Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,588
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I don't agree with DIT about Bowie, one of the all time greats imho but I do get what he's saying. For me it's the Doors. I appreciate their talent but their music is like nails on a chalkboard to me, especially Manzarik's keyboards. Doesn't diminish their talent, just not my taste.

Lots of good bands mentioned here. I think I'm about 10 years or so younger than Dryslot and Ginx and my faves tend to be in their prime about a decade after some of the ones the mentioned. Van Halen and ACDC are always in my rotation, especially with DLR and Bon Scott. GnR is another fave as well as Iron Maiden and Skynard is also floating around the top as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have any time off and crave snow, we have a pretty strong LES event coming for the next 3 days. The tug is not to far of a drive for you guys. Some places will have over 100" by Sunday at that location. Even off Erie totals will be 4-6'+. There will be some thunder snow Tomorrow into Weds as well.

 

This is just from todays event.

 

1796455_1031996423527777_120261535973001

 

StormTotalSnowFcst.png

12540557_1047676938628283_16580785028832

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with DIT about Bowie, one of the all time greats imho but I do get what he's saying. For me it's the Doors. I appreciate their talent but their music is like nails on a chalkboard to me, especially Manzarik's keyboards. Doesn't diminish their talent, just not my taste.

Lots of good bands mentioned here. I think I'm about 10 years or so younger than Dryslot and Ginx and my faves tend to be in their prime about a decade after some of the ones the mentioned. Van Halen and ACDC are always in my rotation, especially with DLR and Bon Scott. GnR is another fave as well as Iron Maiden and Skynard is also floating around the top as well.

 

Those two also are in my archives as well, Also a little Deep Purple and Grand Funk Railroad along with Cream, With Ginger Baker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those two also are in my archives as well, Also a little Deep Purple and Grand Funk Railroad along with Cream, With Ginger Baker

Deep Purple, very under appreciated here in America but a great band none the less. I forgot to mention Aerosmith too. Their early stuff is great, much better than the stuff they put out late in their career. Once they got sober, the good stuff was over.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deep Purple, very under appreciated here in America but a great band none the less. I forgot to mention Aerosmith too. Their early stuff is great, much better than the stuff they put out late in their career. Once they got sober, the good stuff was over.

Steven Tyler was better in the 70's and 80's for sure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I mentioned my concerns with probabilistic snowfall in the storm thread last night, but figured my comments about it were better served in this thread than that one.

 

The idea is good, to give decision makers a realistic idea of what our goal posts are for the event. Those max/min maps represent the 90th and 10th percentiles, so 1 out of 10 chance of verifying higher/lower than those amounts respectively.

 

The problem comes from how those grids are generated. We (the WFO) produce a storm total snow grid, and WPC produces a storm total snow grid. They are compared at every grid point (over 2,500) to come up with a difference. Long story short, WPC comes up with percentile grids from their own distribution functions based on their 62 model ensemble. We then shift their percentiles by the difference between our storm total grid points (again at each grid point).

 

One problem we ran into yesterday was what happens if we agree in some areas but disagree in others. In this storm today we're expecting more snow at WVL than LEW, as totals should increase moving towards central ME. So you would expect that the minimum potential snowfall would be higher at WVL than LEW right? Wrong.

 

We said 6 inches at WVL on yesterday's day shift, and 4.5 inches at LEW. WPC said 6 inches at WVL and 3 inches at LEW. So a difference of 0 for WVL and 1.5 inches for LEW. Now the WPC 10th percentile (the min potential snowfall) was 3.1 at WVL and 1.8 at LEW. Apply the difference and all of a sudden the min potential snowfall for our office is higher at LEW (3.3 inches) than WVL (3.1). Not at all what we intended to say, and not intuitive at all based on the fact that more snow should fall closer to the CAR border.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is what our min potential snow graphic looked like yesterday. A big bullseye in the middle of our CWA, even though the most snow should be farther east. Does it really make sense that in a worst case scenario there is more snow expected around LEW and north, then points east? Doubtful.

 

post-44-0-72590200-1452607512_thumb.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at this morning, BTV's min potential is the exact same as it's most likely. BOX has most likely <1 in central Worcester County, but the min potential is 1.

 

Something is broken with the logic.

 

 

That logic or formula needs more work, That makes very little sense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at this morning, BTV's min potential is the exact same as it's most likely. BOX has most likely <1 in central Worcester County, but the min potential is 1.

 

Something is broken with the logic.

 

 

It's not just NWS. I fight some of this stuff too. Of course in the private sector, some of this is to sell the "sizzle" if you will. It's an interesting battle with sales people and meteorologists. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just NWS. I fight some of this stuff too. Of course in the private sector, some of this is to sell the "sizzle" if you will. It's an interesting battle with sales people and meteorologists. 

 

I love the idea of probabilistic ranges of potential snowfall, but we're not doing it right. I don't claim to know the best way either, but this isn't working for me.

 

And from here it's a slippery slope to just saying "let's just use WPC snowfall and we won't have this issue."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...