Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,609
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

Wednesday 12/8 Possible Snow/Ice/Rain? Discussion


Torch Tiger
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, weatherwiz said:

much better than me. 

This is just frustrating b/c you watch the evolution of this from the upper-levels down to the surface and it's close to being a big hit. I' just so sick of this crap though these past few winters. It's almost not even worth monitoring or getting excited for any chance unless you're within 72-hours...and even then you probably get disappointed. 

why do the models suck so bad? I've asked every winter over the last few years why it seems anything more than 3 days out can go from norester, to cutter, to OTS. And like you said, even within 3 days, it can be a crapshoot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lava Rock said:

why do the models suck so bad? I've asked every winter over the last few years why it seems anything more than 3 days out can go from norester, to cutter, to OTS. And like you said, even within 3 days, it can be a crapshoot

Models have gotten better as a whole. It’s just that now everyone has access to pretty graphics of snow 5+ days out. When 50 miles means flurries or a foot, that’s totally in the margin of error at that time. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

The first few inches of the season are always special...or hell the first storm really. Also knowing what lies ahead with the pattern moving forward we need to capitalize on any chance (no matter how minor) we can get

 

13 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

Is that what she said? 

Good morning W W and. R A I. My declining days would be lost without the members of the forum and  … yup … remembering back, that’s what she said. As always …..

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lava Rock said:

why do the models suck so bad? I've asked every winter over the last few years why it seems anything more than 3 days out can go from norester, to cutter, to OTS. And like you said, even within 3 days, it can be a crapshoot

I don't know if it's really a case of models sucking. These past few winters we have seen patterns become established which have tended to be progressive in nature which usually is associated with lots of moving parts (i.e. shortwave energy). When you have situations where there are so many pieces of energy and an infinite amount of interactions you get chaos from hell. This is why when looking just at SLP and sfc charts you get tons of different solutions not only from model-to-model but mode run-to-model run...it's a product of the infinite amount of solutions which exist. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

much better than me. 

This is just frustrating b/c you watch the evolution of this from the upper-levels down to the surface and it's close to being a big hit. I' just so sick of this crap though these past few winters. It's almost not even worth monitoring or getting excited for any chance unless you're within 72-hours...and even then you probably get disappointed. 

Models shoul not go out past 120 hours

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

C'mon that is 1 month.  September and October are months that lead into the winter season.  One of the warmest falls if not the warmest fall on record. 

If anything, there is actually an inverse correlation for the winter with Sept/Oct. The warmest Sept/Oct tend to have colder/snowier winters. You don't want November warm though (which it wasn't this year).

 

Just checking Boston really quick....their top 5 warmest Sep/Oct combos coming into this year was 2017, 1971, 2007, 1947, and 1961 (with 1983 close behind).

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

I don't know if it's really a case of models sucking. These past few winters we have seen patterns become established which have tended to be progressive in nature which usually is associated with lots of moving parts (i.e. shortwave energy). When you have situations where there are so many pieces of energy and an infinite amount of interactions you get chaos from hell. This is why when looking just at SLP and sfc charts you get tons of different solutions not only from model-to-model but mode run-to-model run...it's a product of the infinite amount of solutions which exist. 

 

makes sense, thanks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

The problem is there are too many ridiculous products out there. Past 120-hours...hell maybe even 96 you only need upper-level charts and some SLP progs. No QPF or snow maps or whatever

Agree

These models keep getting upgraded  which are making them worse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

C'mon that is 1 month.  September and October are months that lead into the winter season.  One of the warmest falls if not the warmest fall on record. 

I get that it was a mild fall, but its tough for me to connect the fall pattern to the early winter pattern when the month immediately preceding the change of seasons was pretty different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Models have gotten better as a whole. It’s just that now everyone has access to pretty graphics of snow 5+ days out. When 50 miles means flurries or a foot, that’s totally in the margin of error at that time. 

Yeah this is really it....years ago you only had basic QPF maps and had to use experience to interpret snowfall based on thicknesses/mid-level temps, etc.....now you have a trillion weenie snow maps (many of which are awful...in both directions) that every person has access to and it can muddy the discourse quite a bit....esp beyond D5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

If anything, there is actually an inverse correlation for the winter with Sept/Oct. The warmest Sept/Oct tend to have colder/snowier winters. You don't want November warm though (which it wasn't this year).

 

Just checking Boston really quick....their top 5 warmest Sep/Oct combos coming into this year was 2017, 1971, 2007, 1947, and 1961 (with 1983 close behind).

Exactly...Novie has a slight positive correlation to winter, I believe...so his post, aside from correctly characterizing the fall as one of the mildest on record, doesn't make much sense.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, weatherwiz said:

unless that period happens to be right around climo...sadly, probably not :(   

 

:lol: 

lol atleast having no snow or ice has helped the alligator strive in the westfield river by The Bige in west springfield   saw on wwlp it was spotted again the other day :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Lava Rock said:

why do the models suck so bad? I've asked every winter over the last few years why it seems anything more than 3 days out can go from norester, to cutter, to OTS. And like you said, even within 3 days, it can be a crapshoot

Perhaps an attempt should  be made to let a new  model learn how to forecast on it's own.  The chess super computer Alpha Zero learned to play extremely high level chess by playing thousands upon thousands of games of chess  against itself. The computer has never "seen" a game played by humans or other computers.  The computer"learned" by trial and error.  I am far from a computer expert although I did stay at a Holiday Day Inn Express last night but I wonder if a similar development can  be taken to develop a new and much better weather model.

From the Wiki article

 AlphaZero was trained solely via "self-play" using 5,000 first-generation TPUs to generate the games and 64 second-generation TPUs to train the neural networks, all in parallel, with no access to opening books or endgame tables. After four hours of training, DeepMind estimated AlphaZero was playing chess at a higher Elo rating than Stockfish 8; after nine hours of training, the algorithm defeated Stockfish 8 in a time-controlled 100-game tournament (28 wins, 0 losses, and 72 draws).[1][2][3] The trained algorithm played on a single machine with four TPUs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...