC, SC, GA, FL, AL, MS, LA and TX.
Bangin' some pots and pans here (Ms. Ivins told me to), phantom! thanks for the heads up -

[crickets]

5. K&R

:dem:

[nashville_brook]

6. here's an alarming story from 2005 -- the year of Katrina

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/12862412.htm

Money woes stifle hurricane science

(snip)

A former director and two senior researchers say they've pleaded for 10 years for an increase of at least 50 percent, but NOAA has granted only incremental bumps that barely kept pace with inflation -- or no increases at all.

''Our requests were dead on arrival,'' said former Hurricane Research Division Director Hugh Willoughby, who quit the post in 2002 after seven years of denials. ''Basically, it was a fool's errand.''

(snip)

At the Research Division, it has come to this: Black studies the intricacies of storms that killed thousands of people on a rigged personal computer because the one NOAA gave him was 8 years old and obsolete. Key data from hurricane hunter flights is stored on a 10-year-old computer; there's no money to replace it.

The screen that researchers use to dissect satellite images is a hand-me-down from a lab in Colorado. Devices they rely on to test ocean temperature were Cold War leftovers donated by the Navy.

(snip)

The nine-track tapes, so far unexplored, are filled with data from radars and hurricane hunter planes, documenting how eye-wall changes made hurricanes stronger, how cool water made them weaker, how cloud patterns produced torrential rainfall.

(snip)

By examining dozens of storms, scientists also hope to find patterns that can help them pierce two of the biggest blind spots in hurricane forecasting:

• The sudden strengthening of storms just before landfall, like Hurricane Charley in 2004, Hurricane Iris in 2001 and Hurricane Keith in 2000, all mild-mannered hurricanes that unexpectedly exploded.

• Rainfall prediction, a particularly unsettling mystery because freshwater flooding has become the No. 1 killer during hurricanes. Deadly flooding sideswiped Richmond, Va., during Hurricane Gaston in 2004, South Florida during Hurricane Irene in 1999, and Honduras and Nicaragua during Hurricane Mitch in 1998. During that hurricane alone, more than 9,000 people died.

[nashville_brook]

7. whoa! -- here's a response that cites INTERNAL POLITICAL PRESSURE at NOAA

http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/rd_funding/000600miami_herald_on_hurr.html

"In 40 Hurricane Center forecast verification reports reviewed by The Herald, almost nothing has been mentioned about vulnerable radars, the diversion of hurricane hunter planes, dropwindsonde failures, broken buoys, gaps in upper-air observations. Going public with such problems would have consequences, said former Hurricane Center Director Neil Frank. ''Woe be to me if I phoned a senator,'' said Frank, now a television meteorologist in Houston. 'There was all this internal pressure. I wasn't free to call and say, `We need more money down here.' '' A 2004 agency memo drives the point home: NOAA chief Conrad Lautenbacher told employees not to talk with lawmakers about budget issues without explicit approval, saying the agency must provide ``a unified message.'' Mayfield, a 33-year NOAA employee, said he has been told repeatedly to work within the bureaucracy's budget process. He's chosen his words carefully, at times drawing criticism from some who say he should have been more outspoken. ''I could be fired,'' Mayfield said."

[nashville_brook]

8. 2005 NOAA hurricane "fun page"

i'm thinking that the quiet 2006 hurricane season was the worst thing that could have happened in terms of preparing ourselves for what NOAA is calling the "Active Hurricane Era."

this page offers a REVIEW of the 2005 season. Records set in 2005 include the totals for:
* Named storms: 28; previous record: 21 in 1933
* Hurricanes: 15; previous record: 12 in 1969
* Major hurricanes hitting the U.S.: Four (Dennis, Katrina, Rita and Wilma);
previous record: Three, most recently in 2004
* Hurricanes of Category 5 intensity (greater than 155 mph): Four (Emily, Katrina, Rita and Wilma);
previous record: Two in 1960 and 1961


http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2005/s2540.htm

[Eugene]

9. Bah! Who needs science? People just need to pray harder and sin less.

You gotta have faith. :sarcasm:

[kestrel91316]

10. Why does Jeff Masters hate America? He better start

Supporting The Troops(TM) if he wants to keep his job.

[kestrel91316]

11. You do realize, of course, that the next step will be to

completely eliminate NOAA.

Who needs atmospheric research and factfinding anyway?? All we need to do is read the bible and pray for good weather.

[starroute]

12. No, they'd rather privatize it

If you really want to know what the weather's going to be, you can damn well pay for it, right?

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[emmadoggy]

13. Unbelievable and disgusting.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: