A Road Map to Enhanced Simulation Capabilities for the National Weather Service: A 5-Year Strategic Vision Warning Decision Training Branch July 2010.

A Road Map to Enhanced Simulation Capabilities for

the National Weather Service:

A 5-Year Strategic Vision

Warning Decision Training Branch

July 2010

Click to edit Master title styleOverview

• Current State of WFO Simulations• Discussion of Needs• Advanced Simulations and Exercises

that Address Needs• Leveraging AWIPS-2

Click to edit Master title styleWES Development &

Terminology

CurrentWES

(AWIPS1)

WES2AWIPS2 Baseline

WES2 Bridge

2010- AWIPS1 FY 20142010-2014

Current WFO Simulation Capabilities

WES WES

Internet AWIPS

• Two WES configurations (WFO distribution: ~50% each)

• Easier to transfer cases

• Easier to manage & update

• NWS Instruction 20-101: 4 simulations/year• Few WFOs: additional machines for teamwork

simulations in warning scenarios• Case Review (e.g., damage surveys and local

research)• Local & National simulations (Science and

Technology Concepts)

Current WFO Simulation Capabilities

• Limited AWIPS Functionality• Level of WES knowledge among SOOs and ITOs not ideal

• Current capabilities fully exploited? • WESSL: WES Scripting Language: audio, video, reports,

graphics, training material

AWIPS-2 & AWIPS-2 Extended

• WES 2 to be “baselined” along with other projects– NAWIPS (National Centers)– CHPS (RFCs)– Thin Client (software)

• Initial WES 2 operating capability FY 2012• Final WES 2 operating capability FY 2014• OSIP Project ongoing

Needs: Root Cause Analysis

Factors contributing to 127 missed tornadoes (2004-2005)

20%

16%64%

Science

Technology

HumanFactors

• Human Factors Causes— Communication/Teamwork

with EM/Spotters/Forecasters— Incorrect Use of Tools — Distractions/Loss of SA— Staffing, Workload, Fatigue,

Inexperience

(2004-2009)

Human Factors (84%)

Science & Technology (16%)

Needs: Service Assessments

Finding: The lack of real-time feedback … contributed to … underestimating the magnitude of flash flooding.

Finding: Despite outreach efforts and table-top exercises where communications with NWS was stressed, EMs generally were unaware of the NWS need for real-time information in a flood event.

Finding: Forecasters had little time to solicit feedback. Calls to 911 centers were unproductive. Direct contact with EMs … would be better.

Recommendation: “NWSFO EWX should work with EM officials to seek alternative and more efficient methods to confirm receipt of warnings”.

Recommendation: “NWS should … explore alternative methods of communicating … to EM officials”.

Finding: Very little real-time information … was relayed to the NWS by local officials.

Recommendation: “The NWS should continue to work aggressively with emergency managers and others in law enforcement … for timely receipt of severe weather information.”

“Recommendation: WCMs should work with local emergency management personnel to develop new or enhanced communication systems”.

Finding: “Some media partners … prefer more definitive tornado warnings and SVSs”.

Finding: “There was no coordination between WFO Nashville and WFO Louisville on the … tornado warning”.

Recommendation: “NWS should require regions to develop severe weather coordination procedures between neighboring offices”.

Recommendation: “NWS should communicate with EMs and other key decision makers to highlight unusual or fast-changing situations involving extreme weather events”.

Recommendation: “When a severe weather event is moving from one CWA to another, the appropriate WFOs should contact each other to ensure a full and complete exchange of relevant information”.

Three Recurring Issues For The Past 20+ Years:

Distributed and CollaborativeDecision-Making

Communication

Coordination (Teamwork)

Three Recurring Issues For The Past 20+ Years:

Distributed and CollaborativeDecision-Making

Communication

Coordination (Teamwork)

Integrated Warning Team Scenarios

Successful Warnings: Public Safety

Participants assigned IWT role they don’t normally have

• Level playing ground; all players have some discomfort

• Walk in someone else’s shoes: helps build empathy and understanding for the IWT partner needs → better communication & collaboration

Scenario and Debrief Guided by Experts•Challenging event with as much realism as possible

•Debrief exercise requires players to think about changes they could make in their own role that may cause positive outcomes for other team members.

MediaNWSEM

Integrated Warning Team Scenarios: Motivation

• Research: Cross training helps all members of the team

― Shared mental models

― Could lead to Improved Shared Situation Awareness

Integrated Warning Team Scenarios: Increasing Team

SATell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn. -- Benjamin Franklin

• Every NWS forecaster: 2 to 4 simulations per year.

• EMs: Regular Exercises (small and large scale)

• Few Integrated warningTeam exercises.

Integrated Warning Team Scenarios: Examples

• Full IWT scenario• Natl Severe Weather

Workshops• Natl Hurricane Conference• 3 rooms: synchronized

simulations w/ WES, FasTrac, OK-FIRST/NC-FIRST “Lite“

• NWSChat, SA display, TV, Vote

• One IWT component, “fake” others• Natl Hydrologic Warning

Council• Assoc. of State Floodplain

Managers Conference

Distributed and Collaborative Simulations

Focused on Human Factors and Decision-Support

Other Gov’t Decision Makers

WFO LZK

WFO SGFWFO LSX

WFO PAH

Paducah EOC

NWSTDFacilitator(s)

• Collaborative simulations and interagency exercises: partnerships, teamwork and decision support

• Intraoffice and interoffice simulations• Focus on teamwork and other social and human factors issues

Wash. Co. EOC

NCEP & RFCs

Click to edit Master title styleProposed Simulation Levels

(J. Zeitler/EWX and K. Van Speybroeck/SMG)

• Level 0: Training, Professional Development, EOC Visits, NIMS/ICS

• Level 1: Developmental Simulation– Verification of plans, procedures, equipment – possibly

segmented– Can serve as pre-training for Level 2

• Level 2: Internal Simulation (local participation)– 1-2 Forecasters training, 1-4 hours duration– Local Simulation Supervisor– Not focused on “training/learning” but working out the

kinds before real-time ops

• Level 3: Train with local decision makers– Use available (local) partners, 1-2 forecasters– Local simulation supervisor or from neighboring forecast

office– 4-8 hour duration– Opportunity to interact with decision-maker

Click to edit Master title styleProposed Simulation Levels

(J. Zeitler/EWX and K. Van Speybroeck/SMG)

• Level 4: Full WFO Team/Partners– WFO shift team with partners– Play the scenario through to completion– Use “real” team members in their roles

• Level 5: FEMA Table top style (WFO Team/multiple agencies/ROC-SRH)– Full Team (customers, WFO team, SRH ROC, EOC, kitchen sink)– Could be multi-day (FEMA Tabletop with WFO spinning their

training into FEMA big picture)– Use all available bodies and any additional that can be loaned– Long fuse planning required– Major time/resource requirements

Examples: Precursor Training

• Residence• Distance

• Synchronous• Asynchronous

• Human Factors Concepts• Teamwork• Communication• Leadership

• NWSTC• COMET/Virtual

Classroom• FDTB• WDTB• VISIT• Others

Z&VS: Level 0

Examples: Intraoffice Simulations

WFO SGF• Sectorization• Teamwork / Workload

Redistribution

Both localized to SGF

WFO SGF

Localized to SGF Localized to LSX

• Service hand-off/coordination

• Forecast collaboration

All simulations designed to fulfill specific learning or performance objectives to apply human factors

concepts in real-world contexts.

Z&VS: Level 1-2

Examples: Interoffice Simulations

WFO TOP • Backup Service Drills• Service hand-off

(multi-CWA events)• Forecast collaboration

WFO EAX

SPC

• Watch By County Collaboration

Z&VS: Level 2+

Examples: Nationally Facilitated Simulations

• Drills on National Policy Changes (e.g., storm based warnings)

• Teamwork and other “soft skills”• “Cross-pollinate” local WFO best practices throughout

the NWS.

WFO LZK

WFO SGFWFO LSX

WFO PAH

WDTB/FDTB/NWSTC

Localization: same or individual WFOsFacilitator: human factors expertise

Z&VS: Level 2+

Click to edit Master title styleExamples: Regionally Facilitated Simulations

• Drills on Regional Policy Changes • Regional collaboration• Large multi-CWA events like hurricanes, ice storms,

widespread floods

NHC

WFO MOBWFO LIX

WFO LCH

SR ROC

SR ROC

Z&VS: Level 2+

Click to edit Master title styleExamples: Interagency

Simulations• Decision Support• Weather Support for EM

Exercises• Partnerships• Polish Communication Skills• Practice Collaboration prior

to Real Events (e.g., FEMA)• Likely to reveal real issues

that need addressing.

WFO PAH

Paducah EOC

Wash Co. EOC

• AWIPS-2 “Thin Client”• Web Page populated by

AWIPS-2 micro-engine during simulation

Z&VS: Level 3-5

Moving Towards Distributed and Collaborative Simulations

• Science and Technology – single workstation (current capability)

• Human Factors • Single workstation (limited human factors capability) • Multiple workstations (required for situational human

factors training)

WES 2Bridge(new)

WES 2Bridge Lite(existing +monitors)

• Intra-WFO teamwork & collaboration in warning situations(FY11)

WES 2Bridge

WES 2 WES 2centrally managed, every WFO, NC and RFC; (new machines)

(FY12)

SA Display

• Team SA• more immersive

(FY13)

WES 2Bridge Lite

• Collaborative andcentrally facilitatedsimulations

Internet

*note: improvements are cumulative each year

Goal: Fully Distributive & Collaborative

End-State (FY 14-15)

• Collaborative simulations– Human Factors focus– Neighboring WFOs (ISC and backup)– Training Community* instructors– NWS: WFOs, RFCs, NCEP, CWSUs– NWS and I-Mets– NWS and warning partners (EM/media)– NWS and other partners

Local WES

• Local Needs– Case development– Data review– Research– Science Training– Technology Training– Some Human Factors

DecisionSupportServicesSA Display

Internet

Central WES Central WES

Thin Clients

Audio/Video(e.g. skype)

Social Networks

*Training Community = COMET, FDTB, NWSTC, VISIT, WDTB, etc.

Human Resources Impacts

• Training community instructors to develop and facilitate centrally delivered simulations– Requires expertise in human factors and social science– Branches, Regions, SOOs, SMEs

• Training staff to assist SOOs in case creation• Workshops: Facilitation and Application of Human

Factors to Simulations and Operations —SOOs, WCMs and other focal points

1. Collaboration2. Communication & Collaboration

• Team Building (Internal)

Main Impacts and Culture Shifts

• Team Building (Stakeholders)3. Time Availability

Operational AWIPS-2 Configuration(Simplified)

EDEX Server

PX DX

database

NAS:HDF

LX

CAVE

LDM

CP

WES-2 Bridge Isolated Simulation Model

EDEX Server

WES 2 Bridge

Software

CAVE

WES2Plug-in

ed

ex.a

lerts

no

tificatio

n we

s.time

synch

ron

izatio

n

database

HDF

WES 2 Bridge

WES-2 Distributed Simulations

Messaging mechanism to synchronize one CAVE with WES-2 permits synchronization of multiple CAVEs – even on multiple machines!

TESTED

WESSL-2 (Seeking New Name)

• Exploit Geospatial-enabled database capabilities

• Situation Awareness Display• Automated Guidance & Evaluation Tools

― Comparison with expert solutions― Key Information Overlooked: Pause Simulation― Performance Statistics

• Decision/Weight Ranking Tools

Future Plans:

Conclusion

Distributed and Collaborative Simulations:• Help solve unmet needs from the past 20+

years• Address evolving & reveal emerging needs

for next 5+ years

Initial 5-Year Strategic Plan (FY11 - FY15)

Hardware/Software Development, Deployment, and Upgrades

Staffing for Technical and Instructional Developers

Staff Time & Buy-in for Forecasters and Management

Four Waypoints to Arrive at the Destination: