October Comes Early: Late September Multi-Hazard Hybrid Storm

[Great Snow 1717]

1 minute ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Yeah I’m not sure there’s a lot of trust in forecasts generally, but the storm being the lead story for a few days isn’t necessarily hype in my book. Now, if you’re not adjusting your forecast as you’re certainly heading toward a bust, that’s a whole different issue and problematic. 

Other than the clowns online using 925mb wind images and calling this tropical, I didn’t see a lot of hype, but we probably have different definitions of what hype is. Showing a legitimate rain and wind forecast map and saying we don’t usually get these in September doesn’t rise to the level for me. 

That is being done far less now than at one time. There is nothing  wrong with a forecaster make adjustments to their forecast. One of the major issues is the forecasters keep relying far too much on future radar as opposed to current radar. Often times the current radar looks nothing like the futurecast radar at that point..that creates doubt for me as the future cast radar moves forward in time.

[Typhoon Tip]

Part of the issue is that any precipitation event is background favored to over perform over quantitative/guidance-based QPF totals.

This is an unavoidable aspect of CC.  

This storm performed pedestrian as far as Nor'easter/coastal event climatology, but over performed on QPF relative to that.

It seems the relativity aspect doesn't filter analytically by many when it comes to assessing forecast. 

Like Wiz was intimating, ...all storms will have over and unders, and right ons.  What you can do is determine the axis of modeled QPF or wind or surf ... vs whichever metric being studied. Then, plot all the empirical results on a bell-curve graph. Super impose the two graphs.  If the interquartile density of results is left of the storm forecast axis/max, the system under performed.  If it is over the max, it over performed.  If it's closely spaced then it performed according to the guidance profile/projection. 

[Great Snow 1717]

5 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Part of the issue is that any precipitation event is background favored to over perform over quantitative/guidance-based QPF totals.

This is an unavoidable aspect of CC.  

This storm performed pedestrian as far as Nor'easter/coastal event climatology, but over performed on QPF relative to that.

It seems the relativity aspect doesn't filter analytically by many when it comes to assessing forecast. 

Like Wiz was intimating, ...all storms will have over and unders, and right ons.  What you can do is determine the axis of modeled QPF or wind or surf ... vs whichever metric being studied. Then, plot all the empirical results on a bell-curve graph. Super impose the two graphs.  If the interquartile density of results is left of the storm forecast axis/max, the system under performed.  If it is over the max, it over performed.  If it's closely spaced then it performed according to the guidance profile/projection. 

I agree the majority of storms will have overs and unders but can't the forecasters adjust their forecasts based on what is actually taking place?

[ineedsnow]

Stopped at salisbury before going to hampton.. pretty gusty now

[Great Snow 1717]

Just now, ineedsnow said:

Stopped at salisbury before going to hampton.. pretty gusty now

Beach Pizza for you???

[tamarack]

Finally got some decent rain - 0.70" overnight.  Mostly very light rain since, event total including Sunday early is approaching 0.90", biggest precip since August 3.

[weatherwiz]

1 hour ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

I do not agree with that at all. lol I think numerous people do not put a lot of trust in forecasts.  ...especially after this in the Merrimack Valley area..

 

1 hour ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Yeah I’m not sure there’s a lot of trust in forecasts generally, but the storm being the lead story for a few days isn’t necessarily hype in my book. Now, if you’re not adjusting your forecast as you’re certainly heading toward a bust, that’s a whole different issue and problematic. 

Other than the clowns online using 925mb wind images and calling this tropical, I didn’t see a lot of hype, but we probably have different definitions of what hype is. Showing a legitimate rain and wind forecast map and saying we don’t usually get these in September doesn’t rise to the level for me. 

There's research out there (but yeah you could argue lack of sample size) which shows a great deal of trust within weather forecasts, particularly with weather forecasts from local outlets. 

[WxWatcher007]

4 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

 

There's research out there (but yeah you could argue lack of sample size) which shows a great deal of trust within weather forecasts, particularly with weather forecasts from local outlets. 

That’s interesting 

[Typhoon Tip]

42 minutes ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

I agree the majority of storms will have overs and unders but can't the forecasters adjust their forecasts based on what is actually taking place?

Well they do... the effort is referred to as "now-casting"  ...

The idea is to tailor the forecast as the results are unfolding, which moves the goal posts on whichever metric is or isn't behaving according to the plan. ...etc

I good example of this is flood headline management.  There's a flash flood watch issue mid way through the event, or not.  Warnings then will or won't need applying ... based upon what is observed.   They can forecast a high wind warning, and if only three reports of down trees occurs, that by definition verifies the warning - even though the general dystopian hobbyists expects down forests.  LOL  ...kidding there but you get it...

[Great Snow 1717]

21 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Well they do... the effort is referred to as "now-casting"  ...

The idea is to tailor the forecast as the results are unfolding, which moves the goal posts on whichever metric is or isn't behaving according to the plan. ...etc

I good example of this is flood headline management.  There's a flash flood watch issue mid way through the event, or not.  Warnings then will or won't need applying ... based upon what is observed.   They can forecast a high wind warning, and if only three reports of down trees occurs, that by definition verifies the warning - even though the general dystopian hobbyists expects down forests.  LOL  ...kidding there but you get it...

But many of them do not do now casting..

[mreaves]

2 hours ago, TauntonBlizzard2013 said:

8.06…. Are we done? Doesn’t look like anything else rotating in on radar 

I hope you get more. I know this event has been meh for you.

[Snowedin]

5 hours ago, CoastalWx said:

Will be nearing 7” soon.

Thats what she said.

[CT Valley Snowman]

Man I thought 1.6" was a dud here,looking at CEF it looks like they are at around .65 storm total? That area up to Belchertown, Amherst looks to have really gotten screwed.  

[WxWatcher007]

13 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Repeat of the blizzard...same spots hammered, same spots T-boned. TBH, I'm just fine with expending this bullet from the chamber now, in the early autumn.

 

2 minutes ago, CT Valley Snowman said:

Man I thought 1.6" was a dud here,looking at CEF it looks like they are at around .65 storm total? That area up to Belchertown, Amherst looks to have really gotten screwed.  

What Ray said. It’s interesting how the valley produced another minimum in wind and rain, but only to an extent. I’m at 2.66” on the event and counting. 

[Typhoon Tip]

35 minutes ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

But many of them do not do now casting..

probably not...  The short reason for that is because it's not deemed or shown to be as necessary.  That and general societal apathy to responsibility - but this latter aspect is a sociological crisis for a different time.  LOL

when I was Met zygote ( heh ) it was required.  Everyone had to ... because everyone new the models were just not that reliably precise.

They're better, but I'm sure there's a lot of arguers that say otherwise.   I can tell from experience in both eras, pre and post 2000, there have been less in the way of vaster positive(negative) busts, respectively since then.  The frequency being down hearkens to more reliance. 

Frankly, it's depressing... there was always a chance that so-and-so would end up being more.  But you took the good with the bad ...sometimes, a lot of time, it was the other way.   Man, the 1980s were notorious for epic Charlie Brown blizzards.   The 1990s were better at not setting up everyone for magnificent ghosts, but interestingly ... missed more on the positive side.  We seemed to get one good snow event a winter that was a rush to warn scenario. .   I've extolled the awesomeness of Dec 23 1997 several times.   1-3 of glop --> 20" of powder.  

Anyway, the models have gotten to point where as much as we may be less charmed, they are still at a different level of usefulness than they were prior to 2000.  That's just existential. 

So anyway... the urgency and need for now-casting isn't considered a priority, because the intra-event variances of the different storm metrics ... mm they don't go crazy like that anymore.   Might even be presumptive. 

You know, the Boxing Day storm in 2010 ...that as "quasi positive bust" imo.  Because it had been suppressed to the point where there really was not system any long on the charts for a couple of cycle at the low/ghosted most point.  Then, inside of 72 hours it merely hinted.  It really wasn't until 36 hours that it came roaring back.   By 2010, that's bordering on model failure on the positive side.  Relative to the state of the art of the time, that was really all but too late. 

In this current dying system... I'm not sure this needed to be down(up) gradated over what was original 'cast. We'll see how the objective accounts lays out  during postmortem but it seems so far that it was acceptable gains(losses) wrt that.

[Brewbeer]

52 minutes ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

But many of them do not do now casting..

we don't need media for that - we can look out the window

 

[WinterWolf]

36 minutes ago, mreaves said:

I hope you get more. I know this event has been meh for you.

He needs to go back and critique his forecast for this…and then give himself a letter grade.

Hint:  The letter comes after E.

[Great Snow 1717]

10 minutes ago, Brewbeer said:

we don't need media for that - we can look out the window

 

can you email the boston on air TV mets and tell them they should also be looking out the window?? lol

[ineedsnow]

Winds are ripping... waves and splash over is awesome at high tide ill post pics when I get home later but this is awesome! 

[jbenedet]

7 minutes ago, ineedsnow said:

Winds are ripping... waves and splash over is awesome at high tide I’ll post pics when I get home later but this is awesome! 

Location?

[tavwtby]

2.12" now, most fell between yesterday afternoon and now 

[SouthCoastMA]

The connection to CC that I've read on this board is that PWATS are generally 10% higher for any given system. I'm likely oversimplifying that, but I'm not a met. 

Looks like I'm finishing at 6.31"

[Layman]

2 hours ago, ineedsnow said:

Stopped at salisbury before going to hampton.. pretty gusty now

 

5 hours ago, ineedsnow said:

off to Hampton beach to see high tide come in.. I know there wont be much flooding but maybe walk the beach after and find something neat.. 

 

24 minutes ago, jbenedet said:

Location?

 

[Baroclinic Zone]

It just keeps on raining.

[HIPPYVALLEY]

12 minutes ago, Baroclinic Zone said:

It just keeps on raining.

This is definitely the wettest day of the three  in NW MA.  

[WxWatcher007]

 

[Layman]

5 hours ago, Layman said:

 

0.42" Sat, 0.89" Sun and 0.76" so far today. 2.07" for the total through 10am.  I sit pretty equidistant from both Manchester (E) and Methuen (NE) at about 30-35 miles.

Now up to 1.24" through 3:15pm putting the 3 day total at:  2.55"

[kdxken]

After nearly 7 inches the past two days I'm almost dead even compared to my yearly average. Still raining pretty good.

[Damage In Tolland]

Southborough has 7”?

[Brewbeer]

1 hour ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

can you email the boston on air TV mets and tell them they should also be looking out the window?? lol

if you aren't in Boston, what is the point knowing what Boston's weather is at that exact moment? 

mets issue forecasts, not now casts

you don't need a weatherman to tell you which way the wind is blowing