talk about tv/lwx/other mets here regarding the storm or whatever else you think of

[Ellinwood]

By and large caution is the right policy around here. I'm not even really interested in calling people out about that caution, just wondering if we will ever be in a case where we feel comfortable going with bigger totals initially here. Heck even last yrs events started as 4-8 before creeping up even when they looked bigger than that at the outset. I guess this is my lack of formal education in the field coming to bite me -- it just feels like poor communication in some ways.

I can see the need for concern looking at the current rain/snow line to our northwest... it's a little off-putting.

[North Balti Zen]

I don't mind caution, what I don't get sometimes is the lack of taking 30 seconds to briefly describe the potential. What I saw last night and this morning in Balt was calls of less than an inch and no discussion of the possiblity of more, and there was plenty of guidance at that point that hinted at more. I don't care for me, and I am not one of those who sees a public safety crisis in their not doing it, my comment is more at how they could be more interesting in their job. Less than one inch is fine to say and show on a map, but a better weather segment would be to give the aforementioned 30 seconds to briefly outlining any uncertainty and going over the chance for it verifying up or down from that. In my opinion, anyway.

[mappy]

I don't mind caution, what I don't get sometimes is the lack of taking 30 seconds to briefly describe the potential. What I saw last night and this morning in Balt was calls of less than an inch and no discussion of the possiblity of more, and there was plenty of guidance at that point that hinted at more. I don't care for me, and I am not one of those who sees a public safety crisis in their not doing it, my comment is more at how they could be more interesting in their job. Less than one inch is fine to say and show on a map, but a better weather segment would be to give the aforementioned 30 seconds to briefly outlining any uncertainty and going over the chance for it verifying up or down from that. In my opinion, anyway.

I agree with you. Tony Pann attempted to do that with the Jan 26th storm, but it seemed he was getting orders elsewhere to back off. But I do remember him giving scenarios and amounts that were more realistic the the "couple at most" that was given the night before.

[Ian]

I can see the need for concern looking at the current rain/snow line to our northwest... it's a little off-putting.

i hear ya.. this has always looked like a climo type storm where people with elevation etc are going to do better. im not talking caution in big amounts down into the cities, im talking caution in thinking we might not get any accum at all in places like d.c. i mean i guess it was/is possible, but the guidance has not supported that for many runs. sure people can say they are ignoring guidance, but im pretty sure most forecasts are 95% based on models these days.

[Ian]

I don't mind caution, what I don't get sometimes is the lack of taking 30 seconds to briefly describe the potential. What I saw last night and this morning in Balt was calls of less than an inch and no discussion of the possiblity of more, and there was plenty of guidance at that point that hinted at more. I don't care for me, and I am not one of those who sees a public safety crisis in their not doing it, my comment is more at how they could be more interesting in their job. Less than one inch is fine to say and show on a map, but a better weather segment would be to give the aforementioned 30 seconds to briefly outlining any uncertainty and going over the chance for it verifying up or down from that. In my opinion, anyway.

On TV it's probably tougher to go into the various scenarios given the time block allotted for the weather segment. This is where online venues have a big advantage... and probably a goo reason CWG is so highly respected now, because we do go into the various things that could also happen. To the credit of LWX they had pretty strong language in their AFD by Thurs/Friday/Saturday indicating that this storm could be dynamic and needed special attention. I'm not too caught up in the fact that I'm not under a WSW since it seems more likely than not this area will get an advisory rather than a warning.

[North Balti Zen]

I agree that is an advantage that CWG has, Ian, and you guys do a great job at maximizing it. From a TV perspective, if I were running things, I would tell my on-air folk to give it a quick 30-45 seconds as a part of their allotted discussion, just to cover the bases. Wouldn't need to be as in-depth as what you guys can do on-line, but it could at least allow them to give some nuance to their forecasts. I am a big fan of nuance.

[lester]

Marty Bass went for 4-6" for Baltimore and 3" north LOL

[Larryweather]

Marty Bass went for 4-6" for Baltimore and 3" north LOL

Marty Bass is awful

[WxUSAF]

WBAL had a complete facepalm "Water Cooler Question of the Day" this morning. It was...Which winter was worse, last year with 2 blizzards or this year with storm after storm? They had Sandra Shaw out on the street asking someone who said this year's "storm after storm" was much worse.

Storm after storm? WTF are they talking about? Dusting after dusting? Most of their viewing area is still below normal on snowfall for the year. The 10 days before the Feb 5-6 blizzard last year had 3 storms that were a general 4-8" for the Baltimore metro area. THAT is storm after storm. This is a joke.

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

WBAL had a complete facepalm "Water Cooler Question of the Day" this morning. It was...Which winter was worse, last year with 2 blizzards or this year with storm after storm? They had Sandra Shaw out on the street asking someone who said this year's "storm after storm" was much worse.

Storm after storm? WTF are they talking about? Dusting after dusting? Most of their viewing area is still below normal on snowfall for the year. The 10 days before the Feb 5-6 blizzard last year had 3 storms that were a general 4-8" for the Baltimore metro area. THAT is storm after storm. This is a joke.

Seriously, they're actually contemplating that and discussing it?? Definite facepalm! How can anyone compare the two winters...3 HECS last year plus 3-4 moderate events and record-breaking seasonal snowfall everywhere in the region vs. a few dustings and busted forecasts with one decent even thrown in. And maybe a little ice a couple of times.

Now, many schools did close for almost the same number of days as last year I believe, at least in some counties. But a lot of that was due to an ice event and then major power outages after the Jan. 26 storm. It certainly wasn't due to "storm after storm".

The only way this can be serious is if they mean "storm after storm MISSING us", then yes, using that interpretation this winter was far worse!

[CheesyPoofs]

WBAL had a complete facepalm "Water Cooler Question of the Day" this morning. It was...Which winter was worse, last year with 2 blizzards or this year with storm after storm? They had Sandra Shaw out on the street asking someone who said this year's "storm after storm" was much worse.

Storm after storm? WTF are they talking about? Dusting after dusting? Most of their viewing area is still below normal on snowfall for the year. The 10 days before the Feb 5-6 blizzard last year had 3 storms that were a general 4-8" for the Baltimore metro area. THAT is storm after storm. This is a joke.

Normally I'm not shocked about anything the public says when it comes to weather. i realize most have no idea what the hell they are talking about, but this is beyond dumb...they can't possibly be this stupid? It kind of saddens you.

Now, many schools did close for almost the same number of days as last year I believe, at least in some counties.

Eh, maybe a few counties, but not most. Including weekends, Howard County schools last year were closed from February 6th-17th, and had 2 hour delays each day from the 18th-20th, not to mention early dismissal on the 5th. Not a full day of school for 17 days. DC public schools, which rarely close, closed on Monday for a storm that ended on a Saturday evening, and then they of course closed again with the Feb 10th event.

The years aren't even remotely comparable...the general public is dumb.

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Normally I'm not shocked about anything the public says when it comes to weather. i realize most have no idea what the hell they are talking about, but this is beyond dumb...they can't possibly be this stupid? It kind of saddens you.

Eh, maybe a few counties, but not most. Including weekends, Howard County schools last year were closed from February 6th-17th, and had 2 hour delays each day from the 18th-20th, not to mention early dismissal on the 5th. Not a full day of school for 17 days. DC public schools, which rarely close, closed on Monday for a storm that ended on a Saturday evening, and then they of course closed again with the Feb 10th event.

The years aren't even remotely comparable...the general public is dumb.

Yes, you are correct, I figured it was maybe only a couple or so counties this year. And as I suggested, I think a lot of that was related to the power outages after the Jan. 26 storm that in some areas lasted for days, plus I think there was an icing event in January that closed Montgomery County and others for an entire day. Last year, MoCo closed from Friday, Feb. 5 (in advance of the Feb. 5-6 storm) through the entire next week. It does not surprise me that some other counties were closed for even longer at that time. The Monday after the December storm, I think that a lot of schools had already started their Christmas vacation so that one may be kind of "hidden" (though the fed gov't did shut down!). There were some other stray days in there last year that had closures or early dismissals/late arrivals, but can't recall exactly how many or when they occurred.

Very true the two years are not even remotely comparable. I fear your last comment might, sadly, be correct.