Loss of key US satellite data could send hurricane forecasting back 'decades'

What actually changed (data vs satellites)

• Commenters clarify the DMSP satellites are largely still functioning; the change is an abrupt halt in processing and distributing their data, not loss of the spacecraft.
• Weather professionals in the thread say this was done with only a few days’ notice, with no user consultation, and that the data stream is mission‑critical for hurricanes and sea ice.
• Others note Congress voted in 2015 to end DMSP and scrap the last built satellite, arguing the program’s demise has been foreseeable for years.

How critical is the DMSP data?

• Specialists emphasize DMSP’s microwave instrument (SSMIS) provides unique, continuous-resolution data on precipitation, surface wind, sea ice, water vapor, and cloud properties, especially useful for hurricanes.
• Successor systems (JPSS, GOES‑R, NOAA‑20/21, ATMS) are described as “better” in some respects but inferior for operational hurricane work at the storm edges; they do not fully replace SSMIS.
• European and US models assimilate each other’s satellite data; losing this stream degrades all global modeling, not just US forecasts.

Motives and politics (highly contested)

• Many commenters see the cutoff as part of a broader attack on climate and weather science by the current administration and its “efficiency” program, fitting into Project‑2025‑style goals.
• Suggested motives include: hiding evidence of climate‑driven intensification; weakening courts’ access to hard data; creating scarcity to push agencies and insurers toward private satellite providers and “grift” opportunities; or hoarding data as a geopolitical lever.
• Others urge Hanlon’s razor, blaming long‑planned program sunset, bureaucracy, or Space Force procedures rather than deliberate malice.

Impacts: forecasting, insurance, and vulnerable regions

• Weather practitioners describe a real “panic and scramble” to find substitutes; preventable loss is judged much worse than a random satellite failure.
• Uncertainty is expected to raise insurance costs, not lower them; “unknown risk” is seen as more expensive.
• Debate arises over how “solved” hurricanes are in places like Florida; several commenters rebut claims that risk is exaggerated, citing rising economic losses and recent catastrophic storms.

Media framing and trust

• Some argue the article is hyperbolic or misleading, especially in tying this directly to a specific office or individual.
• Others counter that cuts to NOAA staffing and climate programs by the current administration are well documented and that the piece fairly situates the data loss within that broader pattern.