Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,587
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

This is pretty cool and I have wondered in the past why this hasn't happened sooner

Typhoon Tip

By Typhoon Tip,
in New England

Recommended Posts

dendrite

dendrite

Posted
Posted

We have a good discussion on it in the main forum. I'm sorta torn on it. When we say storms like Feb 78, Mar 93, Jan 05, Oct 11 we all know what they are. I'd say most of us know the mid tier storms as well. If you use NESIS to determine if the criteria is met then many of my events won't even get named. It seems needlessly gimmicky to me. I think something like this works well for NWS BUF and their LES events, but on a national scale you run into more issues because of climo and population density.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I wonder how they would put it across ?

I mean, there are winter storms, then there are blizzards and ice storms, which are still winter storms, but there's kind of a disconnect there a little.

"Blizzard Sandra" "Ice Storm Eric" Or is it just Winter Storm Sandra, or Winter Storm Eric -

hm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginx snewx

Ginx snewx

Posted
Posted

WFSB 3 in Connecticut used to name winter storms. Not sure if they still do, but I'd imagine it would be confusing unless everyone does it like tropical systems.

Hilton Katterli started that in the 70s and yes they still do it. Makes it easy to remember I guess. 78 was Larry. A real gully whomper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
  • Author
Posted

We have a good discussion on it in the main forum. I'm sorta torn on it. When we say storms like Feb 78, Mar 93, Jan 05, Oct 11 we all know what they are. I'd say most of us know the mid tier storms as well. If you use NESIS to determine if the criteria is met then many of my events won't even get named. It seems needlessly gimmicky to me. I think something like this works well for NWS BUF and their LES events, but on a national scale you run into more issues because of climo and population density.

Me too - torn. I think it makes some sense for upper tier impactors, perhaps - we'd leave those below some pre-determined impact off the list.

If you think about the logistics of it, there are so many names, and an active winter can have a 100 names then - may get tough. Where as the most active TC season is usually handled inside of 18 systems save for outlier years.

"2-4" of snow by dawn, then clearing" shouldn't be named. It'll come down as you say to some kind of NESDIS (perhaps) determination on what gets named.

Ironing that stuff out may get petty or tedious - whatever. I personally don't have a problem with the concept of naming it, if as that article says, it raises awareness.

I see another problem though. If you got a dry but potent dynamic careening S through Michigan with it's eyes set on a baroclinic leaf just off Cape Hatteras, there may not be any satellite eye candy for any lay-person to focus on. These bigger TCs like Katrina and Andrew and Isabel, they all were out there and pretty scary looking on satellite, such that most knew their name as associated to "something" tangible prior to their arrival. But if you are a WC talking head, blustering up over "Blizzard George", and the observer doesn't see anything on Satellite, at what point does the name get applied - to the forecast, or the verification?? Because in the situation where you have a strong parcel of dynamics that is initially dry diving S, by the time it detonates it's usual bombogen with like 8 hour (max) worth of warning. Naming for late bloomers - and many of the bigger events don't do much until they hit the coastal/sea interface, is futile one would think. And name a forecast would be ...funny looking

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CT Rain

CT Rain

Posted
Posted

The criteria may need tweaking. Not sure how I feel about this. So many ways it could be misinterpreted.

I'm sort of meh about it.

I do think it's funny when weather people/hobbyists get so worried about something like this. I think in the end it's a fun/gimmicky thing. Big deal.

At the end of the day people want to know when and how much. They don't really care if it has a name or not.

I wouldn't mind saying "Storm Cesar is going to slam DC... but we'll only get fringe effects". I'm fine with that. I don't see the horrible/terrible/awful downside the wetakeourselvestooseriously posters on the main thread are talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoastalWx

CoastalWx

Posted
Posted

I'm sort of meh about it.

I do think it's funny when weather people/hobbyists get so worried about something like this. I think in the end it's a fun/gimmicky thing. Big deal.

At the end of the day people want to know when and how much. They don't really care if it has a name or not.

I wouldn't mind saying "Storm Cesar is going to slam DC... but we'll only get fringe effects". I'm fine with that. I don't see the horrible/terrible/awful downside the wetakeourselvestooseriously posters on the main thread are talking about.

Yeah I agree...I don't see the harm in it. In the end, it's sort of a gimmick and it's not like I expect extra workload is far as I'm concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'm sort of meh about it.

I do think it's funny when weather people/hobbyists get so worried about something like this. I think in the end it's a fun/gimmicky thing. Big deal.

At the end of the day people want to know when and how much. They don't really care if it has a name or not.

I wouldn't mind saying "Storm Cesar is going to slam DC... but we'll only get fringe effects". I'm fine with that. I don't see the horrible/terrible/awful downside the wetakeourselvestooseriously posters on the main thread are talking about.

I think the impetus of that article is "raising awareness", and that people tend to take more notice when these events are humanized - at least that's clearly what it dances around.

TC Katrina resonates, so perhaps Coast Bomb Clarence might too.

I don't know though - to your point, is there really a need for that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginx snewx

Ginx snewx

Posted
Posted

I'm sort of meh about it.

I do think it's funny when weather people/hobbyists get so worried about something like this. I think in the end it's a fun/gimmicky thing. Big deal.

At the end of the day people want to know when and how much. They don't really care if it has a name or not.

I wouldn't mind saying "Storm Cesar is going to slam DC... but we'll only get fringe effects". I'm fine with that. I don't see the horrible/terrible/awful downside the wetakeourselvestooseriously posters on the main thread are talking about.

Agree Ryan, it is weird. Will NBC make your station refer to the proper name for consistency sake? Too bad the K storm name was taken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CT Rain

CT Rain

Posted
Posted

I think that it was Ken Garee who came up with the naming system not Hilton Kaderli.

Yeah I think the Travelers Weather Service naming predated Hilton.

Genius marketing. TWC has really become better, not an embarrassment any more.

Agreed they're doing a fine job.

Agree Ryan, it is weird. Will NBC make your station refer to the proper name for consistency sake? Too bad the K storm name was taken.

They may encourage it but the ultimate decision will likely be our own. I'm not even sure the other NBC networks (MSNBC, NBC News, etc.) will go along with it. My gut feeling is they will but I don't know.

Anything above 14" in Tolland deserves a name.

In that case we'll never use any of the names on the list for the next 15 or 20 years.

Yeah I agree...I don't see the harm in it. In the end, it's sort of a gimmick and it's not like I expect extra workload is far as I'm concerned.

I love the fact weather weenies and some mets take things like this so seriously. They act like it's the end of the world lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginx snewx

Ginx snewx

Posted
Posted

Yeah I think the Travelers Weather Service naming predated Hilton.

Agreed they're doing a fine job.

They may encourage it but the ultimate decision will likely be our own. I'm not even sure the other NBC networks (MSNBC, NBC News, etc.) will go along with it. My gut feeling is they will but I don't know.

In that case we'll never use any of the names on the list for the next 15 or 20 years.

I love the fact weather weenies and some mets take things like this so seriously. They act like it's the end of the world lol.

LOL at the tropical dudes indignation, at least we will not have to worry about named thunderstorm complexes in the far North Atlantic making headline news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tamarack

tamarack

Posted
Posted

"2-4" of snow by dawn, then clearing" shouldn't be named. It'll come down as you say to some kind of NESDIS (perhaps) determination on what gets named.

Ironing that stuff out may get petty or tedious - whatever. I personally don't have a problem with the concept of naming it, if as that article says, it raises awareness.

I see another problem though. If you got a dry but potent dynamic careening S through Michigan with it's eyes set on a baroclinic leaf just off Cape Hatteras, there may not be any satellite eye candy for any lay-person to focus on. These bigger TCs like Katrina and Andrew and Isabel, they all were out there and pretty scary looking on satellite, such that most knew their name as associated to "something" tangible prior to their arrival. But if you are a WC talking head, blustering up over "Blizzard George", and the observer doesn't see anything on Satellite, at what point does the name get applied - to the forecast, or the verification?? Because in the situation where you have a strong parcel of dynamics that is initially dry diving S, by the time it detonates it's usual bombogen with like 8 hour (max) worth of warning. Naming for late bloomers - and many of the bigger events don't do much until they hit the coastal/sea interface, is futile one would think. And name a forecast would be ...funny looking

Good points all. One more is that TCs have distinct geographical regions - N.Atlantic, E.Pac, etc - with their own naming protocols. If a name-worthy winter storm rips up thru the Lake States into Canada, will forecasters in the MA/SE need to respect the name? What about an event like Feb 1-3, 2011, with heavy snows OK to Maine? As noted above, a 3-6" event in the non-mt Carolinas is a big event, even if no flakes make it north of DCA. Then there's the late-blooming Miller B that gives PWM flurries, BGR 5", and half a meter to Fredericton, NB. I could see some potential for real confusion unless all of the US (and Canada) east of the Rockies were on board with a naming system.

KISS principle says why bother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted

I'm sure the naming stuff will be fine as long as you watch TWC a lot. Otherwise, I really don't think most people are going to know what the names are.

One real dilemna is when do you name the storm? Do you name it before it turns into anything notable because the models say its going to blow up? What if the storm is a weak clipper and then turns into a late bloomer? What if a storm is forecasted to be a big deal but then completely craps the bed wide right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginx snewx

Ginx snewx

Posted
Posted

I'm sure the naming stuff will be fine as long as you watch TWC a lot. Otherwise, I really don't think most people are going to know what the names are.

One real dilemna is when do you name the storm? Do you name it before it turns into anything notable because the models say its going to blow up? What if the storm is a weak clipper and then turns into a late bloomer? What if a storm is forecasted to be a big deal but then completely craps the bed wide right?

Oh I disagree on not many people knowing the names. TWC is part of the massive NBC empire, you do know that the TWC announcement yesterday was the top topic in many social media outlets? As soon as they announce a name it will be everywhere. I just hope we get to Z, I want the Chaka Khan storm bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginx snewx

Ginx snewx

Posted
Posted

I'm sure the naming stuff will be fine as long as you watch TWC a lot. Otherwise, I really don't think most people are going to know what the names are.

One real dilemna is when do you name the storm? Do you name it before it turns into anything notable because the models say its going to blow up? What if the storm is a weak clipper and then turns into a late bloomer? What if a storm is forecasted to be a big deal but then completely craps the bed wide right?

It will be interesting but a storm missing because it has a name is fully accepted I think. I mean crap for 3 weeks Nadine has been in the news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted

Oh I disagree on not many people knowing the names. TWC is part of the massive NBC empire, you do know that the TWC announcement yesterday was the top topic in many social media outlets? As soon as they announce a name it will be everywhere. I just hope we to Z, I want the Chaka Khan storm bad

I guess...but unless the news stations use the names, I still don't see people all over the place referring to the storms by their name. Regardless, we'll see how popular it is this winter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...