Ambitious project our chase team is undertaking

Hugh's Burner Phone

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2017
3,975
2,681
113
A few weeks ago I made mention in a post that our chase team was working on an idea that we think would dramatically improve tornado warning information. Well this weekend or Monday that plan kicks into action and we would love your support. A member of our team had an idea that he shared with a couple of us and we tweaked it slightly to what I'm presenting now. Our idea is to place cameras on cell towers in places across the state with poor radar coverage with access granted to the NWS and local news agencies. These cameras will serve as remote tower cams allowing them to obtain real time storm information on whether or not a tornado has formed. In places with poor radar coverage a lower end tornado can be n the ground but radar is unable to see the debris signature. So while strong enough to flip a mobile home or bring a tree down on a house, not strong enough to loft debris high enough to get into the radar beam to be seen.

I have drafted a letter that will be sent to our governor, Lt. governor, and a handful of state senators asking them to consider legislation to fund 100 cameras to be placed in those parts of the state with poor radar coverage. Initial cost projections point to this being possible for $75,000 the first year and $45,000 in following years. This does not include the cost of installing the cameras as I had no idea what that would cost. Next week I am asking if you would contact your local senator and representatives to obtain a copy of this letter and to support legislation to make this a reality. Research has shown people are 75% more likely to take shelter if they know a tornado has actually formed. If we can get real-time info to those that issue warnings it could help save lives.
 

Shmuley

Well-known member
Mar 6, 2008
21,842
3,757
113
A few weeks ago I made mention in a post that our chase team was working on an idea that we think would dramatically improve tornado warning information. Well this weekend or Monday that plan kicks into action and we would love your support. A member of our team had an idea that he shared with a couple of us and we tweaked it slightly to what I'm presenting now. Our idea is to place cameras on cell towers in places across the state with poor radar coverage with access granted to the NWS and local news agencies. These cameras will serve as remote tower cams allowing them to obtain real time storm information on whether or not a tornado has formed. In places with poor radar coverage a lower end tornado can be n the ground but radar is unable to see the debris signature. So while strong enough to flip a mobile home or bring a tree down on a house, not strong enough to loft debris high enough to get into the radar beam to be seen.

I have drafted a letter that will be sent to our governor, Lt. governor, and a handful of state senators asking them to consider legislation to fund 100 cameras to be placed in those parts of the state with poor radar coverage. Initial cost projections point to this being possible for $75,000 the first year and $45,000 in following years. This does not include the cost of installing the cameras as I had no idea what that would cost. Next week I am asking if you would contact your local senator and representatives to obtain a copy of this letter and to support legislation to make this a reality. Research has shown people are 75% more likely to take shelter if they know a tornado has actually formed. If we can get real-time info to those that issue warnings it could help save lives.
The vast majority of cell towers are privately owned. You’re going to have to solve the access riddle before you can hope to get state funding for devices. You need to think through these issues, among others, for each potential site you have in mind:

1. Who owns the tower (to find out whether device placement is allowed)?
2. Who owns the property upon which the tower is located (to find out whether access to the tower can be obtained)?
3. Are there restrictions on co-location that preclude placement of cameras (most tower leases have prohibitions on equipment co-location)?
4. Am I prepared to pay a monthly or annual fee for tower access (towers are expensive as hell and there are investor ROI expectations)?

Your idea seems to have merit. But, don’t address anything to the legislative leadership (ESPECIALLY on the Senate side) unless you have answers to those questions. And be prepared for other questions as well.

I think a better idea would be to ask carriers about sponsoring the cameras as a public safety initiative. Your Verizons, C-Spires and AT&Ts hang $hi+ on towers all over the place. They already have access. Make contact and see if they would be willing to use this idea as a PR move.
 

ababyatemydingo

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2008
2,618
1,067
113
my company sells and installs video surveillance all over the southeast US. your cost estimations seem awfully low, for the quality of camera that will be required to accomplish your goal, and the accompanying network and power equipment to send that video over the internet, and the labor to install 100 cameras (tower climbs will run you between $1000 - $2000 each, depending on height). definitely a noble effort, and I applaud you and your team. This won't help much for night storms, but will definitely help for daytime storms (that aren't rain-wrapped)
 

Hugh's Burner Phone

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2017
3,975
2,681
113
We have thought about trying to see if the cell companies would sponsor the service costs. If any of you know any execs at Cspire feel free to put a bug in their ear and forward their contact info. The costs were based solely on the camera and a service subscription fee. We are already partnered with a web hosting company to help handle the internet distribution access. The main cost I did not know was cost to climb the tower to install and that has now been answered. The camera that a guy on our team found looks to do what we need as far as video clarity and Wi-Fi wise. He's an IT and tech guy so I defer to him on that stuff. And I think he said it does have at least some type of night vision capability for nocturnal storms, but most tornadoes at night are seen by lightning and power flashes.
 

ababyatemydingo

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2008
2,618
1,067
113
We have thought about trying to see if the cell companies would sponsor the service costs. If any of you know any execs at Cspire feel free to put a bug in their ear and forward their contact info. The costs were based solely on the camera and a service subscription fee. We are already partnered with a web hosting company to help handle the internet distribution access. The main cost I did not know was cost to climb the tower to install and that has now been answered. The camera that a guy on our team found looks to do what we need as far as video clarity and Wi-Fi wise. He's an IT and tech guy so I defer to him on that stuff. And I think he said it does have at least some type of night vision capability for nocturnal storms, but most tornadoes at night are seen by lightning and power flashes.
yeah, tower climbs are pricey. it's the insurance that they have to carry that drives up the price, not to mention the obvious. you could always find someone nutty enough to do it that just likes climbing stuff. But if he fell doing it for you, his estate could sue you into bolivian. best to leave it to the pros on the climbs. make sure you don't get cheap Chinese crap for cameras. you don't want to pay every other month for someone to climb that tower and replace or troubleshoot a camera that you skimped on up front. you'll need cable tray wire that has super shielding and UV jacketing for the Cat6 wire. It's not cheap, either. you'll need a camera that has a self cleaning dome or lens (think literally windshield wiper). again, you can't be climbing that tower every other month to clean dried rain mist and dust off the lens or dome. This needs to be a "set and forget" camera. Not to mention the power source for the camera, and battery backup (with solar fail-over). Lot to consider, other than sticking a camera 150 - 300 feet up a pole and forgetting about it
 

FormerBully

Well-known member
Sep 2, 2022
726
1,165
93
Why don’t we build another radar tower? Wouldn’t that be the better idea? Is cost just too high? You figured with the number of storms we get here funding would be available.
 

Hugh's Burner Phone

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2017
3,975
2,681
113
Why don’t we build another radar tower? Wouldn’t that be the better idea? Is cost just too high? You figured with the number of storms we get here funding would be available.
That would be ideal, but a new radar has around a $2,000,000 price tag and then there is the annual operating and maintenance costs. While this idea we have come up with is far from ideal, it would cost a fraction of what a new radar system costs and would provide a huge step forward in warning information. While I know it is a long shot, I did send the letter in today. The worst that can happen is that they ignore me or tell me to go 17 myself. I've been on the receiving end of both those responses several in my past so it would hardly be new ground broken. Best case scenario, one of them likes the idea and responds back it has a chance to make some traction either this year or next year.
 

maroonmadman

Active member
Nov 7, 2010
2,360
413
83
That would be ideal, but a new radar has around a $2,000,000 price tag and then there is the annual operating and maintenance costs. While this idea we have come up with is far from ideal, it would cost a fraction of what a new radar system costs and would provide a huge step forward in warning information. While I know it is a long shot, I did send the letter in today. The worst that can happen is that they ignore me or tell me to go 17 myself. I've been on the receiving end of both those responses several in my past so it would hardly be new ground broken. Best case scenario, one of them likes the idea and responds back it has a chance to make some traction either this year or next year.
If you could get the providers to go along with this plan how much extra would it cost to put night vision/IR cameras up that could "see" at night? Would the providers support the extra cost? Just a random thought.
 

Hugh's Burner Phone

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2017
3,975
2,681
113
If you could get the providers to go along with this plan how much extra would it cost to put night vision/IR cameras up that could "see" at night? Would the providers support the extra cost? Just a random thought.
The camera that the person on our team that came up with the idea does have some degree of night capability. I am not sure how much. I'm a far cry from a tech guy so when you get in to stuff like that it goes over my head fairly quickly. But he did say it had that and had the ability to be panned left and right as well as zoom. I know thermal imaging on a drone starts around $5,000 and true night vision is expensive, too. Most tornadoes seen at night are observed when illuminated by lightning so while true night vision would be nice, it would not be a deal breaker.
 

Cantdoitsal

Well-known member
Sep 26, 2022
3,359
2,705
113
I've shown balls of brass on occassion in my life but you guys have balls of steele. Thanks to all who do this stuff and your efforts to save lives.
 

Hugh's Burner Phone

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2017
3,975
2,681
113
I've shown balls of brass on occassion in my life but you guys have balls of steele. Thanks to all who do this stuff and your efforts to save lives.
Thank you. Much appreciated. And thanks to all of you who support us by either being a Patreon member, YouTube subscriber, donated to the medical supply drive, or just saying thanks for what you do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cantdoitsal

Hugh's Burner Phone

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2017
3,975
2,681
113
Do you mind if I share this project with some other weather folks?
Please do. Tell them they can contact their state senators and reps to get a copy of the letter from one of the senators I sent it to. It was sent to Tate Reeves, Delbert Hosemann, Hob Bryan, Lydia Chassenoil, Barbara Blackmon, and Chris McDaniel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cantdoitsal

Shmuley

Well-known member
Mar 6, 2008
21,842
3,757
113
"It was sent to Tate Reeves, Delbert Hosemann, Hob Bryan, Lydia Chassenoil, Barbara Blackmon, and Chris McDaniel."

Last 4 legislative sessions for the good Senator McDaniel from the Free State of Jones:

2023 - authored and introduced 40 bills. 40 died in committee or on calendar.
2022 - authored and introduced 23 bills. 23 died in committee or on calendar.
2021 - authored and introduced 10 bills. 10 died in committee or on calendar.
2020 - authorized and introduced 22 bills. 21 died in committee or on calendar. He was able to get a Senate Concurrent Resolution adopted that declared the second week of April 2020 to be "Mississippi Mosquito and West Nile Awareness Week."
 

Hugh's Burner Phone

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2017
3,975
2,681
113
"It was sent to Tate Reeves, Delbert Hosemann, Hob Bryan, Lydia Chassenoil, Barbara Blackmon, and Chris McDaniel."

Last 4 legislative sessions for the good Senator McDaniel from the Free State of Jones:

2023 - authored and introduced 40 bills. 40 died in committee or on calendar.
2022 - authored and introduced 23 bills. 23 died in committee or on calendar.
2021 - authored and introduced 10 bills. 10 died in committee or on calendar.
2020 - authorized and introduced 22 bills. 21 died in committee or on calendar. He was able to get a Senate Concurrent Resolution adopted that declared the second week of April 2020 to be "Mississippi Mosquito and West Nile Awareness Week."
As they say in baseball...he's due.

There was not a lot of rhyme or reason on who I picked from the senators. I tried to pick some whose districts were affected and some were just off names I had heard of before. The state website that lists all of the senators doesn't list their areas of representation until you click on their name and I got tired of clicking and seeing where they were from and finally just said 17 it and went with what I had,
 

IBleedMaroonDawg

Well-known member
Nov 12, 2007
21,744
5,560
113
Please do. Tell them they can contact their state senators and reps to get a copy of the letter from one of the senators I sent it to. It was sent to Tate Reeves, Delbert Hosemann, Hob Bryan, Lydia Chassenoil, Barbara Blackmon, and Chris McDaniel.
Do you have any other web page to share with them besides this thread? They have discussed the problem that exists in other locations. I think it should get enough funding to have better weather observation everywhere. Imagine a network of cameras the NWS and Storm Chasers could use to have another way to observe all kinds of weather.
 

horshack.sixpack

Well-known member
Oct 30, 2012
8,478
4,304
113
A few weeks ago I made mention in a post that our chase team was working on an idea that we think would dramatically improve tornado warning information. Well this weekend or Monday that plan kicks into action and we would love your support. A member of our team had an idea that he shared with a couple of us and we tweaked it slightly to what I'm presenting now. Our idea is to place cameras on cell towers in places across the state with poor radar coverage with access granted to the NWS and local news agencies. These cameras will serve as remote tower cams allowing them to obtain real time storm information on whether or not a tornado has formed. In places with poor radar coverage a lower end tornado can be n the ground but radar is unable to see the debris signature. So while strong enough to flip a mobile home or bring a tree down on a house, not strong enough to loft debris high enough to get into the radar beam to be seen.

I have drafted a letter that will be sent to our governor, Lt. governor, and a handful of state senators asking them to consider legislation to fund 100 cameras to be placed in those parts of the state with poor radar coverage. Initial cost projections point to this being possible for $75,000 the first year and $45,000 in following years. This does not include the cost of installing the cameras as I had no idea what that would cost. Next week I am asking if you would contact your local senator and representatives to obtain a copy of this letter and to support legislation to make this a reality. Research has shown people are 75% more likely to take shelter if they know a tornado has actually formed. If we can get real-time info to those that issue warnings it could help save lives.
Who is going to watch the cameras for tornados? It seems that properly identifying them with any clarity might be an issue. I'm not sure if there is any liability that could be attributed to it. Also, getting power will be an issue that has be solved and will likely have an on going cost. Around 2000, it cost $1000/day to get someone to climb a tower and hang something, once you got permission to do so. Idea is solid. It will be challenging to implement and maintain.
 

Hugh's Burner Phone

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2017
3,975
2,681
113
Right now we do not. I will post a transcript of the letter here and if anybody wants a personal copy they can DM me their email address and I will send it to them.
 

Hugh's Burner Phone

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2017
3,975
2,681
113
Who is going to watch the cameras for tornados? It seems that properly identifying them with any clarity might be an issue. I'm not sure if there is any liability that could be attributed to it. Also, getting power will be an issue that has be solved and will likely have an on going cost. Around 2000, it cost $1000/day to get someone to climb a tower and hang something, once you got permission to do so. Idea is solid. It will be challenging to implement and maintain.
The idea is to have the cameras linked to a website that the NWS and local news agencies will have access to. When a suspicious storm is approaching a certain camera, they can go to that website and pull up the feed. The cameras we are looking at are solar powered so there is no need for an external power source. The biggest obstacle is going to be gaining tower access, but my hope is that if we can get enough political push behind it that access will be granted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: horshack.sixpack

Hugh's Burner Phone

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2017
3,975
2,681
113
May 1, 2023

Dear Governor Tate Reeves, Lt. Governor Delbert Hosemann, Honorable Senators Lydia Chassaniol, Barbara Blackmon, Hob Ryan, and Chris McDaniel,

My name is Stan Dorroh and I am a storm chaser with North Mississippi Storm Chasers and Spotters (NMSCAS). I would like to ask for a few moments of your time to read and consider this letter. I know the tornadoes that devastated part of Mississippi on the night of March 24 are still etched into your memories and mine. The tragic scenes with loss of life and injuries that occurred in Rolling Fork, Silver City, Winona, Amory, and other locations will never be forgotten. This is especially true for me as I was at Silver City shortly after the tornado passed and saw firsthand the devastation it caused to that small community. I was assisting in the unfortunate futile efforts to save the life of two year old Aubree Green. The scenes of that night will haunt me forever.

That is why I am writing to you in hopes of seeking legislation to implement an idea from another one of our members (Ashton Lemley) and fine-tuned by Ashton, team VP, James Bishop, and myself. It is an idea we believe could provide invaluable lifesaving information at the fingertips of the National Weather Service and local news agencies to better upgrade warning information. We have all watched tower cams on local news channels during times of severe weather as they watch the sky from an elevated vantage point trying to see if a tornado is, or has already, developed. What we propose is to install cameras like those on cell phone towers across the state with access being granted to the National Weather Service offices and local news agencies. This would allow those in charge of creating and disseminating warning information to have the means to see if a tornado is on the ground well before it threatens a population center giving people time to take shelter.

As storm chasers for NMSCAS, we do our best to position ourselves to be able to provide this information to the relevant entities, but, as you are all too aware, the heavily forested terrain of MS often times makes that difficult or impossible to do. We still do our best even when that involves putting ourselves in positions to try to gain a view that is not always the safest option because of our desire to try to be able to provide that bit of life saving information. You also may have seen while watching weather reports the meteorologists using an option on radar that tracks debris being lofted to help in determining whether or not a tornado has touched down. While that is a great benefit of the new dual-pol radar capabilities, it also has its limitations. The radar beam is set at an angle with the lowest angle usually being 0.5o in elevation. (Then, every pass it raises in elevation slightly to get as complete a view of the storm as possible.) However, even at that low of a starting angle when combined with the curvature of the earth, the radar beam quickly gains altitude so that by the time you are approximately 70 miles from the radar site, the beam is over 6,000 ft off the ground. The attached image at the bottom of this letter shows the parts of the state where the beam is at a minimum that height off the ground. In some places it is closer to 10,000 ft. EF-0 and EF-1 tornadoes usually will not loft debris above this 6,000 ft. threshold. That means a tornado could be on the ground causing damage, and radar is unable to confirm its existence. While not the devastating tornadoes like we saw on the night of March 24, those are still more than capable of knocking over trees onto houses and flipping mobile homes causing serious injuries or fatalities. Research has shown people are over 75% more likely to take shelter when they know a tornado is on the ground; therefore, being able to provide concrete evidence that a touchdown has occurred will save lives.

For these reasons I am requesting that legislation be drafted and submitted for consideration to implement placing these cameras on cellphone towers throughout the state, starting in the areas with the least reliable radar coverage outside the red circles in the attached image. With the cameras located on the towers, they would always have a reliable signal to broadcast their images. These cameras could be a monumental step forward in helping to make the citizens of this state as safe as possible during times of severe weather. While I do not have concrete numbers at the time of writing, a pilot program of 100 cameras located in the worst served areas of the state would cost approximately $75,000.00 for the first year broken down as follows below with an annual recurring cost of $50,000.00. This price does not include costs to install the cameras as I don’t have any way of knowing what that would be, but even with that cost added in, I believe this to be an extremely economical and cost effective way to help keep people safe. I have spoken to a member of our National Weather Service and this individual saw the benefit such a camera system would provide.

Governor, Lt. Governor, Senators – I am not a lobbyist. I don’t even know how the process works. But I am a citizen of this great state with a passion for severe weather and a desire to try to keep my fellow citizens as safe as possible during severe weather events. What I saw that night in Silver City absolutely broke my heart. It was things I never hope I see again. But as hard as it was for me while I was there, I know my experiences don’t even begin to come up to the level of those that were affected. Those that losft all their belongings and in the worst of cases…loved ones from their family, I know are still suffering far more than I ever will and will continue to suffer for many months and years to come. That is why I am writing to you today in hopes that you will agree that this idea has merit, and you will use the power and influence to help take this from an idea to a reality not only from a legislation standpoint, but also convincing the cell phone companies to allow their towers to be used for such an endeavor, although I can’t imagine they would refuse at having their towers also used to help save lives. I sincerely thank you for your time and consideration of this proposal.

NWS Radar Beam Heights.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: IBleedMaroonDawg