Ian Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 This is why nam talk is frowned upon. Need to stop using it for what it can't do well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 This is why nam talk is frowned upon. Need to stop using it for what it can't do well. Yeah, seems like typical NAM barf to me. OTS is far more likely than a cutter/runner. I don't see why folks are honestly worried about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUweathermanDD Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 This is why nam talk is frowned upon. Need to stop using it for what it can't do well. True. I am still thinking GFS could be right, but seeing the Euro ens now not getting really measurable to DC hurts a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2O Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 This is why nam talk is frowned upon. Need to stop using it for what it can't do well. Model clutter. It runs so everyone thinks they need to look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BristowWx Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 This is why nam talk is frowned upon. Need to stop using it for what it can't do well. But considering where the Euro is at...maybe the NAM at this point is where we want it...not suppressed and wet...I got nothing...just reaching at this point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87storms 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUweathermanDD Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 But considering where the Euro is at...maybe the NAM at this point is where we want it...not suppressed and wet...I got nothing...just reaching at this point Oh i know, i said last not that id rather have it where it is than suppressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTRWx Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 EURO supression + NAM moisture + GFS track = D.C. MECS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian 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 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 just fook this year n stream wins....period I don't care about analogs, MJO, or any other meteo voodoo Good grief you baby lol.knowing the outlier 84 nam will never verify but also is not out to sea or supressed should be encouraging. We need a solution like this to balance other runs out Wow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonderdog Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Yeah, seems like typical NAM barf to me. OTS is far more likely than a cutter/runner. I don't see why folks are honestly worried about that. Yeah, NAM can't be trusted three days out. If we had one more frame I'd bet it jumps to the coast and we could have a rain to snow event. It will be interesting to see if the EURO trends in the direction of the GFS, how it will do it actually. Supressed for days and its latest run has a unorganized slp over GA moving NE to a position off the Delmarva. Would any change in our favor result in a more amped up coastal that has a more northerly move to it? Or am I being too much of a w_ _ _ _ e. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.