Rick G Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 I am John Q Public. I watch the local tv Met and he says it will be windy and we will get a lot of snow. At the same time a weather warning goes across the TV screen stating that there is a blizzard warning for the area. The TV met then states that there will be blizzard conditions. To John Q Public a blizzard is a bad snow storm.(I use my 70 year old mother as an example) she doesn't care about the 35 mph wind requirements. I would think that you NWS mets should be using your best judgement and calling warnings when you think they are needed. One side note: there was a tornado near by a couple of months ago. no tstorm watches or warnings. there was no SAME warning either. One last thought: I think that NOAA needs to overhaul the SAME radio system. equip all Radios and TVs with it. Much better way to get the message out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieOber Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 I am John Q Public. I watch the local tv Met and he says it will be windy and we will get a lot of snow. At the same time a weather warning goes across the TV screen stating that there is a blizzard warning for the area. The TV met then states that there will be blizzard conditions. To John Q Public a blizzard is a bad snow storm.(I use my 70 year old mother as an example) she doesn't care about the 35 mph wind requirements. I would think that you NWS mets should be using your best judgement and calling warnings when you think they are needed. One side note: there was a tornado near by a couple of months ago. no tstorm watches or warnings. there was no SAME warning either. One last thought: I think that NOAA needs to overhaul the SAME radio system. equip all Radios and TVs with it. Much better way to get the message out. Agreed, but that's not NOAA's call. It's something that a law would be needed to require manufacturers to install. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MGorse Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 One side note: there was a tornado near by a couple of months ago. no tstorm watches or warnings. there was no SAME warning either. I believe this was the low-topped squall line event you are referring to, which the northern end went across the southern portions of NWS BGM's CWA. There was little to no lightning with that activity, and any tornado was likely a rather brief spin-up. Very tough to catch and warn on. One last thought: I think that NOAA needs to overhaul the SAME radio system. equip all Radios and TVs with it. Much better way to get the message out. The NOAA Weather Radio system is being completely redone. I believe a few offices will be testing it later in 2011. If I understood correctly, this new system will not really be noticed by the customer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isohume Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 I am John Q Public. I watch the local tv Met and he says it will be windy and we will get a lot of snow. At the same time a weather warning goes across the TV screen stating that there is a blizzard warning for the area. The TV met then states that there will be blizzard conditions. To John Q Public a blizzard is a bad snow storm.(I use my 70 year old mother as an example) she doesn't care about the 35 mph wind requirements. That's good. The public doesn't need to know what the specific criteria is for a blizzard warning. As long as they acknowledge it is a dangerous storm and take heed. When I said earlier that we explain what a BZ.W is to the public in our products, I was addressing another posters concern that there is no information out there that explains what a blizzard actually is. I would think that you NWS mets should be using your best judgement and calling warnings when you think they are needed. That's what we do. We don't flippantly issue or not issue warnings on whims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBG Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 I think that we should go back to the old classification and include very cold temperatures. That would make blizzard rarer and more deserving of the moniker. How about reviving the old "heavy snow warning" for all but storms including all three factors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isohume Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 How about reviving the old "heavy snow warning" for all but storms including all three factors? We still say it in the WS.W attribution line...things like: "WINTER STORM WARNING FOR HEAVY SNOW". We'll mention sleet, blowing snow and freezing rain or any combination as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amped Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 It's all about road conditions as far as the public is concerned In 2006 my dad went out to CVS a mile from the house in the heart of it. Everything was fine. He wouldn't try it on Sundays storm.. . And he would't have either if he was in Frederick on 2/10/10. Thats the difference the winds make In summary WSW = Don't travel if you don't have to. Blizzard Warning= Do not Travel Even if you have to. If people don't understand blizzard warning, they should just make travel ban on when conditions like Sundays' so people don't think it's a bluff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.