OceanStWx

A strong argument for Kevin's favorite type of forecasting. Probabilistic.

Look at Scott's example for ORD. If those stations were airing GFS snowfall maps, they just got halved or worse for tonight's broadcast.

Obviously some of those improvements are "cosmetic" to an extent. I mean the big selling point of the GFS was that you could get it 4 times a day! Well now you can get the Euro that often too. And hourly data. So while the skill isn't necessarily improving rapidly, the utility of the model is.

Or it forces EC to improve faster than they already are. The weather enterprise is undeniably better off when you have more than one elite model.

I could live with the GFS not coming out before lunchtime if it was as good as the Euro.

Yeah, this is going to be the proverbial turning of the cruise ship. It doesn't happen overnight, but at least we're moving in a better direction.

It's 4th behind the Euro, Ukie, and CMC on days 3-5 500 height correlation.

That roll out was fundamentally flawed. Lots of pomp and circumstance, but there wasn't much actual improvement to model performance. The guts were what was transformed, for future performance improvements. That is not at all how the press releases sounded. Never mind the stuff that actually broke with the transition, like the low/mid level cold bias.

Definitely woke up to a pool this morning. Good news is it drains away from the house!

Finally finished up my stable/neutral wind study. If I hold the 925 wind, and surface to 925 depth and lapse rate as independent variables to the surface wind gust as the dependent I get a correlation of 77%. R squared is about 0.60, so 60% of the variance in gusts are explained by those 3 variables. The regression equation wasn't too bad: gust = 31.9 + (0.5 * 925 wind) + (0.9 * lapse rate) - (0.05 * depth) Ran it against an independent data set (2006-2008, study compiled from 2010-2019). I found that my equation was within 2 knots roughly a quarter of the time, 5 knots just under 50% of the time, and within 10 knots 84% of the time. I'm pretty happy with those results, especially for a first guess on the forecast. Edit: All numbers for PWM (surface)/GYX (aloft)

The rains in Maine fall on my open pit reserved for a patio to be built this weekend...

The NBM is pretty robust on temps, so eventually I think it would be strong guidance. The problem is that we would have very little experience with the NBM and its MOS. So hard to tease out the typically biases right away. Going to be some growing pains I'd imagine.

Eventually not even that. I believe the plan is to transition to NBM MOS. There will be a short, long, and extended.

Well they are both going away in the near future, so I wouldn't expect any significant changes to MOS. Any the NAM is on its last legs, as the future will be the FV3 and HRRR.

The edge of the precip is nearly stationary around PWM, so that's kept the gusts going for a couple hours now. Even the WFO managed a 44 knot peak gust.

62 mph at PWM Ripping on the edge of the dry slot

IOSN3 70 knots peak wind

48 knots at PWM. Considering this is an independent data point from my study, I'm really happy with the output of 47.6 knots. Even if PWM goes in a little higher over the next hour.

Weeeeee!

PYM 53 kt peak wind.

I'm maybe more impressed with sustained 34 knots at BOS.

If they do, you should consult a doctor. 57 knots at Conimicut Light.