November Medium/Long Range Discussion

[WEATHER53]

22 hours ago, WxUSAF said:

Pattern changes are often rushed on guidance. That’s just typical? Especially -EPO driven changes. I have been posting (along with lots of better Mets) that guidance has been overdoing mid-long range warmth for us for months now. And I personally don’t want our peak pattern on December 1. Our average high is like 52 still! I’m vey good with Thanksgiving through December 10-15 being a transitional period that builds up cold air and snowcover in our source regions. 

If pattern changes are almost built in rushed in guidance then why not develop a system that does not do that?

Over last couple winters we’ve seen gigantic failure anywhere from 36 hours to 15 days out.   Very few if any positive such surprises .  

 

[Maestrobjwa]

3 hours ago, WEATHER53 said:

If pattern changes are almost built in rushed in guidance then why not develop a system that does not do that?

Over last couple winters we’ve seen gigantic failure anywhere from 36 hours to 15 days out.   Very few if any positive such surprises .  

 

I think you're expecting things that the computers are simply not advanced enough for those things not to happen sometimes. Why not just...accept the current limitations/biases and set forecasts/expectations from there instead of railing against the failures as if it's something easy to fix or some conspiracy? Technology simply isn't there yet. NWP (if I'm using that term correctly) is leaps and bounds better than it was 25-30 years ago but it still isn't a crystal ball! (and someone can correct me if I'm off base on any of that).

[eduggs]

1 hour ago, WEATHER53 said:

If pattern changes are almost built in rushed in guidance then why not develop a system that does not do that?

Over last couple winters we’ve seen gigantic failure anywhere from 36 hours to 15 days out.   Very few if any positive such surprises .  

 

People just expect too much accuracy from model guidance, especially past day 10. The model doesn't know it's showing a "pattern change." That's just human interpretation, which is also subjective and biased. When models are inevitably less accurate in the long-range than we wish, particularly after we've identified a perceived regional "pattern change," we feel like the model failed or delayed it. But the failing is our false interpretation and unrealistic expectation.

We really should stop anthropomorphizing weather models.

[Interstate]

42 minutes ago, eduggs said:

People just expect too much accuracy from model guidance, especially past day 10. The model doesn't know it's showing a "pattern change." That's just human interpretation, which is also subjective and biased. When models are inevitably less accurate in the long-range than we wish, particularly after we've identified a perceived regional "pattern change," we feel like the model failed or delayed it. But the failing is our false interpretation and unrealistic expectation.

We really should stop anthropomorphizing weather models.

You mean 3 days 

[Weather Will]

WB latest 12Z EPS: temps average near normal/ slightly above through Dec 5. Precipitation looks like it will pick up toward the end of the period but nothing extreme. Looks like any big storms will track NW of the MA during this time frame with the NAO slightly positive and the PNA slightly negative.

[Weather Will]

WB latest EPS weeklies centers the coldest period in December around the holidays now with normal precip. Maybe we will be able to do more than dream about a White Christmas this year.  Definitely does not look like a torch right now around the holidays.

[Eskimo Joe]

The fly in the ointment right now for the holidays is a lack of a -NAO. It's tough to get a big snowstorm without that feature to hold a storm closer to the coast. I'm not unhappy by any stretch of the imagination though...it beats Pacific Puke with 580dm heights across the entire CONUS!

[TSSN+]

9 minutes ago, Eskimo Joe said:

The fly in the ointment right now for the holidays is a lack of a -NAO. It's tough to get a big snowstorm without that feature to hold a storm closer to the coast. I'm not unhappy by any stretch of the imagination though...it beats Pacific Puke with 580dm heights across the entire CONUS!

Till we actually don’t crap the bed, I expect us to crap the bed lol 

[Eskimo Joe]

15 minutes ago, TSSN+ said:

Till we actually don’t crap the bed, I expect us to crap the bed lol 

My goals before Christmas:

• Outstanding: multiple snow events, whether all advisory/warning/combination of these
• Great: One warning level snowfall event.
• Good: One advisory level snowfall event
• Bad: No snow
• Shut the Blinds: patterns fails and we get back to zonal puke

[TSSN+]

17 minutes ago, Eskimo Joe said:

My goals before Christmas:

• Outstanding: multiple snow events, whether all advisory/warning/combination of these
• Great: One warning level snowfall event.
• Good: One advisory level snowfall event
• Bad: No snow
• Shut the Blinds: patterns fails and we get back to zonal puke

Bottom 3 most likely 

[TSSN+]

1 minute ago, TSSN+ said:

Bottom 3 most likely 

I used to be hopeful but after the last 9 years I can say unlike Justin Berk, I do not have faith in the flakes haha. 

[WEATHER53]

1 hour ago, eduggs said:

People just expect too much accuracy from model guidance, especially past day 10. The model doesn't know it's showing a "pattern change." That's just human interpretation, which is also subjective and biased. When models are inevitably less accurate in the long-range than we wish, particularly after we've identified a perceived regional "pattern change," we feel like the model failed or delayed it. But the failing is our false interpretation and unrealistic expectation.

We really should stop anthropomorphizing weather models.

I would say both posts suggesting  I cool my jets are mostly just excuse making about the accuracy and statements that we should just accept it and don’t complain. 
Models  cover all the bases.  Thats how they are scored for funding. So the status quo is content. I see no serious improvement over the last 20 years. I believe they try to do too much,  like using a microscope for very close up inspection rather than a more  backed off binoculars approach.  Between now and Christmas Day we will see everything from 30 and snow to 60 and sun for Christmas Day. That’s  not science, that’s cover all bases guesswork 

[eduggs]

Weather models have improved a lot in 20 years. We have data to prove it.

[stormy]

3 hours ago, eduggs said:

People just expect too much accuracy from model guidance, especially past day 10. The model doesn't know it's showing a "pattern change." That's just human interpretation, which is also subjective and biased. When models are inevitably less accurate in the long-range than we wish, particularly after we've identified a perceived regional "pattern change," we feel like the model failed or delayed it. But the failing is our false interpretation and unrealistic expectation.

We really should stop anthropomorphizing weather models.

How about models being off 10 degrees for thermal highs in 12 hours. Is that acceptable???