40/70 Benchmark Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Your weenie-meter is about an 11 on a scale of 1-10 when you start using the DGEX to talk about long range pattern potential. Nothing wrong for turning to the DGEX to buttress a forecast already supported by viable guidance... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Paul Gordon Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Nothing wrong for turning to the DGEX to buttress a forecast already supported by viable guidance... Agree.... the spirits guided me to make my HECS forecast for the 21-23 and they are very trustworthy at this range out....It's just that sometimes they get a little fickle the closer in we get....But what the heck...I want a white Christmas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesnichols89 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Agree.... the spirits guided me to make my HECS forecast for the 21-23 and they are very trustworthy at this range out....It's just that sometimes they get a little fickle the closer in we get....But what the heck...I want a white Christmas A White Christmas is more likely for you than for me, but I want a White Christmas as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Paul Gordon Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 A White Christmas is more likely for you than for me, but I want a White Christmas as well. Consult the spirits... they'll give you one.... that HECS will be a benchmarker, but as it slowly moves away you will go from rain to snow. White Christmas for you,, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesnichols89 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Sweet, that would be awesome, normally benchmark storms give Cape Cod snows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Nothing wrong for turning to the DGEX to buttress a forecast already supported by viable guidance... I don't find it useful in any situation. But to each his own. At any rate. We turn a bit colder but it's far from a good wintry pattern. We may have to wait until closer to Christmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesnichols89 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Will, its much winter like on the ensembles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Will, its much winter like on the ensembles. I'm basing my opinion on the ensembles. Any cold looks fairly marginal over the next 10 days. Perhaps closer to Christmas it gets a little better. Doesn't mean we can't get a storm on the 17th but it's not screaming winter storm right now to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typhoon Tip Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Hey Scott -- I'm actually kind of optimistic for that D9 thing... It's one of these scenarios where the teleconnectors argue there "should" be something more prevalent in the runs, and since something is "hinted", the hint might actually get a confidence interval. The 12z GGEM (Great Gobs of Excrement Model) does now show a more involved N/S stream like we alluded to earlier, and tho it's laughable as usual for this time range.... the "Concept" stands to reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I don't find it useful in any situation. But to each his own. At any rate. We turn a bit colder but it's far from a good wintry pattern. We may have to wait until closer to Christmas. If it corroborates what all other guidance has, then sure it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesnichols89 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I like the PNA ridging that is developing from AZ to AK. The ridge aligns with the spine of the Rockies at hour 120 and that northern stream disturbance is starting to dive southeastward. Could be a sign of greater things to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 If it corroborates what all other guidance has, then sure it is. That lends the question: If the Euro/Euro ensembles/GFS/GEFS/Ukie/etc all agree on a certain type of setup...why would you even bother looking at a 96 hour DGEX map to compliment your forecast? If it disagrees, then you aren't changing your forecast based on that, correct? So what value does it have when it agrees? It's the broken clock syndrome to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 That lends the question: If the Euro/Euro ensembles/GFS/GEFS/Ukie/etc all agree on a certain type of setup...why would you even bother looking at a 96 hour DGEX map to compliment your forecast? If it disagrees, then you aren't changing your forecast based on that, correct? So what value does it have when it agrees? It's the broken clock syndrome to me... Maybe it goes from 96.42% probability to 96.43% probability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesnichols89 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Just another model to your disposal, and if its in disagreement you see why and figure it will correct towards the rest of the guidance, like we had to do with the GFS for this storm today and tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weathafella Posted December 9, 2014 Author Share Posted December 9, 2014 Just another model to your disposal, and if its in disagreement you see why and figure it will correct towards the rest of the guidance, like we had to do with the GFS for this storm today and tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Maybe it goes from 96.42% probability to 96.43% probability. Exactly. I don't know why that concept is lost on some. I never attempted to quantify it's value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Exatly. I don't know why that concept is lost on some. I never attempted to quantify it's value. I think he was sarcastically agreeing with me that it provided no value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthCoastMA Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Sweet, that would be awesome, normally benchmark storms give Cape Cod snows. mostly, but SE of the benchmark is more favorable for your area, even mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesnichols89 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 mostly, but SE of the benchmark is more favorable for your area, even mine. Roughly 50-100 miles southeast of the benchmark is classic for Cape Cod, especially the CHH to HYA corridor. Also the greatest blizzard to ever hit Cape Cod dumped 35" on Harwich, was a benchmark track storm, which turned to rain for a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesnichols89 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 The AFDs were historic from Taunton NWS. Anyone know where I can find the AFD archives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Exatly. I don't know why that concept is lost on some. I never attempted to quantify it's value. I think he was sarcastically agreeing with me that it provided no value. I was actually sort of being serious, but leaving the interpretation up to the reader. It provides value in probabilistic forecasting even if it would never change a deterministic forecast, but the level of value it brings is certainly low. I think an "even the DGEX agrees" forecast is better than "the DGEX is on it's own with something different" scenario, and you damn well know that if the DGEX is the only model showing a huge nor'easter, somebody will latch onto it as a "possibility." But then again, nobody is going to say "well the DGEX shows something different, so let's wait for the 0z ECMWF before making our forecast public." But yeah, I used extremely small percentage increase to highlight the fact that I think it's value is pretty negligible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesnichols89 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I'm not disagreeing on the level of matter in the forecasts that professional meteorologists make and that it certainly is negligible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I was actually sort of being serious, but leaving the interpretation up to the reader. It provides value in probabilistic forecasting even if it would never change a deterministic forecast, but the level of value it brings is certainly low. I think an "even the DGEX agrees" forecast is better than "the DGEX is on it's own with something different" scenario, and you damn well know that if the DGEX is the only model showing a huge nor'easter, somebody will latch onto it as a "possibility." But then again, nobody is going to say "well the DGEX shows something different, so let's wait for the 0z ECMWF before making our forecast public." But yeah, I used extremely small percentage increase to highlight the fact that I think it's value is pretty negligible. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I was actually sort of being serious, but leaving the interpretation up to the reader. It provides value in probabilistic forecasting even if it would never change a deterministic forecast, but the level of value it brings is certainly low. I think an "even the DGEX agrees" forecast is better than "the DGEX is on it's own with something different" scenario, and you damn well know that if the DGEX is the only model showing a huge nor'easter, somebody will latch onto it as a "possibility." But then again, nobody is going to say "well the DGEX shows something different, so let's wait for the 0z ECMWF before making our forecast public." But yeah, I used extremely small percentage increase to highlight the fact that I think it's value is pretty negligible. Oh my mistake then...well I'd put pretty much no value in it personally...and haven't in my 10 years in the professional field. I will find a model adds value if it is going to change any part of my forecast or certainty by disagreeing with model consensus. The DGEX doesn't fit that criteria for me. It is a poor verification determinisitic model that doesn't start until post-84 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBRI Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesnichols89 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Understood completely Will, I just thought it was fascinating to see a notoriously wrong model to be in the aforementioned camp of the consensus in which the EURO is not a part of. Will what does the EURO ensemble means show for the 17th and 18th? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Euro ensembles do show a storm SE of the BM for Dec 17-18...its been there for a couple runs now. But I'm not overly excited about it yet. I'd be more excited if the airmass was able to set in before the storm rather than almost as it is evolving. There's a high building in from the NW as the storm is trying to get organized. But this thing could look worlds different in a couple days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesnichols89 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I wish the storm was inside the 3.5 day window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Oh my mistake then...well I'd put pretty much no value in it personally...and haven't in my 10 years in the professional field. I will find a model adds value if it is going to change any part of my forecast or certainty by disagreeing with model consensus. The DGEX doesn't fit that criteria for me. It is a poor verification determinisitic model that doesn't start until post-84 hours. I can't say I've ever looked at it personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowMan Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 What's the next disappointment we get to track? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.