Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

January 28-29, 2022 Miller abcdefu Storm Threat


WxUSAF
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, osfan24 said:

Not great. Would do anything for the 970 just southeast of OC. That's perfect.

It’s fine. It’s not great if you want a MECS or HECS to occur, yes, but a track offshore with proper phasing and a mature moisture field can still lay down 3-6” in your area - even with the low not tucked. Of course, the OCMD tuck is the perfect scenario, but it’s unlikely to happen given the setup. If people have reasonable expectations for a complex Miller B in a niña, we’ll likely end up doing just fine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rockem_sockem_connection said:

This isn't true. You can't perceive shifts as trends in the sense you're trying to. It's not like a sporting team trending in the right direction with some wins, making progress on making the playoffs. The models can and probably will come out at 0z taking away the 1-2' totals because again, trends don't actually excited in weather models - just the perception of trends. My two cents ty for listening 

Great. If you’re looking at it from the perspective of things slowly shifting in a direction over a period of time, it’s a trend.
 

How’s Philly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jayyy said:

Great. If you’re looking at it from the perspective of things slowly shifting in a direction over a period of time, it’s a trend.
 

How’s Philly

Lol I'm kinda cracking myself up. Like you sit here and go 5 MILE SHIFT WEST and keep saying that each run til we run out of time? Lol are we supposed to pretend it's like a football game that ran outta time? Oh darn if we just had some more time those models would of shifted west two more times??? Hahaha it's a funny thought you gotta admit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jayyy said:

Great. If you’re looking at it from the perspective of things slowly shifting in a direction over a period of time, it’s a trend.
 

How’s Philly

I get what both of you are saying. But I think what he's saying is that the models don't "remember" what they predicted X number of cycles ago. They take in the data ingested for the latest cycle and run math calculations to spit out what it thinks the atmosphere will do. The perception of "trends" is there - but it's in the initialization of the models and our analysis of it...

So yes - initilization over several cycles could analyze that a piece of energy is stronger each time. But that's not the model trending in that sense - it's the starting data adjusting in real time. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Rockem_sockem_connection said:

That's because there's no such thing as a trend when it comes to model runs. We like to think there is but there's not and that's why your statement is correct. Models don't trend. There digest data and spit out results. It might look like things are trending in a direction but that's something we have artificially created ourselves. Models don't trend 

 

68B77DF6-FBE6-4383-BAAF-AC4C1A344084.gif

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kmlwx said:

I get what both of you are saying. But I think what he's saying is that the models don't "remember" what they predicted X number of cycles ago. They take in the data ingested for the latest cycle and run math calculations to spit out what it thinks the atmosphere will do. The perception of "trends" just there - but it's in the initialization of the models and our analysis of it...

That's what I'm saying ty for helping. It's just something I battle with myself. Like yes there's a trend we observe but I don't find it actually means anything. I mean we do this every winter we all know the deal lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Rockem_sockem_connection said:

That's because there's no such thing as a trend when it comes to model runs. We like to think there is but there's not and that's why your statement is correct. Models don't trend. There digest data and spit out results. It might look like things are trending in a direction but that's something we have artificially created ourselves. Models don't trend 

Put your head back onA539C8DD-A3D7-456B-9D13-A32DFAA4DDCE.jpeg.4e738ba20338c3ac5d533c75cc1a44bf.jpeg 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kmlwx said:

I get what both of you are saying. But I think what he's saying is that the models don't "remember" what they predicted X number of cycles ago. They take in the data ingested for the latest cycle and run math calculations to spit out what it thinks the atmosphere will do. The perception of "trends" is there - but it's in the initialization of the models and our analysis of it...

So yes - initilization over several cycles could analyze that a piece of energy is stronger each time. But that's not the model trending in that sense - it's the starting data adjusting in real time. 

True. Models don't "remember" and perhaps the idea of trending a certain way is more attributing a human characteristic onto them. But it does serve a purpose to look at d(model)/dt. Personally I think Rockem Sockem comes off a bit too dismissive and arrogant on the subject when there is no need to do so.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Rockem_sockem_connection said:

Lol I'm kinda cracking myself up. Like you sit here and go 5 MILE SHIFT WEST and keep saying that each run til we run out of time? Lol are we supposed to pretend it's like a football game that ran outta time? Oh darn if we just had some more time those models would of shifted west two more times??? Hahaha it's a funny thought you gotta admit.

I haven’t said a word since I made one comment about hoping for an average of a 25 mile shift west with each run. Which, is completely plausible.  

Coming from someone who uttered the words “the storm being further west won’t help us”, you should probably get off your high horse on this one.  No one cares about your definition of the word trend. Carry on. 
 

By the way - it’s called the rock and sock connection.

30A95638-F488-4C03-A27C-75E1D61A1B40.jpeg

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rockem_sockem_connection said:

Sorry I'm not popular around here I'll go back to my hole. Good luck to tonight's observers. Many fine drinks in here, cheers. it's not goodbye just a see you later 

It's not a matter of popularity. You bring up some good points but can come off as a bit superior and dismissive of others' comments. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Rockem_sockem_connection said:

Lol I'm kinda cracking myself up. Like you sit here and go 5 MILE SHIFT WEST and keep saying that each run til we run out of time? Lol are we supposed to pretend it's like a football game that ran outta time? Oh darn if we just had some more time those models would of shifted west two more times??? Hahaha it's a funny thought you gotta admit.

Hahaha. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Always in Zugzwang said:

True. Models don't "remember" and perhaps the idea of trending a certain way is more attributing a human characteristic onto them. But it does serve a purpose to look at d(model)/dt. Personally I think Rockem Sockem comes off a bit too dismissive and arrogant on the subject when there is no need to do so.

Correct. It’s fine to have differing opinions on things - no need to be condescending in the process.   

I get that a given model isn’t necessarily “trending”, but when models are collecting more recent data, and that data results in a systematic shift in a particular direction 2 days in a row, one could consider that an overall trend. If all models are moving west, to say we are seeing a west trend with the outcome is a reasonable thing to say.  At least in my eyes. We’re parsing words here honestly. Pretty stupid argument lol. What else would you call it? 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Rockem_sockem_connection said:

That's what I'm saying ty for helping. It's just something I battle with myself. Like yes there's a trend we observe but I don't find it actually means anything. I mean we do this every winter we all know the deal lol

There’s still a trend, but more so in regards to initialization of one run (actual) compared to where the previous run expected those initialized data points to be. It’s a matter of semantics, but I’m not sure what other word you can use other than trend.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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