BTRWx Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Here is the probability of > 4" http://www.erh.noaa.gov/lwx/winter/images/snowProbGT4.png It's amazing how many times a threat this winter has been at least 50% here, fun times! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ers-wxman1 Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 That's low when they have a watch for the possibility of 5+, IMO. A watch is 50% confidence of 5 or more inches. This is right in line... Areas in the warning are 80% or greater. Lines up well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T. August Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Is it still gonna snow? I think so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 That's low when they have a watch for the possibility of 5+, IMO.I've thought they've been unusually bullish on those since yday. Seems fine with the watch to me. And any disagreements in forecast aside (admittedly I'm getting nervous CWG is too low) those maps are fairly useful IMO. Much more than the high and low bound ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 That's low when they have a watch for the possibility of 5+, IMO. Its greater than 50% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowdude Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Sand cools pretty easily anyway doesn't it? I'm sort of perplexed by the whole conversation. Why can 6-10 happen in coastal Calvert but not Ocean City? Yeah it does, even the soil here in Salisbury is pretty sandy and that sometimes allows our nighttime temps to plummet on clear and calm nights. And again 6-10 CAN occur in Ocean City, even in March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Yeah looks like the two 1" areas in CVA joined into one and bumped north a tad. I wonder what this means for the NAM...just saw SREF's...north and wetter a you say....if the NAM moistens or shifts any more, it could mean some forecast headaches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthArlington101 Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Its greater than 50% That's the <4, so I presume it's very close to 50 in DC. It meets the criteria, but it's closer then what I thought it was going to be, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ers-wxman1 Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 I've thought they've been unusually bullish on those since yday. Seems fine with the watch to me. And any disagreements in forecast aside (admittedly I'm getting nervous CWG is too low) those maps are fairly useful IMO. Much more than the high and low bound ones. Cool. Have you experimented with the snowfall table? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 what happens when the NAM shows 1" for DC and the euro shows 0.35""? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTRWx Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 I've thought they've been unusually bullish on those since yday. Seems fine with the watch to me. And any disagreements in forecast aside (admittedly I'm getting nervous CWG is too low) those maps are fairly useful IMO. Much more than the high and low bound ones. Are the probabilities not the same for both map types? It seems to me that the min and max maps support site specific ones. The max map has D.C. around a foot at the 90 percentile and the site specific map for dca shows 8% for >12" (29% >8") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 what happens when the NAM shows 1" for DC and the euro shows 0.35""? Wish for the NAM to be right but lean toward the EURO to be right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternUSWX Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 what happens when the NAM shows 1" for DC and the euro shows 0.35""? See what the ukmet, gfs and ggem show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nj2va Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 I wonder what this means for the NAM...just saw SREF's...north and wetter a you say....if the NAM moistens or shifts any more, it could mean some forecast headaches I've noticed this winter that the NAM hasn't always followed the trend on the SREFs but more often than not, they do tend to be an indication of whats to come on the NAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Wish for the NAM to be right but lean toward the EURO to be right I still like 2-4" for DC until I see another model pump out 0.5+ between 11 and 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ers-wxman1 Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Are the probabilities not the same for both map types? It seems to me that the min and max maps support site specific ones. The max map has D.C. around a foot at the 90 percentile and the site specific map for dca shows 8% for >12" (29% >8") That's about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTRWx Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 what happens when the NAM shows 1" for DC and the euro shows 0.35""? the big question of the night... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ers-wxman1 Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 I love probabilistic forecasting, especially for events like this. I think it can be used to better describe the potential positives and potential red flags for a storm. I think those maps might be a bit more helpful than the min/max maps, but I think those have their purpose as well. Thanks. Good feedback Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 I still like 2-4" for DC until I see another model pump out 0.5+ between 11 and 11 Def agree. We can hope for 4-8... but go low and you are usually right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Cool. Have you experimented with the snowfall table?Yeah I think that's fine too. My issue with the other maps is more they are confusing or not necessarily clear what they are more than anything maybe--in this case the low end one seems too high as well. Perhaps putting a giant label on them instead of tiny type.. I dunno. I'm honestly less a fan of probability forecasting at least outwardly than most people. Obviously it has positives but I agree with those who see it as a cop out at times. When it comes to the true public I think simple is always the best policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Thanks. Good feedback Here is a link for the guy that tweaks the auto-generated maps that are based on SREFS http://www.ecmwf.int/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Are the probabilities not the same for both map types? It seems to me that the min and max maps support site specific ones. The max map has D.C. around a foot at the 90 percentile and the site specific map for dca shows 8% for >12" (29% >8")They should I'd think. Still.. My test of posting the max one with no commentary shows a lot of people are like woah that's a lot of snow in the forecast! Maybe just the diff between a percentage which forces you to find out the whole story vs numbers which look like the regular forecast map. Anything sref based is a bit sketchy too IMO at any range.. Eventually ensemble forecasting might be the way of forecasting but we aren't there yet at least from what I can tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTRWx Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Yeah I think that's fine too. My issue with the other maps is more they are confusing or not necessarily clear what they are more than anything maybe--in this case the low end one seems too high as well. Perhaps putting a giant label on them instead of tiny type.. I dunno. I'm honestly less a fan of probability forecasting at least outwardly than most people. Obviously it has positives but I agree with those who see it as a cop out at times. When it comes to the true public I think simple is always the best policy. that makes two of us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowdude Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 NAM rolling... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ltrain Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 NAM rolling... Yeah. Its out to hour 20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTRWx Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 They should I'd think. Still.. My test of posting the max one with no commentary shows a lot of people are like woah that's a lot of snow in the forecast! Maybe just the diff between a percentage which forces you to find out the whole story vs numbers which look like the regular forecast map. Anything sref based is a bit sketchy too IMO at any range.. Eventually ensemble forecasting might be the way of forecasting but we aren't there yet at least from what I can tell. Another idea could be to place 2 smaller min/max map graphics below an enlarged "most likely" one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 NAM rolling... comparing just at 12hrs to 18Z 18 hrs, the freezing line is noticeably not as far south on 0Z I think she comes further north Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interstate Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 comparing just at 12hrs to 18Z 18 hrs, the freezing line is noticeably not as far south on 0Z I think she comes further north wouldn't be funny if it came north and we had to worry about about rain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bricktamland Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 comparing just at 12hrs to 18Z 18 hrs, the freezing line is noticeably not as far south on 0Z I think she comes further north Surface low is also ever so slightly north of 18z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kay Posted March 16, 2014 Share Posted March 16, 2014 Yeah I think that's fine too. My issue with the other maps is more they are confusing or not necessarily clear what they are more than anything maybe--in this case the low end one seems too high as well. Perhaps putting a giant label on them instead of tiny type.. I dunno. I'm honestly less a fan of probability forecasting at least outwardly than most people. Obviously it has positives but I agree with those who see it as a cop out at times. When it comes to the true public I think simple is always the best policy. They should I'd think. Still.. My test of posting the max one with no commentary shows a lot of people are like woah that's a lot of snow in the forecast! Maybe just the diff between a percentage which forces you to find out the whole story vs numbers which look like the regular forecast map. Anything sref based is a bit sketchy too IMO at any range.. Eventually ensemble forecasting might be the way of forecasting but we aren't there yet at least from what I can tell. With publicly available products, the clearer the better. IMO suggestions like these could help to prevent confusion/spread of misinformation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.