Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,508
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

March 25-26 Potential Bomb Part II


earthlight

Recommended Posts

Agree my man , its just par for the course in this thread .

Speaking of which would love to be at the HO in Chatham for this one . Should be a show .

Its just annoying that people post according to their backyard only. Also, posting like this Nuke of a storm is a sure bet to go east, disregarding anything that may say otherwise.

That's s huge flag for me to be honest. The euro ensembles had 3 members significantly southeast that was skewing the mean badly. The clustering was north and west of the mean itself. Remove the outliers and we would have seen another jump northwest

Funny you mention, my girlfriends family owns a summer house in Chatham, and she will be inquiring if we can head down there lol. It may be epic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

That's s huge flag for me to be honest. The euro ensembles had 3 members significantly southeast that was skewing the mean badly. The clustering was north and west of the mean itself. Remove the outliers and we would have seen another jump northwest

Don't know if it was posted here or not, but this is what TauntonBlizz is referring to:

Good representation posted by https://twitter.com/EricHolthaus

Those 950/940's on the left side of the envelope are a bit ominous

BjW-NuzCEAAu_Ex.png-large.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very well said, particularly the point about looking at multiple factors.

Thank you Don .  I still think for some reason , this can be tugged west a bit . I`m not sure if KNYC is out of the woods.

The GFS has been east since inception , so no surprise there . But the Euro came west again at 12z albeit slight with the precip shield

And as I am  writing JC and Taunton are showing the 3 members that may have skewed  the ensemble mean a bit SE .

 

So until I see the Euro jump east with the new data already absorbed I just cant punt it , even for Monmouth County yet .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think about the direction of the track, there are three waaay east outliers, one decently west outlier, and the rest pretty clustered west of the mean, with a spread out (E-W) group of 4 that appear to be on the slower end of the guidance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very well said, particularly the point about looking at multiple factors.

 

Don, he is talking about 2 or multiple different aspects of risk.

We would need complete model failure at this point to support a significant snowfall for the area.

Sure it can change, but if I was in rick mgmt, I would hedge the other direction.

The  risk with investing in a company/property/car etc compared to a weather model is strange.

Surprised he would bring his job into a weather discussion.

 

Best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy the furthest W 950MB would be nice if we had our pick huh .

I think there is a pretty good cluster that take a similar track, some of which are in the 940s. That particular one may just be an outlier on the slow side.

I would love a peek at the same image from 3 and 6 hours prior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don, he is talking about 2 or multiple different aspects of risk.

We would need complete model failure at this point to support a significant snowfall for the area.

Sure it can change, but if I was in rick mgmt, I would hedge the other direction.

The  risk with investing in a company/property/car etc compared to a weather model is strange.

Surprised he would bring his job into a weather discussion.

 

Best.

No matter what you assess , if there are multiple factors you have to take them all into account . In this case 3 of the 4 major global models are west, not the other way around . Why should I punt this for Long Island and CT ?

 

Based on what ?  I`m hear to listen , make you`re case .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don, he is talking about 2 or multiple different aspects of risk.

We would need complete model failure at this point to support a significant snowfall for the area.

Sure it can change, but if I was in rick mgmt, I would hedge the other direction.

The risk with investing in a company/property/car etc compared to a weather model is strange.

Surprised he would bring his job into a weather discussion.

Best.

What area, NYC? I disagree, that would not be a complete model failure unless we haven't gotten any indications of that movent by tomorrow evening or maybe even tomorrow's overnight runs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don, he is talking about 2 or multiple different aspects of risk.

We would need complete model failure at this point to support a significant snowfall for the area.

Sure it can change, but if I was in rick mgmt, I would hedge the other direction.

The risk with investing in a company/property/car etc compared to a weather model is strange.

Surprised he would bring his job into a weather discussion.

Best.

Also, comparing probabilistic forecasting to probabilistic risk management is not strange...it is the critical function of our NWS to do exactly both of these things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter what you assess , if there are multiple factors you have to take them all into account . In this case 3 of the 4 major global models are west, not the other way around . Why should I punt this for Long Island and CT ?

 

Based on what ?  I`m hear to listen , make you`re case .

 

No case, just years of watching models. The storm looks to be a near mis as with thousands of other storms.

Check the records, how often does NYC or LI get a significant snow storm this far out in the season.

I have no dog in this fight. 

 

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, comparing probabilistic forecasting to probabilistic risk management is not strange...it is the critical function of our NWS to do exactly both of these things.

All one has to do is read WPC in ALL their AFDs they discuss all the models in 1 or 2 suites .

They may dismiss one for being too fast , or one for its thermal profiles or one for the lack of depth etc .

 

The point is the smartest guys in the this business take a macro approach when forecasting because sometimes the physics from one model out of one stream are better than another - and they will yield to verification scores  or whatever metric they use at that time when deciding which one to go with .

 

But they will NEVER look at one model ,and  dismiss all the  rest of the guidance and create a forecast for a major metropolitan area . No one would .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, comparing probabilistic forecasting to probabilistic risk management is not strange...it is the critical function of our NWS to do exactly both of these things.

 

 Call up the big insurance companies and ask them if they are concerned with giving insurance to new home purchases the next 10 days in the area.

 

Best

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No case, just years of watching models. The storm looks to be a near mis as with thousands of other storms.

Check the records, how often does NYC or LI get a significant snow storm this far out in the season.

I have no dog in this fight. 

 

Cheers

And being in Colts Neck I may not either . All I am saying is if the models come east at 0z or 12z that's life , but right now people just off to my NE are in the game.

 

All good

Cheers as well mate .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All one has to do is read WPC in ALL their AFDs they discuss all the models in 1 or 2 suites .

They may dismiss one for being too fast , or one for its thermal profiles or one for the lack of depth etc .

The point is the smartest guys in the this business take a macro approach when forecasting because sometimes the physics from one model out of one stream are better than another - and they will yield to verification scores or whatever metric they use at that time when deciding which one to go with .

But they will NEVER look at one model , dismiss all the guidance and create a forecast for a major metropolitan area . No one would .

Sorry didn't mean to quote you originally. See revised post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No case, just years of watching models. The storm looks to be a near mis as with thousands of other storms.

Check the records, how often does NYC or LI get a significant snow storm this far out in the season.

I have no dog in this fight. 

 

Cheers

 

Arguing the fact that NYC/LI doesn't get significant snowstorms in late March has nothing to do with whether or not this one will verify.  Climatology is one thing, but ask the people in CT about climatology in October 2011.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arguing the fact that NYC/LI doesn't get significant snowstorms in late March has nothing to do with whether or not this one will verify. Climatology is one thing, but ask the people in CT about climatology in October 2011.

It said no power for two weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No case, just years of watching models. The storm looks to be a near mis as with thousands of other storms.

Check the records, how often does NYC or LI get a significant snow storm this far out in the season.

I have no dog in this fight. 

 

Cheers

C'mon if this storm misses it won't be because it is March 26th.  Of course most storms miss, everyone knows that.  The point various posters are making is that it is too soon for you to say that the storm will miss the entire area, especially since eastern areas were still hit decently by the 12z globals.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No case, just years of watching models. The storm looks to be a near mis as with thousands of other storms.

Check the records, how often does NYC or LI get a significant snow storm this far out in the season.

I have no dog in this fight. 

 

Cheers

Don't know how you equate climo here. There are plenty of large March storms that affect the region even if many are liquid along the coast. We are not worried about p-type here. It's pretty much snow or OTS except for extreme eastern sections if it does trend west. But we get plenty of significant storms this time of year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don, he is talking about 2 or multiple different aspects of risk.

We would need complete model failure at this point to support a significant snowfall for the area.

Sure it can change, but if I was in rick mgmt, I would hedge the other direction.

The  risk with investing in a company/property/car etc compared to a weather model is strange.

Surprised he would bring his job into a weather discussion.

 

Best.

I don't believe he is suggesting that the NYC area will have a significant snowfall. He specifically mentions that the highest risk concerns parts of Long Island and eastern New England. Having said that, NYC is still in the running for a light to maybe moderate snowfall. There's still a good amount of uncertainty, but odds of a significant snowfall for NYC are probably low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don, he is talking about 2 or multiple different aspects of risk.

We would need complete model failure at this point to support a significant snowfall for the area.

Sure it can change, but if I was in rick mgmt, I would hedge the other direction.

The  risk with investing in a company/property/car etc compared to a weather model is strange.

Surprised he would bring his job into a weather discussion.

 

Best.

 

Why would there be a complete model failure?  The models are portraying the output resulting from initial conditions at the time of sampling, nothing more nothing less.  If during the next sampling period conditions have changed the models will reflect the change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don`t dismiss the GFS because its s@#$ for me , I am just trying to plug into the rest of the guidance and see where continuity is .

3 out the 4 major globals are still on board East of NYC  across Central and Eastern Long Island and Eastern CT for a nice event  .

 

I assess risk for as living , I never look at one factor when determining how to a price of an instrument , I get it , people get emotional so they want to punt it and others wana see stuff fail .

 

If you`re looking at this objectively areas off to the east are not dead . And a storm that deepens 30 MB in 12 hours is cool if it happens .

Would be cooler if happened a little further west .

But that's life .

 

Agree with Don - well said.  Most people on this board (and in general) have very little understanding of uncertainty and probabilistic risk analysis.  Sure, at this point, the evidence is weighted towards most of this forum mostly missing this storm (except east of NYC), but knowing that this is likely to be a monster storm that is currently not being modeled perfectly, especially given that the disturbances that will coalesce to form this monster are over 3000 miles away, there is some decent possibility that the track will end up west of where most models are showing it now.  Maybe a 25% chance. 

 

And playing the hypothetical "what if" game, then it would also be likely an equal 25% chance of the track ending up east of where most models are showing, since all things being equal, unless one has specific knowledge of known tendencies of the models, expecting one deviation (east) to be more likely than another in the opposite direction (west) is illogical.  If one accepts those two probabilities of deviation (and maybe they're 10% likely in each direction - I really don't know, but I'm sure they're symmetrical around the current track), that would then mean there's probably a 50% chance of it tracking just about where it's progged now (and when I say now, I mean by the 12Z runs, not one run of the 18Z GFS, which I've never seen any pro make any conclusion on). 

 

My point in all of this is those people saying "it's dead" or "it's over" when the best pros on the planet at the WPC and the NWS say otherwise, are simply behaving like emotionally petulant children.  They may end up being correct, but not for any scientific reason and they're completely wrong in dismissing the possibility of a westward deviation in the track.  Far too much uncertainty, still, to dismiss this threat for NYC and at least much of NJ.  If we're still in this spot tomorrow night, then, yeah, it's probably time to give it up, but not yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No longer living in what is now the NYC subforum, I, obviously, would like everyone to get a bomb, but Euro ensembles suggesting six inches of snow in Western Suffolk County (and almost a foot on Cape Cod) and maybe a 50 mile shift putting that into the city (BOS), I wouldn't  personally let the storm not being quite what was hyped a few days ago mean abandoning all hope, especially as even a few inches in late March is better than nothing.

 

Is WxBell PPV ok here?  Dr. Maue tweets out so much I don't know how anyone would know if TOS was violated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would there be a complete model failure?  The models are portraying the output resulting from initial conditions at the time of sampling, nothing more nothing less.  If during the next sampling period conditions have changed the models will reflect the change.

 

Not to mention a 75 mile error at 3-4 days or so is not that big on the models, and as of now thats about the only shift we'd need to get eastern sections into big snows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol @ people calling this dead because THEY might not get snow in their backyard. People on long island and eastern new england are very much under the gun, and everyone else still to a lesser degree.

This happens every storm. Some people aren't in prime position so they start calling threats "dead" and " its going east, I told you so!" Just because your backyard doesn't jackpot doesn't mean that a storm is "dead"

Reality is the gfs didn't look as great. However not all was lost. Some things looked better, some worse.

The euro ensembles were clustered heavily on the nw side of the mean, possibly indicating an even further north solution.

With a storm of this power and magnitude, who knows what will happen

 

Lol @ people calling this dead because THEY might not get snow in their backyard. People on long island and eastern new england are very much under the gun, and everyone else still to a lesser degree.

This happens every storm. Some people aren't in prime position so they start calling threats "dead" and " its going east, I told you so!" Just because your backyard doesn't jackpot doesn't mean that a storm is "dead"

Reality is the gfs didn't look as great. However not all was lost. Some things looked better, some worse.

The euro ensembles were clustered heavily on the nw side of the mean, possibly indicating an even further north solution.

With a storm of this power and magnitude, who knows what will happen

Snow in DC, Boston, CT, LI....doesn't mean a thing to me. I'm not that big a weather fan that I care what happens hundreds of miles from me. I wanna know if a storm will affect me and my family, my coworkers etc. New England getting snow might as well be China for all I care. That's the fact Jack, for most people in the world. You can find interesting storms anywhere on the planet if you look for them I guess.

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...