1/27 Winter Storm - Round 3 - Discussion Thread

[jwilson]

My question would be: why did it seem most media outlets also followed the Euro only, going down with the ship?  Perhaps I'm slightly off-base, but the early forecasts I saw really had no model support outside of those couple Euro runs.  There was one busted NAM run in there, too, but I've never found the NAM particularly reliable, even short-term.  I'm just surprised the media didn't hedge their bets a bit more.  I do understand the need for the media to sensationalize everything, but in 2015, this seemed irresponsible.

 

I think the end result simply reinforces the idea that models don't know everything.  I doubt humans will ever 100% come to understand the weather and be able to predict it with any unwavering certainty.  Nature is an infinitely complex system.  Disseminate what  information you can that is reliable and has evidentiary support.  It only seems logical to me, but of course I'm not in charge of predicting the weather for millions of people.  To those that do I say thanks and good luck!  I don't envy your job in these circumstances.

[Birds~69]

My question would be: why did it seem most media outlets also followed the Euro only, going down with the ship?  Perhaps I'm slightly off-base, but the early forecasts I saw really had no model support outside of those couple Euro runs.  There was one busted NAM run in there, too, but I've never found the NAM particularly reliable, even short-term.  I'm just surprised the media didn't hedge their bets a bit more.  I do understand the need for the media to sensationalize everything, but in 2015, this seemed irresponsible.

 

I think the end result simply reinforces the idea that models don't know everything.  I doubt humans will ever 100% come to understand the weather and be able to predict it with any unwavering certainty.  Nature is an infinitely complex system.  Disseminate what  information you can that is reliable and has evidentiary support.  It only seems logical to me, but of course I'm not in charge of predicting the weather for millions of people.  To those that do I say thanks and good luck!  I don't envy your job in these circumstances.

 

It's been the king for quite a while...not this year though. Everyone should just not hold it to high standards moving forward...take all the runs and come to a conclusion (w/logic).

[GD0815]

The red flags were there the last two days we just chose to ignore them. Every major Delaware valley snowstorm will have universal model support going into the event but we only had the ECM. It was the reason why I was feeling a model blend was most prudent and was feeling 6-10", still too high of course.

This is not the case, i have seen storms where one or more models were not on aboard going into a storm.

[famartin]

It's been the king for quite a while...not this year though. Everyone should just not hold it to high standards moving forward...take all the runs and come to a conclusion (w/logic).

Euro is "king" of models but its certainly not perfect.  Just glancing at the skill scores reveals plenty of room for the others to beat it here and there.  Saturday and Sunday this was Euro vs. the world. 

 

Maybe, in the end, the destruction of the Euro's "impeccable" record is a good thing for forecasters.  No one will trust the Euro that much again.

[famartin]

This is not the case, i have seen storms where one or more models were not on aboard going into a storm.

Yeah there have been storms where not all models were onboard... however, usually within 24 hours both the NAM and GFS jump on the ship.  And certainly there is always multiple model support.  This was Euro vs. the whole world.

[Bluescat1]

This is what I have been posting on places like FB to people that are coming down hard on the NWS. Here is what happened, the EC ( European model) sniffed this storm out 6 days before it was supposed to happen. This model is usually rock solid as it was the only one that predicted that Sandy would make a Hard left turn into NJ, almost unheard of. The EC had this storm track predicted almost up until 0 hour.The storm that came through on Friday with the snow and rain was supposed to stall in the Canadian Maritimes. Since we have a positive NAO this storm was supposed to act as a blocking low, what we call a 50/50 low and hold the storm closer to the coast. this low was pushed away by energy digging down the back side of the trough allowing the new storm to form out to sea further. Other models such as the GFS and Canadian as well as the UKMET showed this happening. The NAM model which is the US near term model also gave support to the EC so when those 2 agree you usually ignore the others.That is the best I can do in layman terms.

[GD0815]

Yeah there have been storms where not all models were onboard... however, usually within 24 hours both the NAM and GFS jump on the ship.  And certainly there is always multiple model support.  This was Euro vs. the whole world.

yeah, this was the point i was making from the get-go.  im just saying you wont always have universal model support until maybe right as the storm is about to hit.  To be fair, there was certainly a movement on the other models after saturday's big euro run towards a bigger storm, but nothing like the euro.  that is why a compromise forecast was the way to go.   If someone went 8-12 for PHL i cant criticize them today, that would seem reasonable to me given all the guidance.   It is the 15 plus forecasts that seemed to, as you said, just adopt the Euro verbatim that might warrant some rethinking.   The one thing I can say to partially defend those forecasts is that it is hard when you are dealing with a storm capture situation, and if you bought that the storm would be captured earlier, than I can see why you would have the bigger numbers.   And that could be for reasons beyond just adopting the Euro.  In the end though, it is hard not to believe that Euro-hugging wasn't a big part of this.

[GD0815]

This is what I have been posting on places like FB to people that are coming down hard on the NWS. Here is what happened, the EC ( European model) sniffed this storm out 6 days before it was supposed to happen. This model is usually rock solid as it was the only one that predicted that Sandy would make a Hard left turn into NJ, almost unheard of. The EC had this storm track predicted almost up until 0 hour.The storm that came through on Friday with the snow and rain was supposed to stall in the Canadian Maritimes. Since we have a positive NAO this storm was supposed to act as a blocking low, what we call a 50/50 low and hold the storm closer to the coast. this low was pushed away by energy digging down the back side of the trough allowing the new storm to form out to sea further. Other model such as the GFS and Canadian as well as the UKMET showed this happening. The NAM model which is the US near term model also gave support to the EC so when those 2 agree you usually ignore the others.That is the best I can do in layman terms.

Aside from that one wonky run yesterday, im not sure the NAM really supported the Euro very much this time around.

[famartin]

Aside from that one wonky run yesterday, im not sure the NAM really supported the Euro very much this time around.

Agree.  The Euro was by itself, then the NAM took its place as the Euro started to reel itself in yesterday.

[Bluescat1]

Wasn't the Nam on board for a couple of runs?

[famartin]

Wasn't the Nam on board for a couple of runs?

12Z and 18Z yesterday.  Euro backed off majorly at 12Z and just plain gave up after that.

[Treckasec2]

This storm ended up worse than the blizzard of 2013 here. 3.1 inches compared to 4 inches from the 2013 blizzard. This year is shaping up to be a repeat of 2012-13. Not as bad as 2011-12, but always getting rain and some snow. 

[CRB]

My question would be: why did it seem most media outlets also followed the Euro only, going down with the ship?  Perhaps I'm slightly off-base, but the early forecasts I saw really had no model support outside of those couple Euro runs.  There was one busted NAM run in there, too, but I've never found the NAM particularly reliable, even short-term.  I'm just surprised the media didn't hedge their bets a bit more.  I do understand the need for the media to sensationalize everything, but in 2015, this seemed irresponsible.

Big snow totals = big ratings

 

It's also the general public's fault for insisting news be provided in small sound bites.  Forecast nuances require a longer attention span and is difficult to summarize in a colorful map graphic.

[RedSky]

This storm ended up worse than the blizzard of 2013 here. 3.1 inches compared to 4 inches from the 2013 blizzard. This year is shaping up to be a repeat of 2012-13. Not as bad as 2011-12, but always getting rain and some snow. 

You and me both if one goes by the euro

 

2013 ECM 8-12"  i get 2.8"

2015 ECM 12-18" i get 2.7"

 

Fool me once shame on you fool me twice...

 

Dr NO where did you go

[The Iceman]

You and me both if one goes by the euro

 

2013 ECM 8-12"  i get 2.8"

2015 ECM 12-18" i get 2.7"

 

Fool me once shame on you fool me twice...

 

Dr NO where did you go

Euro would of nailed this 8 days out if it was a cutter...

[blue sky]

It's been a bad week for the local NWS. This busted snowstorm and the flash freeze last weekend morning.

On the other hand...the new GFS did pretty good.

[bigtenfan]

Quite honestly at this point if the models told me the sun was going to rise in the east tomorrow I would be on my lawn at dawn tomorrow looking at the western sky for the sunrise.

[snowwors2]

So here's a question I haven't seen posed amongst all this "EURO SUCKS" stuff...

wouldn't most folks in New England agree that the Euro did an amazing job for them with this storm by picking up the intensity of it first and being most consistent?

[Birds~69]

So here's a question I haven't seen posed amongst all this "EURO SUCKS" stuff...

wouldn't most folks in New England agree that the Euro did an amazing job for them with this storm by picking up the intensity of it first and being most consistent?

 

Euro nailed them from the get-go...for us, not so much. No clue...which I hate to trust going further.

[famartin]

So here's a question I haven't seen posed amongst all this "EURO SUCKS" stuff...

wouldn't most folks in New England agree that the Euro did an amazing job for them with this storm by picking up the intensity of it first and being most consistent?

 

Euro nailed them from the get-go...for us, not so much. No clue...which I hate to trust going further.

 

Euro had agreement with the other models that they would get blasted. By Sunday there was good consensus on a New England blizzard. That agreement didn't exist down here.

[snowwors2]

Euro had agreement with the other models that they would get blasted. By Sunday there was good consensus on a New England blizzard. That agreement didn't exist down here.

well that could/should have indicated further credence to the fact that the euro was being "over zealous" down our way!

[famartin]

This became a bust because on Sunday, a big conference call was held around the region and at the end it was decided that everyone would disregard all models except the 12Z European that day.  That's why the NWS forecasts on Sunday afternoon were so high.

[wkd]

This became a bust because on Sunday, a big conference call was held around the region and at the end it was decided that everyone would disregard all models except the 12Z European that day.  That's why the NWS forecasts on Sunday afternoon were so high.

 

If that is true I think it would be prudent to delete the post unless this is already known.  Press would have a field day.

[famartin]

If that is true I think it would be prudent to delete the post unless this is already known.  Press would have a field day.

Oh?  Forecast conference calls happen from time to time.  That's not that unusual.  The decision to disregard some guidance during those calls is also not that unusual.  I just think its interesting that at this conference call, the decision was made to ignore everything except the Euro. 

[wkd]

Oh?  Forecast conference calls happen from time to time.  That's not that unusual.  The decision to disregard some guidance during those calls is also not that unusual.  I just think its interesting that at this conference call, the decision was made to ignore everything except the Euro. 

 

Okay, I respect your thinking.  Just seemed to me the type of thing that could be blown up for no good reason. 

[RU848789]

Oh?  Forecast conference calls happen from time to time.  That's not that unusual.  The decision to disregard some guidance during those calls is also not that unusual.  I just think its interesting that at this conference call, the decision was made to ignore everything except the Euro. 

 

Ray - nice analysis in this thread.  There's also an excellent thread in the NYC forum called "dissecting the bust."  Here's one question I haven't seen answered.  Lots of folks have been saying that the point of the upper low "capturing" the surface low was ~70 miles east of where the Euro had been predicting, leading to the roughly 70 mile displacement of the whole precipitation shield to the east (such that NYC got Allentown's forecasted snow, for example, and the very steep gradient was from Nassau County to NE NJ (from 20" to 6" over maybe 50-60 miles), instead of in eastern PA.  I get that.  

 

But I've seen a few Monday morning QB's saying they saw this at 6-7 pm Monday and it was "obvious" at that point that NJ/NYC were toast with regard to getting more than 12".  I would think if it was that obvious, the NWS in Mt. Holly would've downgraded the storm much more quickly than the 10:05 pm update in which they cut back a little, and we would've seen a lot more posters, including pros, also downgrading the storm at that time (maybe I just missed it).  Especially since there was no snow at all falling from NYC westward from maybe 7 pm onward for many hours.  

 

SO WE HAVE CUT BACK TOTALS

SOME ACROSS THE AREA, BUT WE WILL WAIT TO MAKE BIG CHANGES UNTIL

WE GET MORE INTO THE HEART OF THE STORM AND HAVE ALL THE 00Z

GUIDANCE IN TO GET A BETTER HANDLE ON THE POTENTIAL SNOW AMOUNTS.

 

They didn't make the big cuts in accumulations until the 12:43 am updated discussion and even then, they didn't drop the eastern NJ blizzard warnings until about 4:30 am.  It's one thing to bust badly, but it's another to wait so long to acknowledge the bust - maybe they were just hoping, like I was, staring at that friggin' heavy snow band advancing at a snails pace just off the NJ coast for hours, but never really making it.  

 

As I said on some NYC threads, this was a classic case of poor risk management before the storm, in that it would've conveyed the same huge snowstorm impact message to predict 12-24" for NYC, for example, vs. the 24-36" forecast they had all day Monday (even if the actual forecast was 20-30", but they didn't have a graphic for that, which is just silly).  If you predict 12-24" and you get 30", nobody really cares, but if you predict 24-36" and you get 12", it looks like a huge bust, which it was.  If they had predicted 12-24". it wouldn't have looked nearly as bad when NYC got 10-13" of snow in most places (a minor bust, at worst).  Same logic could have been applied for the Mt. Holly CWA forecasts.  

 

Curious to hear your thoughts about the lack of commentary on the more eastern capture in the 6-7 pm timeframe and if you have any thoughts as to why the NWS was so slow to back off on accumulations.  Thanks.

[Ralph Wiggum]

I was on the phone at 6:30 PM with a "well-respected met" Monday night discussing the evolution, or lack thereof, of this storm. I told him that based on radar trends and some of the models' depictions of the precip shield things were way off. He told me the capture was taking place earlier and the storm had slowed down. He went on to add that the brunt of the storm for South Jersey would be Tuesday instead of Monday night. My reply was that a storm delayed usually does not happen and we got into a very heated discussion about the 700mb low closing off, the 500mb low closing off and it's location, etc.

 

Point is, the pros were seeing something that us laymen were not that was leading them to believe this was still going to hit hard in Eastern PA and South Jersey. The met I was talking with claimed better UVVs were going to be overhead based on 700mb trends which showed a closed low at that level and also 500mb. What were others seeing?

[snowwors2]

I was on the phone at 6:30 PM with a "well-respected met" Monday night discussing the evolution, or lack thereof, of this storm. I told him that based on radar trends and some of the models' depictions of the precip shield things were way off. He told me the capture was taking place earlier and the storm had slowed down. He went on to add that the brunt of the storm for South Jersey would be Tuesday instead of Monday night. My reply was that a storm delayed usually does not happen and we got into a very heated discussion about the 700mb low closing off, the 500mb low closing off and it's location, etc.

Point is, the pros were seeing something that us laymen were not that was leading them to believe this was still going to hit hard in Eastern PA and South Jersey. The met I was talking with claimed better UVVs were going to be overhead based on 700mb trends which showed a closed low at that level and also 500mb. What were others seeing?

"Blinded by Science"!!!

[famartin]

There was a lot more going on here than just meteorology.  There were some political elements which forced people's hands.  I have been told that many at Mt. Holly were more or less against the higher forecast that ended up going out and would not have gone high if they were not "influenced" from outside. 

 

Unfortunately, NWS is one agency, not a bunch of separate offices, and while there is often disagreement, consistency between offices is important as well as attempting to appease certain stakeholders. 

[RU848789]

There was a lot more going on here than just meteorology.  There were some political elements which forced people's hands.  I have been told that many at Mt. Holly were more or less against the higher forecast that ended up going out and would not have gone high if they were not "influenced" from outside. 

 

Unfortunately, NWS is one agency, not a bunch of separate offices, and while there is often disagreement, consistency between offices is important as well as attempting to appease certain stakeholders. 

 

Thanks for the insight.  That's not unusual for large organizations with a centralized management structure overseeing a host of somewhat independent offices/facilities/subsidiaries etc.  I could imagine the Philly and NYC offices disagreeing strongly during their collaboration calls, until finally someone at a higher level (Eastern Region or National level) had to step in and make a decision that he or she thought would be in the best interests of the NWS.  Nothing sinister in it - it's decision-making 101, where someone, ultimately is accountable and will likely be seriously read the riot act.  It would be even worse for the NWS to have major discontinuities between offices acting completely on their own - hell, I complain when there's a 2" discontinuity.

 

Just imagine if NE NJ counties under Upton had 20-30" forecasts and the bordering counties under Mt. Holly had 6-10" forecasts.  That's why I still say they should've gone for 12-24"in NYC, 10-16" in NE NJ and Middlesex/Monmouth/Ocean (eastern NJ) and maybe 6-10" in the counties to the west of those in NJ.