Imagine taking off on a wagon train in the 1800's in tornado alley and have no idea where the storms are other that the one currently over you head? These new high def radars etc have saved countless lives I'm sure.
Modern Weather Forecasting - Not Impressed
- Thread starter LoneRanger
- Start date
- Status
My four local TV stations all seem to make 80F sound like a dangerous heat wave, and a 1' snowstorm sound like a life threatening blizzard.
MNGopher is right, the NWS is the better source. (But, no young forecasters.) I use http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/sew/ Since we are on the coast things can change quickly. A weekend forecast that looks good on Wednesday can turn into an incoming storm by Friday.
Ranger, the arrows next to the forecast area map will take you to anywhere in the midwest. During major weather events, a forecast office will produce an infomative Weather Story graphic. Great Falls, MT, http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/tfx/ currently shows a satellite picture of a low that is going to smack us tomorrow, then MT on Saturday. Appears today should be the yearly check on my gutters and downspouts. Uggh.
MNGopher is right, the NWS is the better source. (But, no young forecasters.) I use http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/sew/ Since we are on the coast things can change quickly. A weekend forecast that looks good on Wednesday can turn into an incoming storm by Friday.
Ranger, the arrows next to the forecast area map will take you to anywhere in the midwest. During major weather events, a forecast office will produce an infomative Weather Story graphic. Great Falls, MT, http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/tfx/ currently shows a satellite picture of a low that is going to smack us tomorrow, then MT on Saturday. Appears today should be the yearly check on my gutters and downspouts. Uggh.
Do YOUR job duties involve predicting the future?
Our local weather forecasts here, and when I was in NY were usually pretty spot-on. The only exception was big snowstorms, and estimates of snowfall. Other than that jchances of rain, and temp, are correct most of the time.
Weather underground was pretty good, until they got bought by the weather channel. Now their website is pretty much useless. Too flashy and not able to find anything. As a tornadic thunderstorm was rolling through the city, I couldn't find a radar. Frustrating.
The warning system they (government) have in place is pretty neat, actually. They can send out warnings at the cell-tower level. It worked EXCELLENT when we had a tornadic thunderstorm move through. I was a bit confused when the thing went off ... but when I looked off to the southwest and saw the wall cloud, well, I think it was working pretty good!
The warning system they (government) have in place is pretty neat, actually. They can send out warnings at the cell-tower level. It worked EXCELLENT when we had a tornadic thunderstorm move through. I was a bit confused when the thing went off ... but when I looked off to the southwest and saw the wall cloud, well, I think it was working pretty good!
Your thread got me wondering about what these probabilities in the forecasts are supposed to represent.
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/ffc/?n=pop
Quote:
The "Probability of Precipitation" (PoP) describes the chance of precipitation occurring at any point you select in the area.
How do forecasters arrive at this value?
Mathematically, PoP is defined as follows:
PoP = C x A where "C" = the confidence that precipitation will occur somewhere in the forecast area, and where "A" = the percent of the area that will receive measureable precipitation, if it occurs at all.
So... in the case of the forecast above, if the forecaster knows precipitation is sure to occur ( confidence is 100% ), he/she is expressing how much of the area will receive measurable rain. ( PoP = "C" x "A" or "1" times ".4" which equals .4 or 40%.)
But, most of the time, the forecaster is expressing a combination of degree of confidence and areal coverage. If the forecaster is only 50% sure that precipitation will occur, and expects that, if it does occur, it will produce measurable rain over about 80 percent of the area, the PoP (chance of rain) is 40%. ( PoP = .5 x .8 which equals .4 or 40%. )
In either event, the correct way to interpret the forecast is: there is a 40 percent chance that rain will occur at any given point in the area.
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/ffc/?n=pop
Quote:
The "Probability of Precipitation" (PoP) describes the chance of precipitation occurring at any point you select in the area.
How do forecasters arrive at this value?
Mathematically, PoP is defined as follows:
PoP = C x A where "C" = the confidence that precipitation will occur somewhere in the forecast area, and where "A" = the percent of the area that will receive measureable precipitation, if it occurs at all.
So... in the case of the forecast above, if the forecaster knows precipitation is sure to occur ( confidence is 100% ), he/she is expressing how much of the area will receive measurable rain. ( PoP = "C" x "A" or "1" times ".4" which equals .4 or 40%.)
But, most of the time, the forecaster is expressing a combination of degree of confidence and areal coverage. If the forecaster is only 50% sure that precipitation will occur, and expects that, if it does occur, it will produce measurable rain over about 80 percent of the area, the PoP (chance of rain) is 40%. ( PoP = .5 x .8 which equals .4 or 40%. )
In either event, the correct way to interpret the forecast is: there is a 40 percent chance that rain will occur at any given point in the area.
- Status
