H2O Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 pretty sure in 2010 we dismissed its high totals until they showed up elsewhere etc. even then i think it was probably the highest of all models. it has lots of issues with synoptic winter storms especially outside 24-48 hours.. diminishing returns at distance. nam is a time passer waiting for the others until we're within a day usually and looking for details about the sfc etc. Even then the NAM was still overdoing the QPF. It was just a tool to use in the shorter range, not some be all end all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 lol @ you guys dogging the nam...you know dam well if it was showing a blizzard, you'd be hyped lol How long have you been a member here? We constantly take the NAM beyond 48 hours with a grain of salt, even when it's great for us. Very few people here believe the nam when it gave us like 5" QPF for snowmageddon. THe general rule is to de-amp the NAM and cut QPF by 50%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 The GFS will hold and maybe even improve a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Even then the NAM was still overdoing the QPF. It was just a tool to use in the shorter range, not some be all end allTho the NAM was quick to lock in at range that year if I remember correctly. Then again predicting it was going to snow a lot was easier then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87storms Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 How long have you been a member here? We constantly take the NAM beyond 48 hours with a grain of salt, even when it's great for us. Very few people here believe the nam when it gave us like 5" QPF for snowmageddon. THe general rule is to de-amp the NAM and cut QPF by 50%. yea but we're not really talking about qpf here. we're talking about track. you can rationalize it however you want, but if it meant nothing there wouldn't be 35 members paying attention to it on a sunday afternoon. i never said it was right, just saying that it doesn't need to be put down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonderdog Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Tho the NAM was quick to lock in at range that year if I remember correctly. Then again predicting it was going to snow a lot was easier then. Isn't the NAM and the GFS interrelated in some way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 yea but we're not really talking about qpf here. we're talking about track. you can rationalize it however you want, but if it meant nothing there wouldn't be 35 members paying attention to it on a sunday afternoon. i never said it was right, just saying that it doesn't need to be put down. Nobody is rationalizing anything. I'm just stating facts. 35 members aren't paying attention because of an amped up run of the NAM. The threat is there on all the models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokeybandit Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 The next storm is "Orko?" Is She-Ra coming up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winter_warlock Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 The GFS will hold and maybe even improve a little. well the gfs has been consistant for nearly 12 runs , it may be on to somethin, now if we could only get the euro to follow suit. .... 3 days of GFS close to coast and 3 days of EURO farther out to sea.... hmm roll the dice lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 The NAM is not OTS like the Euro. Acknowledge that and move on to better models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winter_warlock Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Nobody is rationalizing anything. I'm just stating facts. 35 members aren't paying attention because of an amped up run of the NAM. The threat is there on all the models. i dont pay attention to nam at all untill its at least inside of 60 hrs.. and i really dont get excited with it till inside of 48 hrs, nam at 78-84 hrs is very inaccurate IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87storms Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Nobody is rationalizing anything. I'm just stating facts. 35 members aren't paying attention because of an amped up run of the NAM. The threat is there on all the models. all i'm saying is that no one here probably knows enough to put down a computer model imo. how many people on here have contributed to improving them? i'm just grateful we have these things because let's face it, no one would be able to forecast their way out of a wet paper bag if they didn't exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winter_warlock Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 all i'm saying is that no one here probably knows enough to put down a computer model imo. how many people on here have contributed to improving them? i'm just grateful we have these things because let's face it, no one would be able to forecast their way out of a wet paper bag if they didn't exist. models are a tool but it still takes real mets with degrees to dicypher the data and make real forecasts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87storms Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Uh oh. tell me someone who could forecast a few days in advance without a computer model and i'll show you how to grow money on trees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87storms Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 models are a tool but it still takes real mets with degrees to dicypher the data and make real forecasts. i understand that, and i'm sure not all of them put them down because they know how to utilize their strengths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winter_warlock Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 tell me someone who could forecast a few days in advance without a computer model and i'll show you how to grow money on trees. models are only a tool, but real mets need to figure out the diagnostics with the model to see their biases, and to see which models are out liers . so it does take more than a computer model to forecast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 all i'm saying is that no one here probably knows enough to put down a computer model imo.how many people on here have contributed to improving them? i'm just grateful we have these things because let's face it, no one would be able to forecast their way out of a wet paper bag if they didn't exist. But we do though...at least in cycles. The NAM has constantly been too amped/too juiced and sometimes too cold. We DO know model biases and can apply them. We're all grateful for the models. And within 3 days, I'd have to disagree that forecasters wouldn't be able to forecast their way out of a paper bag. Without a doubt, they have been extremely useful tools that have enhanced accuracy greatly...but believe it or not, forecasters used to do their jobs before these models existed. Of course we're all going to be interested if the 84 hour NAM shows a blizzard....but if the other models are far less enthused and they don't latch on to the idea, then I think we can safely say the NAM is the outlier and it's less likely to be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87storms Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 models are only a tool, but real mets need to figure out the diagnostics with the model to see their biases, and to see which models are out liers . so it does take more than a computer model to forecast models are a little more than "only a tool". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winter_warlock Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 models are a little more than "only a tool". nevermind, your missing my point. they are one of many tools mets use. the modeling shows them different possibilitys, its up to the met to use their knowlegde to examine the data, and use the best solution. so models are a tool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Maybe somebody wants to make a "Modelology Thread" ??? - This is getting absurd. Every single model cycle we do this for like 2-4 hours My bad. You're right though, maybe we can make a thread for the model debate/discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winter_warlock Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 My bad. You're right though, maybe we can make a thread for the model debate/discussion. yeah then we'd argue about whether they are a tool or not lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmlwx Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 My bad. You're right though, maybe we can make a thread for the model debate/discussion. Not really directed at you - more at the people who are literally hyper-analyzing the models as tools every single cycle. You've only chimed in which I think is fine. Plus, I'm not the rule maker here It just seems like the same people want to bring up the exact same points at 00z, 06z, 12z, 18z - we come to the same conclusions about the models and then the same people are back like they completely forgot the previous discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 GFS won't look like the NAM, for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87storms Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 nevermind, your missing my point. they are one of many tools mets use. the modeling shows them different possibilitys, its up to the met to use their knowlegde to examine the data, and use the best solution. so models are a tool no, i got your point. obviously i know you need skills to interpret large amounts of data, but without that data there'd be nothing to interpret. all i'm saying is that i would gladly take the nam over nothing at all. that's all i'm saying. i know past 48 hrs it's not as accurate as the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87storms Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 entertaining and passed time at least. exactly! it's just discussion. i'm not flustered in anyway. i thought it was quite civil. on to the gfs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLPressure Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 GFS through 48 is no change from the 12z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winter_warlock Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 no, i got your point. obviously i know you need skills to interpret large amounts of data, but without that data there'd be nothing to interpret. all i'm saying is that i would gladly take the nam over nothing at all. that's all i'm saying. i know past 48 hrs it's not as accurate as the others. oh ok.. its all good man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swva Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Hmmm.. GFS might be going in the direction of the Euro this run so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 here comes suppression...depression lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87storms Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 I didn't say it wasn't civil. But we literally have the same discussion multiple times per day it seems. one thing that never bothered me is the chitter chatter during a model thread. i never understood why others get upset about that, but that's another debate. personal attacks are the only thing i don't tolerate. anything else i can sift through, but that's just me. anyway, it's model run time so i'm gonna focus on that now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.