Crop Duster Crash near Bourke NSW 10/2/2024

[turboplanner]

On 13/02/2024 at 1:43 PM, turboplanner said:

Yes, The story applied ”catastrophic” to the whole of Victoria, but green grass doesn’t burn. Later there was reference to the North West which might well be dry.

 

As it turned out the BOM has some serious explaining to do. Not only no catastrophe in the North West but a hailstorm and high winds knocked down trees and knocked power out to a lot of Melbourne. Power will be out until tomorrow so frig food destroyed. This one really backfired on BOM.

[facthunter]

BS Turbs. . The weather was as predicted  Fires in the Grampians and east of them and SW of Ballarat. Pomonal hardly recognisable. High winds knocked down large transmission Towers. You can NEVER predict accurately where fires WILL start. You can only define areas where they are most likely to have the conditions for fires to start. Plenty of trees down cutting powerlines. One 600Metres from Me by a front that was predicted and totally on time. Power restored at 11 am this morning. Some difficult places will take a lot longer, understandably and I thank the people who work in dangerous conditions to get the system back on line again.  Nev

[spenaroo]

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

As it turned out the BOM has some serious explaining to do. Not only no catastrophe in the North West but a hailstorm and high winds knocked down trees and knocked power out to a lot of Melbourne. Power will be out until tomorrow so frig food destroyed. This one really backfired on BOM.

[Student Pilot]

6 hours ago, turboplanner said:

As it turned out the BOM has some serious explaining to do. Not only no catastrophe in the North West but a hailstorm and high winds knocked down trees and knocked power out to a lot of Melbourne. Power will be out until tomorrow so frig food destroyed. This one really backfired on BOM.

Time for the bottom feeders to get involved then 😜 They will be able to "seek compensation" for wrongful predictions. Either the storms didn't arrive or they were early/late......It's the same as farmers blaming BOM for declaring an El Nino, weather varies, farmers know that.  

 

 

[Area-51]

Its important to use the correct terminology; "weather" is no longer valid word; its now all referred to as "global warming" 🐖

[Student Pilot]

What

2 hours ago, Area-51 said:

Its important to use the correct terminology; "weather" is no longer valid word; its now all referred to as "global warming" 🐖

What you refer to is a point for much disgruntlement, it's entirely the BOMs and the Labour government's fault for storms, too much rain, not enough rain, too hot, too cold along with there should be more coal fired power stations, no wind turbines, rainbow flags, trans people, cat litter trays in school toilets and how Abbot should still be prime minister. Gives much joy, endless conversation to the enlightened elite. 🤪 

Edited February 14 by Student Pilot

[facthunter]

Any person who knows even a little would know the difference between Climate and Weather. People who suggest it's STILL not settled are deliberately confusing the issue for their own self interests.$$$$$'s   Nev

[turboplanner]

On 11/02/2024 at 9:40 PM, skippydiesel said:

May not be "earth shattering" however the increasing use of hysterical language, in our media and by our authorities, is a trend that should be called out. 

 

We no longer have  "Extreme Fire Danger" weather condition, an accurate description,  it has escalated to "Catastrophic Fire Danger" which isn't even good English. Such misuses of emotive language, does no one any good , and does not help to appropriately motivate the population.

 

It almost seem that there is some sort of competition to see who can come up with the most alarming, disproportionate language, for any given situation.

 

 

 

I agree, it's getting way out of hand to the point where we now need a Catastrophic 1, Catastrophice 2, Catastrophic 3 system based on what happened this week:

 

Feb 12                                     “Victoria braces for worst fire conditions since Black Summer Bushfires.”                               

                                                “catastrophic fire danger”

 

Feb 12             16:33               CFA map showing just 2.2% of Victoria zoned Catastrophic.

 

Feb 13             5 am                “Victorians are warned of a catastrophic summer”:

                                                 Rick Nugent at VicEmergency headquarters.

 

Feb 13             11:47               “Victoria facing fire danger”

                                                “Catastrophic”

                                 

Feb 13             14 :00              (2 hours later)                                    

Hailstorm, major temperature drop, trees uprooted, power lines down.  “hundreds of thousands without power”.

 

The CFA Warning Zones for Victoria are:

Moderate:        Plan and Prepare

High:                Be ready to Act

Extreme:          Take action now to protect your life and property

Catastrophic:   For your survival leave bushfire risk areas.

 

Of course, for the people of Pomonal out in the Extreme Zone it was catastrophic, with 24 homes lost, but all lives saved.

 

 The “Catastrophic” warning may be intended as the key signal for people to leave regardless, or it may be a key word triggering some elevation of action in the Council EMPs, but I agree that on that day it misled the people of Victoria.

 

How many people know that Catastrophic in the CFA ratings means leave the bushfire areas

Very few apparently or the whole of Victoria would have been exiting to SA or NSW.

Why was the word used when the CFA Catastrophic area was only 2.2% of the State and in one district.?

 

Since 2010 – 2013 in Victoria we’ve had the technology to send a phone message to every resident in Victoria. The government could activate an “Evacuate” order whenever they wanted wherever they wanted instead of the signs on the side of the road indicating “Catastrophic”.

[skippydiesel]

My "whinge" is not about timely, informed/measured, advice, its about emergency services spokespersons over escalation the issue, by using, what I see, as hysterical language.

 

This sort of language desensitises people - ie we get so use to it, we tend to underreact - its The Boy Who Called Wolf syndrome.

 

Yes,the poor sods of Pomonal etal, have suffered a catastrophe, as the result of an Extreme or Dangerous (not a catastrophic) weather event. 

[sfGnome]

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

its about emergency services spokespersons over escalation the issue, by using, what I see, as hysterical language.

Remember the floods last year? What was the main complaint afterwards? “We weren’t given enough warning. Nobody told us it was coming!”  Forecasters can’t win. They must get up every morning thinking “whatever I do today, 50% of the population will think I’m an idiot”.

[facthunter]

Skip is getting hysterical over hysterical language.. There WAS some pretty WILD weather out there in some places more than others as is consistent with storm cells in an extensive cold front. Tinder DRY large areas of grass made dry lightning a real RISK.  HIGH winds snapped off a lot of trees and downed Powerlines and towers..   Nev

[Methusala]

Save us from the Experts! Below are 2 pics of the wood pile constructed within 2m UPWIND of our house. At a time when we were being warned about probable 'CATASTROPHIC' fire conditions to come, we asked the local fire authorities their opinion of the risk. Out they came with a 20 ton fire appliance and 6 men. The grand Poobah, complete with name tag informed us that he saw no possible risk from this pile. Further he said that a car parked in the drive presented far greater hazard than this dry pile of very flammable firewood!!!

Almost unbelievably, the owner decided he'd had enough of living with such hysterical neighbors and sold up! We have almost become believers.

Best regards Don

Ps. Sorry for getting well off topic.

Edited February 16 by Methusala

[skippydiesel]

2 hours ago, sfGnome said:

Remember the floods last year? What was the main complaint afterwards? “We weren’t given enough warning. Nobody told us it was coming!”  Forecasters can’t win. They must get up every morning thinking “whatever I do today, 50% of the population will think I’m an idiot”.

Yes, times are a tad tough for weather the forecaster. Apparently their computer models are unable to adapt to current climate behaviour - they might have to go back to checking out the chickens entrails.

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

Skip is getting hysterical over hysterical language.. There WAS some pretty WILD weather out there in some places more than others as is consistent with storm cells in an extensive cold front. Tinder DRY large areas of grass made dry lightning a real RISK.  HIGH winds snapped off a lot of trees and downed Powerlines and towers..   Nev

You miss my point - I hope deliberatly.

 

I have attended many an emergency - it is never helpful and can be down right unhelpful, if those reporting/instructing, do not use appropriate  & proportionate language, to communicate the actual situation.

 

In recent times (Australia) there seems to have been a competition amongst emergency services and the media to add drama to every situation. I for one am no longer motivated by such hysterics - this may be to my detriment, should the situation be as dire, as the bemedaled first responder and /or media is suggesting.

[facthunter]

Using uniform "standard " terminology might have something to  do  with this and I'm pretty sure that applies. You don't seem to think it deserved the  term "catastrophic". I have opined the situation as I read it Was  enough to justify it but in any case, the factors specified for it may be fitting the NEED to use Catastrophic. so it would be a requirement, not a choice to be used on an individual's whim for a vainglory episode.   Nev

[turboplanner]

32 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Using uniform "standard " terminology might have something to  do  with this and I'm pretty sure that applies. You don't seem to think it deserved the  term "catastrophic". I have opined the situation as I read it Was  enough to justify it but in any case, the factors specified for it may be fitting the NEED to use Catastrophic. so it would be a requirement, not a choice to be used on an individual's whim for a vainglory episode.   Nev

The "Catastrophic" broadcast  from the day before and at 5 AM at Vic Emergency Headquarters with the signing person present was used for the whole State, not just the 2.2% which CFA had zoned. Technically the population of Victoria were told to move out. I'd call that ecessive, when the correct call would have been for that tiny 2.2% area, then "Severe" for a relatively small area which included Pomonal.

 

The last "Catastrophic" for the high temperature was called just two hours before the hailstorm hit Melbourne.

I'd been watching the Eastern Grid power mis to see how the renewables were standing up and the temperatures just reached the 37 predicted then started cooling ahead of the hailstorm.

 

The trend Skippy is talking about has been occurring regularly in the last couple of years with calls to arms by the BOM to get ready for catastrophic/ severe flooding.  In the Maribyrnong and Yarra Valleys and south around the Bayside suburbs and in the Carrum Swamp between Dandenong and Frankston and the Koo Wee Rup Swamp we can get flooding 3 metres high so "Severe" or "Catastrophic" means working out how you get up onto the roof. I always go to the BOM radar and for about the last four times these warnings have come through the radar is showing the rain moving well north for Melbourne towards the north east of the State, pretty much missing Melbourne completely. The issue is not so much whether they get the forecast exactly right as issuing Whole-of-State warnings when only a sector is involved. 

 

A lot of positioning changes have come in:

• We used to measure temperatures "in the shade"; the definition of shade has changed and records have been adjusted to match the new development.
• The Williamstown Tidal gauge has been moved, so our sea levels are different.
• Around the 1990s the CSIRO had hundreds of radio sondes floating around measuring the temperatures of our oceans; today ocean temperatures based on observation from a Satellite are used, so adjustments of old and new data have to be adjusted.
• Flood prone areas were surveyed accurately, but these days levels are calculated by trigonometry by Satellites sighting, and there are variations between the two.

 

 

 

 

 

[F10]

On 12/02/2024 at 8:00 AM, johnm said:

the top cop still have some way to go

 

Definitely, these coats get sent to the panel beaters, not the dry cleaners....

[Blueadventures]

26 minutes ago, F10 said:

Definitely, these coats get sent to the panel beaters, not the dry cleaners....

Must have seen that cowboy film were the Sherrif lived because the bullet hit his tin star;  they could not be Navy as they don't make life jacket that bouyant.

[skippydiesel]

On 16/02/2024 at 4:13 PM, facthunter said:

Using uniform "standard " terminology might have something to  do  with this and I'm pretty sure that applies. You don't seem to think it deserved the  term "catastrophic". I have opined the situation as I read it Was  enough to justify it but in any case, the factors specified for it may be fitting the NEED to use Catastrophic. so it would be a requirement, not a choice to be used on an individual's whim for a vainglory episode.   Nev

The use of the word "Catastrophic" (past tense) to describe a potential (future) weather/fuel conditions is bad grammar/English - what was so wrong with "Extreme"?

 

Exteem is accurate, to the point and every English speaker (or feigner with a dictionary) will understand its meaning.

 

The addition of "Catastrophic" above "Extreme" is an inaccurate, unnecessary escalation of language - in short - Crap!

 

Just like every accident/incident scene is now a "Crime Scene"  - more Crap!

 

This sort of misuse of language, is  designed to enhance the status of the organisation, has zip to do with accurate information/communication.

 

 

 

[facthunter]

It is "beyond" extreme. I can't work out why this works  you up so much. it's a level of warning relating to existing conditions. Not a forecast. and probably applies Nationally.  That's how these things work.. Nev

[alf jessup]

On 16/2/2024 at 11:12 AM, sfGnome said:

Remember the floods last year? What was the main complaint afterwards? “We weren’t given enough warning. Nobody told us it was coming!”  Forecasters can’t win. They must get up every morning thinking “whatever I do today, 50% of the population will think I’m an idiot”.

And the other 50% will know they are idiots.

[Area-51]

Please give the forecaster a break; they are dealing with wind. Its not easy, it blows all over the place. Herding cats would be easier!

[skippydiesel]

14 hours ago, facthunter said:

It is "beyond" extreme. I can't work out why this works  you up so much. it's a level of warning relating to existing conditions. Not a forecast. and probably applies Nationally.  That's how these things work.. Nev

That's the point - there is no level beyond "Extreme" other than the bad english, imposed by some ridiculous committee, wishing to big note themselves.

 

"Not a forecast". A warning, by its very nature is a forecast/prediction.

 

"That's how these things work.." You jest - it doesn't work, or if it does, not well. Warnings, to be effective, need to be clear & precise (as simple as can be articulated, to communicate the message)- ie  not needing to be deciphered. 

 

Catastrophic/Catastrophe can be past or present tense, never future (unless qualified as in "impending catastrophe") - it describes an outcome.

 

It very like the Crime Scene description - there is no crime, until it has been determined that  # a crime has been committed, # in progress or # conspired to. Until otherwise known, it can only be an Incident Scene. I agree that certain incidents, by their nature, are very likely to involve a crime having been committed, it would be fair to describe them, from the outset, as a Crime Scene .

[Blueadventures]

30 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

That's the point - there is no level beyond "Extreme" other than the bad english, imposed by some ridiculous committee, wishing to big note themselves.

 

"Not a forecast". A warning, by its very nature is a forecast/prediction.

 

"That's how these things work.." You jest - it doesn't work, or if it does, not well. Warnings, to be effective, need to be clear & precise (as simple as can be articulated, to communicate the message)- ie  not needing to be deciphered. 

 

Catastrophic/Catastrophe can be past or present tense, never future (unless qualified as in "impending catastrophe") - it describes an outcome.

 

It very like the Crime Scene description - there is no crime, until it has been determined that  # a crime has been committed, # in progress or # conspired to. Until otherwise known, it can only be an Incident Scene. I agree that certain incidents, by their nature, are very likely to involve a crime having been committed, it would be fair to describe them, from the outset, as a Crime Scene .

They will be styling the words for the audience. There will be at least three types out there; those who won’t take much notice (been there before and ok), those who hit the full panic button and those who adhere to the advice and prepare, leave etc. And then after the fact the critics start.  All part of living theses days.

[skippydiesel]

20 minutes ago, Blueadventures said:

They will be styling the words for the audience. There will be at least three types out there; those who won’t take much notice (been there before and ok), those who hit the full panic button and those who adhere to the advice and prepare, leave etc. And then after the fact the critics start.  All part of living theses days.

You are kind - I am way more cynical - not for us/the great unwashed ("the audience") but for bureaucratic self aggrandisement.

 

In this context ,terminology is much like marketing, which so often descends into" jingoism". The difference between marketing & emergency warnings is - if you fail to purchase a product, only the bottom lie suffers, if you fail to appropriately respond to a warning, you & yours may suffer greatly.

[onetrack]

The BOM can't win. If they say "Possible Severe Thunderstorm likely", and it peters out, they're blamed for crying Wolf. If they forecast "Possible Severe Thunderstorm likely" and a massive storm builds up in extra-quick time and tears through an area of the country, the people affected by the damage say they weren't given adequate or effective warning - while the areas that missed out, say the BOM was crying Wolf again.

 

Storms build up quickly and massive destructive fires can develop within a couple of hours, and become extreme by generating their own cyclonic winds. The BOM simply have to cover their a***, and allow for the worst that can develop.