RE: Wow! HUGE changes to NOAAport coming!

• To: ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Subject: RE: Wow! HUGE changes to NOAAport coming!
• From: Robert Mullenax <rmullenax@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 21:21:52 -0600

 Thanks a bunch Ray for the info!



-----Original Message-----
> From: Ray Weber
Sent: 4/1/03 8:51 PM

The storm attribute table is sent at the end of the Composite
Reflectivity
product, NCR. There are a few other products such as TVS, MESO, and
Storm
structure products that are not on NOAAPORT however. The majority of the
data in these are contained in the table in the NCR product. 

>  Thanks for the link.  That pretty much confirms what they said at
AMS.
> Now for the real question..Why can't they transmit all the radar
products,
> especially the storm attributes on NOAAport?
> 
> Anyone priced a dedicated T1 to the NWS to get the Radar Multicast?
> It's very expensive.

Not only that, it carries an annual fee in addition to the T1 charge.

Ray Weber
MA Skywarn


> 
>From owner-ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 01 2003 Apr -0500 22:33:43 
Date: 01 Apr 2003 22:33:43 -0500
From: Dan Vietor <devo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-Reply-To: <200304020234.26138.stonie.cooper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Gilbert Sebenste <sebenste@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Subject: Re: Wow! HUGE changes to NOAAport coming!
Received: (from majordo@localhost)
        by unidata.ucar.edu (UCAR/Unidata) id h323XTEu026944
        for ldm-users-out; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 20:33:29 -0700 (MST)
Received: from bbmail1-out.unisys.com (bbmail1-out.unisys.com [192.63.108.40])
        by unidata.ucar.edu (UCAR/Unidata) with ESMTP id h323XS7U026928
        for <ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 20:33:29 -0700 (MST)
Organization: UCAR/Unidata
Keywords: 200304020333.h323XS7U026928
Received: from sdosrv4.ks.unisys.com (sdosrv4.ks.unisys.com [192.62.131.2])
        by bbmail1-out.unisys.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA28606;
        Wed, 2 Apr 2003 03:28:48 GMT
Received: from wxplinux (wxplinux [192.62.131.56])
        by sdosrv4.ks.unisys.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA02941;
        Tue, 1 Apr 2003 22:33:41 -0500 (EST)
   ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: 
        <Pine.LNX.4.44.0304011849170.20003-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
        <200304020234.26138.stonie.cooper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-10) 
Message-Id: <1049254424.21685.83.camel@wxplinux>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: owner-ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 2003-04-01 at 21:34, Stonie R. Cooper wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 April 2003 00:58 am, Gilbert Sebenste wrote:
> >> deletia >>
> > OK. So in 2 1/2 years, they could conceivably crank the speed of NOAAport
> > up to 20 times what it is now.
> 
> But that is not the plan . . . the plan is to go to 7.5Mbit on a single DVBs 
> channel . . . roughly twice the current bandwidth.  The issue is that the 
> technology we have pushed for NOAA to consider has not been adopted by the 
> "ip-via-satellite" community . . . i.e. TPC.  This leaves NOAA to play with 
> current DVBs technology which is based on RS Forward Error Correction (FEC).  
> If this is all greek to anyone reading . . . you can stop reading here and 
> hit the delete key.
>...
> Anyway, just some clarification to dispell any FUD . . . this is a good thing 
> . . . a very good thing.

This is being pushed from two other angles... cost and needs.  

Just think of trying to push the entire Eta and GFS model suite that's
currently available on the FTP server down the current T1 line. 
Forecasts offices are starting to use these files more and more and the
bandwidth is not there on NOAAPORT to add it.  Now, the WFOs have to go
through already taxed network connections to get the data.  But adding
more T1 channels on the SBN was too expensive.  The space segment costs
were only part of the problem.  The current receivers at the WFOs are
overtaxed and may not be able to handle much more bandwidth.  The cost
of replacing 130 NOAAPORT servers and the transmission costs meant that
route had to be scrapped.  

So it was decided to compress the satellite imagery to open up another
channel rather than going to 5 or 6 T1s.  But this only opened up
limited bandwidth and future bandwidth requirements still exceeded what
NOAAPORT currently had.  

It was mentioned at the AMS FOS meetings in Long Beach that future needs
of the WFOs are changing.  NOAAPORT needs to be flexible enough to meet
these changes.  For example, there needs to be the capability to do
streaming video and audio in the future.  There needs to be targeted
data delivery where you can send data to a specific WFO so that no one
else sees it.  Also, there is the issue of IP over satellite.  This is
in addition to opening up the fire hose even more for data.  This cannot
be accomplished using the existing NOAAPORT data stream.  

But if they go to DVB, they can do it.  Stonie brought up good points
about DVB that I had had suspected.  Costs for receive systems will
diminish substantially and it could be that off-the-shelf cards and
software along with a reasonable dish could receive NOAAPORT over DVB. 
We are currently working with this technology and its very promising. 
This could really redefine how weather data is broadcast and could bring
the prices down to the level that any amateur could tap into this
stream.

It will be interesting to see the specs and where the NWS is going with
this new technology.

-- 
________________________________________________________
Daniel Vietor               Mail: devo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unisys Corp                 Title: Engineer/Meteorologist
221 Gale Lane               Phone: 610-925-5206
Kennett Square PA 19348     Fax: 610-925-5215