Rockem_sockem_connection

Didn't like the setup last system and still don't like this setup. I've got my doubts

Flurries in gloco

They call me SNOWSTORM STEVE actually.

Didn't like the setup and not surprised how it is ending up. I'm not exactly ready for snow yet either honestly.

I don't think last year was normal snowfall in GloCo. In fact, I never even shoveled if I recall correctly.

Yeah, I didn't like how it looked yesterday despite it showing the snow. Hate to say it but this new solution on the GFS looks much more likely.

I hardly buy into next week at all at this point. I'm barely able to digest what is going on but it just doesn't seem like a good setup to me. I will stay tuned though.

What is a jebwalk

Thanks for the reply. My brother warned of the road reversal stuff and said it's tough to call right now. I don't get a lot of vacation time and otherwise wouldn't see him until Christmas when he came up here so I don't want to cancel if I don't have to. Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Hopefully this thing goes out to sea. I need some advice but my problems are not even close to what Carolina residents have to deal with, but I am still in need of help. I'm flying into CHS from Philly Wednesday morning to visit my brother, and am supposed to go back Saturday morning. I only go down once a year really and we're supposed to go to an indoor concert in Charleston Friday. Seems like that will get cancelled and I'll get stuck at the airport Saturday. Perhaps I just shouldn't go? I have no experience with this kind of thing at all, and this is only my second time flying.

No idea why winter outlooks are a thing. No one ever has a clue. No one is ever going to call for a monstrous winter nor an extremely bleak winter. You mostly just see average or slightly above/below. Seems like it's just an unnecessary thing to predict honestly.

Thank you for the informed post.

Very interesting, as I did mention this already but was interested to learn some insight from an insider. This is totally a loaded question, but in your mind, why is it that many TV meteorologist sided with data coming from the models with more conservative solutions, as opposed to the more aggressive solutions offered by other models? What kind of comparison goes on with current atmospheric conditions versus what is likely to happen, and why did some models simply not pick up on what actually occurred? An unrealistic question I am sure to ask, as it probably requires a lot of details to explain that we likely cannot even understand - but if you could entertain this just a bit I think it would be awesome. I do find the NWS to be quite good as well - to add to what others have said.

I would just be curious to know what goes into a forecast. We are perceiving that forecasting was more accurate at another period of time, but is that actually true? If it is true, why is it? Is it because weather models have become less reliable, or because more models are available than ever and meteorologist are being forced to pick and choose which they think are right? Aside from weather models, what else goes into a forecast? Different atmospheric conditions are looked at like the AO and NAO, and those are even discussed on here. Are models relied on too much do you think? Possible perhaps, but it would take an insider from the business to really give proper insight to the matter as to what has changed from a forecasting perspective over the years. Someone could go back and look at each model, and determine the conservative models were suffering some sort of misinterpretation of data, and go into detail about what actually occurred instead. It would be up to the scientist/programmers to continue to improve weather models to increase accuracy, but I do believe the weather is just too tricky to ever be nailed down to a T from a computer model - at least at the moment. It would be up to the meteorologist of the world to look at current conditions and rely on experience to determine what is actually going to happen. A tough task indeed, and beyond my scope of knowledge for sure. I would be curious to learn about what the Euro/GFS/etc were seeing differently from what actually panned out, and why many meteorologist did not go with the solutions of the more amped models. Perhaps for no other reason than that it is safer to go with conservative numbers?

Forecasting is most certainly not very good these days. We all know the models are back/forth, back/forth, etc making it tough to predict. I briefly attended school for meteorology, but switched majors. Had I stuck with it, I would like to believe I would of learned a ton about atmospheric science itself, and not just how to read weather models. Perhaps the models sincerely are not very good (news flash: they are not, because not one is consistently correct) and perhaps meteorologist today rely too much on them instead of applying what they know, combined with their years of experience, to analyze current atmospheric conditions to determine what may happen in the future? Hard to say of course. We all understand no one wants to get caught calling for a blizzard only for it to bust (this just happened in recent history again though!), but I seem to recall watching Rob Guarino as a kid, and him always having more thoughts on upcoming storms before anyone else, and really did a good job of teaching viewers at home. Something has changed, but I am unsure of what that is. I know for a fact these guys can't pull up the NAM/EURO/GFS and that is it - right? There is most certainly some sort of art that has been lost along the way here, without a doubt. The forecast from all of these TV meteorologist called for conservative numbers based off of certain models. What did the NAM see that those other models did not, and why did the TV meteorologists not pick up on this? I just know there's more to the gig than staring at models and putting your faith into a solution based off of a few of them. So much science behind weather, but it just isn't being put to use.

I have been lurking for years and know he pops up on here. All I said was "classic guy" so if he dislikes that, it's whatever I suppose. VERY difficult storm to forecast, I have zero problems with any mets who were wrong. I just dislike when the media tries to pretend that they were right, when they were wrong is all. Is that acceptable for me to feel that way? Don't put up a map saying everyone got 2-4" in an area, when literally everyone got over 4" in that particular zone! Tell me totals were higher than expected to due X Y Z but that general gradient for higher/lower snow amounts followed exactly as forecasted. Boom, everyone wins. You're honest but still somewhat correct, we're informed and learn something, everyone goes home happy. Or tell me I got 2-4" just like you predicted, when I am looking in my back yard and everyone else's backyard online and seeing otherwise lol. It's alright, I hardly watch the news anyway. He's got years and years of good experience, no one questions whether or not he knows his stuff, so I hope he doesn't feel like he needs to prove himself by pulling these kind of stunts because no one will get mad about a busted forecast by a few inches.

Glenn put up a map with me in the 2-4" zone of actual totals tooting his own horn, but we got closer to 6" and 30 miles North where my GF lives also got 7" but was in the 2-4/3-5 spot. Classic guy.