Mid January/Mid February Medium/Long Range Discussion

[Ji]

3 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

cause I know how much you all crave it

 

for the heart of winter, this is the default setting. Come back with a real map:)

[Deer Whisperer]

4 minutes ago, losetoa6 said:

For those who've been saying it's too warm to snow Saturday.  The 12z  Eps has a cluster of hits into southern Md and Southern Va even that are snow . 

Pics or it didn’t happen

[JakkelWx]

How much for philly?

[stormtracker]

24 minutes ago, Ji said:

we got 40 inches of snow between Feb 5 and Feb 12 in 2010...relax bro...plus the euro spit out 2 huge inches on day 10

Yeah, that happens a lot around here. 

[psuhoffman]

20 minutes ago, Deer Whisperer said:

Pics or it didn’t happen

[Maestrobjwa]

42 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

problem is there will likely be a few days of dead space behind it also... there could maybe be a little NS vort diving in behind if it ends up not phasing that could bring a clipper type snow.  That kind of thing wouldnt show up at range...but Ive seen hints that is possible.  But other then a fluke type thing like that...after the weekend we have to wait for the dump of cold getting ejected out of AK.  As that presses down into the midwest there will be the natural see saw effect on the longwave pattern and we will ridge here so that first wave will most likely go to our north...maybe so far to our north we don't even get any precip from it.  It's after...later that next week that things could get interesting starting with the chance at a trailing wave along the front and then see if the STJ wants to play nice after that.  

Which means this weekend may only be good for the beginning of chase for NEXT weekend? I think I'll take that...lol

[WEATHER53]

1 hour ago, psuhoffman said:

In the past when you would look at a setup that is 48 hours away...and you break down our odds of this or that based on the barometric pressure... you are using the guidance.  Otherwise you would have no freaking idea exactly what our barometric pressure would be in 48 hours...or what the pressure at Pittsburgh would be...or anywhere else.   Your tools and application of very sound methodology are great...but they would have absolutely no predictive worth beyond about 24 hours without NWP because its impossible to extrapolate the atmosphere very far out in time without the aid of computers.  Some of the best minds used to try back before NWP  and it was mostly a disaster of busted forecasts.  

There is no need to know that has an effect on 99% of the population beyond 5 days AND models can’t do it anyway so what the point

its a self fulfilling confirmation effort on the part of models to show 30 and snow in DC with a low off VA and 6-12 hours later show a central lakes cutter with rain and 60.

Wow. What a tool, no rather it is a tool (deragatory)  shows everything between the coastal and cutter and then come confirmation time for federal funding you can claim you got it because one outcome did occur. I’m glad my doctors technology  has improved over the last 20 years so he does not have to hunt and peck between all possible outcome.

We have been sold a bill of bad goods that largely exists to self sustain and has very little predictive emphasis toward what is the most likely, most accurate forecast of an outcome.

i know “it’s all we have” but that’s too desperate and is  not leading to any advancement skill wise. 

 

 

 

[psuhoffman]

2 minutes ago, WEATHER53 said:

There is no need to know that has an effect on 99% of the population beyond 5 days AND models can’t do it anyway so what the point

its a self fulfilling confirmation effort on the part of models to show 30 and snow in DC with a lie off VA and 6-12 hours later show a central lakes cutter with rain and 60.

Wow. What a tool, no rather it is a tool (deragatory)  shows everything between the coastal and cutter and then come confirmation time for federal funding you can claim you got it because one outcome did occur. I’m glad my doctors technology  has improved over the last 20 years so he does not have to hunt and peck between all possible outcome.

We have been sold a bill of bad goods that largely exists to self sustain and has very little predictive emphasis toward what is the most likely, most accurate forecast of an outcome.

i know “it’s all we have” but that’s too desperate and is  not leading to any advancement skill wise. 

 

You shouldn't be using single op runs at long range for synoptic scale details.  If you are...that is user error not model error.  But I am not talking LONG range...forecasts were atrocious even at 48 hours before we had the aid of NWP.  HUGE busts at 24-48 hours are MUCH less frequent now compared to any time in the past.  You are always focused on what the limitations of guidance are.  And there are limitations...we cannot model the atmosphere perfectly even with computers.  But the fact is they are helping to make forecasts much better than they would be without NWP...and that is the bar.  Not are they perfect...but do they make things better...and they do.  

[psuhoffman]

Just now, losetoa6 said:

With the Eps advertising a pretty stout 50/50 low Sunday through Tuesday that could  keep heights low enough to score something by as early as Wednesday...maybe a clipper or wave on a front .

I think the first wave goes north...but a trailing wave on the front is a possibility

[Baltimorewx]

8 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

You shouldn't be using single op runs at long range for synoptic scale details.  If you are...that is user error not model error.  But I am not talking LONG range...forecasts were atrocious even at 48 hours before we had the aid of NWP.  HUGE busts at 24-48 hours are MUCH less frequent now compared to any time in the past.  You are always focused on what the limitations of guidance are.  And there are limitations...we cannot model the atmosphere perfectly even with computers.  But the fact is they are helping to make forecasts much better than they would be without NWP...and that is the bar.  Not are they perfect...but do they make things better...and they do.  

I personally think its pretty incredible that we can model the atmosphere in any way....and yes like you said, its pretty darn accurate for the most part inside 48 and even 72 hours. Its usually the interpretation where things kind of go wrong in my opinion.  To expect a model to be accurate a week or 2 weeks in advance may not ever be reasonable in my opinion

[psuhoffman]

1 minute ago, Baltimorewx said:

I personally think its pretty incredible that we can model the atmosphere in any way....and yes like you said, its pretty darn accurate for the most part inside 48 and even 72 hours. Its usually the interpretation where things kind of go wrong in my opinion.  To expect a model to be accurate a week or 2 weeks in advance may not ever be reasonable in my opinion

Ensemble forecasting has increased accuracy with general longwave patterns out to day 10 or so...but the problems really come when people try to pin down details (like the exact location of a low) in the 5-10 day period.  

[Baltimorewx]

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

Ensemble forecasting has increased accuracy with general longwave patterns out to day 10 or so...but the problems really come when people try to pin down details (like the exact location of a low) in the 5-10 day period.  

Yeah I agree.  Operating my own weather page, I see all the time how the general public thinks the models are so terrible though...it irks me because they just dont understand what goes into these models and how difficult it is to model a chaotic atmosphere

[Bubbler86]

9 minutes ago, Baltimorewx said:

Yeah I agree.  Operating my own weather page, I see all the time how the general public thinks the models are so terrible though...it irks me because they just dont understand what goes into these models and how difficult it is to model a chaotic atmosphere

I do not post much here but going to jump in on this convo.  The public only started talking about the models being terrible when the Met's and Want-To-Be Met's started posting model outputs in TV Show and web site graphics.  It especially became prominent with TWC and Hurricanes.   Many people who post models as part of their forecast do it as a way to redirect criticism..."Well, my forecast was based on the GFS and the Euro and neither were right so don't blame me".

 

 

[Baltimorewx]

2 minutes ago, Bubbler86 said:

I do not post much here but going to jump in on this convo.  The public only started talking about the models being terrible when the Met's and Want-To-Be Met's started posting model outputs in TV Show and web site graphics.  It especially became prominent with TWC and Hurricanes.   Many people who post models as part of their forecast do it as a way to redirect criticism..."Well, my forecast was based on the GFS and the Euro and neither were right so don't blame me".

 

 

Thats true some but I do also see the "average joes" who can somewhat interpret what a weather model shows and looks at them often and thinks they suck because of the degree in change but dont understand how sensitive some patterns are to small synoptic shifts that cause a relatively drastically different outcome.

[clskinsfan]

18Z NAM is a lot closer to mood flakes for Thursday. If that ends up verifying the CMC will deserve some credit.

[Bubbler86]

Just now, Baltimorewx said:

Thats true some but I do also see the "average joes" who can somewhat interpret what a weather model shows and looks at them often and thinks they suck because of the degree in change but dont understand how sensitive some patterns are to small synoptic shifts that cause a relatively drastically different outcome.

Yea, there are certainly some people who look at models and think they are experts and critique from there with no basis for it.  I guess my thought was that the people who are railing on models would have been the same people railing on Met's before models became so accessible.  They have just redirected their opinions.    

[Solution Man]

ICON...checking in

[Weather Will]

WB-18Z ICON

[WinterWxLuvr]

54 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

18Z NAM is a lot closer to mood flakes for Thursday. If that ends up verifying the CMC will deserve some credit.

Right as the Icon which had shown snow here for several runs in a row loses it.

[Buddy1987]

7 minutes ago, Weather Will said:

WB-18Z ICON

Lmao 4.6" here I'll believe it when hell freezes over. 

[Shu Suzuki]

2 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

#18 for the win.....

[jaydreb]

GFS much closer to legit coastal.  Still too warm though.  

[Weather Will]

GFS WB 18Z

[Ji]

Gfs shows 34 and rain leesburg at 12z sat with all the columns good enough. I dont think so

[WVclimo]

Just now, Ji said:

Gfs shows 34 and rain leesburg at 12z sat with all the columns good enough. I dont think so

Has 1000-500 mb thicknesses sub 534 here at 18Z with rain falling.

[CAPE]

1 minute ago, Ji said:

Gfs shows 34 and rain leesburg at 12z sat with all the columns good enough. I dont think so

Crappy rates lad.

[WinterWxLuvr]

2 minutes ago, Ji said:

Gfs shows 34 and rain leesburg at 12z sat with all the columns good enough. I dont think so

That makes two of us

[jaydreb]

1 minute ago, Ji said:

Gfs shows 34 and rain leesburg at 12z sat with all the columns good enough. I dont think so

Yeah, GFS is basically saying that those surface temps are too warm for snow.   IMBY its 36, which probably isn’t good for anything but white rain.  But column looks OK for areas like yours which are around 33-34.   

[WinterWxLuvr]

Just now, C.A.P.E. said:

Crappy rates lad.

For now 

[Ji]

Crappy rates lad.

I've seen it snow at 40 so...