Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

Presidents Day storm Part 2


Ji

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 959
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think most people that say that stuff here just do so because they read it some place. If you read AFDs, its not uncommon to see mention of model guidance wrt sampling of specific features. I know I have seen it in Mount Holly AFDs a dozen times this winter.

Yes many knowledgeables share that info as truth. Too many. I think mainly they are not considering the vast increase in NWP over the past decade or two. One of those things that once might have been more true than it is now. Sort of just stuck with people. Extra sampling is mostly for QC etc I think. It's also a good PR move when gov can say they are pulling out all the stops to nail the forecast. Think there's probably value just not in the way most people assume. Severe wx outbreaks somewhat different as 18z special soundings can give local insights on hotspots that might be otherwise missed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course right after my post I look at the RGEM and it flipped to bone dry through 12z mon. Lol

there was a storm in 2012 I think similar to this where we got screwed because the frontrunner waa snow went south of us. Central va got 3-5" from that. Then the main low bombed up west and by the time that got precip in it was changing to rain. Just something to look out for. I am becoming interested in that trailing system.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

there was a storm in 2012 I think similar to this where we got screwed because the frontrunner waa snow went south of us. Central va got 3-5" from that. Then the main low bombed up west and by the time that got precip in it was changing to rain. Just something to look out for. I am becoming interested in that trailing system.

That seems to be a trend to watch with this one. I dont think the GFS gets anything significant into my area until the torch has commenced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes many knowledgeables share that info as truth. Too many. I think mainly they are not considering the vast increase in NWP over the past decade or two. One of those things that once might have been more true than it is now. Sort of just stuck with people. Extra sampling is mostly for QC etc I think. It's also a good PR move when gov can say they are pulling out all the stops to nail the forecast. Think there's probably value just not in the way most people assume. Severe wx outbreaks somewhat different as 18z special soundings can give local insights on hotspots that might be otherwise missed.

Pretty much spot on.  When it is used as a broad generalization, it demonstrates a general lack of understanding in terms of how NWP models are initialized.  The 18z special soundings are a good example where that extra detailed information can make a huge difference.  Another good example is the set of surveillance observations that are taken from the hurricane missions.  By in large, however, this kind of stuff is irrelevant to discussing broader, synoptic-scale initialization.

 

While all mets are trained in terms of using NWP, many (most?) of them lack training in terms of how things really work under the hood.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much spot on.  When it is used as a broad generalization, it demonstrates a general lack of understanding in terms of how NWP models are initialized.  The 18z special soundings are a good example where that extra detailed information can make a huge difference.  Another good example is the set of surveillance observations that are taken from the hurricane missions.  By in large, however, this kind of stuff is irrelevant to discussing broader, synoptic-scale initialization.

 

While all mets are trained in terms of using NWP, many (most?) of them lack training in terms of how things really work under the hood.  

I don't know the under the hood stuff really but I'm pretty fascinated by NWP so I've read a lot about it and talked to quite a few people. Met with a modeler/forecaster in the Air Force who is a liaison to JTWC but based in DC (at the observatory)... he among others (like you) really drove home how much info we get from satellites etc with today's models. Purpose of meeting with him was largely an idea of pushing for recon to resume in the WPAC as a national security issue. He was kind enough not to laugh at me but I could sort of tell he wanted to. ;)

 

I've admittedly shifted my view as I've learned more as I used to just follow the line that more data is necessary. I think it's largely people not being fully informed rather than trying to spread misinfo. Would never argue for less data.. imagine it's all valuable in its own right even if just for R&D. Atlantic recon has certainly helped advance hurricane forecasting and such, though I've heard that even a lot of that data will not get assimilated these days because it doesn't line up right with what we already have. In many ways it seems recon of late is mostly for verification. Like, we'd probably not have had Patricia so intense without it and such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems one step up and two steps back with each run. Seems this is slowly bleeding the wrong way each run.

Other than some wobbles in track and strength of the low, the euro has remained quite consistent irt sensible wx here. That's the primary reason I've only focused on what we can squeeze out before the inevitable flip. Gfs backed down a little. Not a fan of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...