• Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!

Misc 2020/21 Fall and Winter Whamby Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Webberweather53 said:
And everyone was wondering why I came across as such a debbie downer for this setup the last several days. Once I realized several days ago that most of the ascent was being forced by warm advection, I tuned out.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we appreciate it but damn this sucks when you look at this setup. What could have been.
 
KyloG said:
Yeah, we appreciate it but damn this sucks when you look at this setup. What could have been.
Click to expand...

Yep, we had any semblance of a snow pack to our north, N Pacific blocking in late Dec to drive some cold air into the pattern that we could have used here as leftovers, or just a little better luck synoptically we got something.
 
What is the point if even having the models when they show this and it turns out to be mostly rain?

1609943886744.png
 
Brick Tamland said:
So, no point really.
Click to expand...
How is forecasting no point ? Things like snow maps , 2m maps etc are less useful than 500mb maps , 850 vorticity maps etc because of the more biased nature and struggle to translate synoptic to actual on the ground weather . It doesn’t take much to understand how to read all that and what is a good luck . Notice the more savvy posters are posting soundings rather than clown maps ?
 
SD said:
Models=guidance
Devil in details
This map assumes 10:1
Theres a lot of bad images being produced by these model sites
Click to expand...

Then why are they used? And why can't they be fixed to be better?
 
Lickwx said:
How is forecasting no point ? Things like snow maps , 2m maps etc are less useful than 500mb maps , 850 vorticity maps etc because of the more biased nature and struggle to translate synoptic to actual on the ground weather . It doesn’t take much to understand how to read all that and what is a good luck . Notice the more savvy posters are posting soundings rather than clown maps ?
Click to expand...

I was saying there is no point in the maps they produce.
 
Brick Tamland said:
So, no point really.
Click to expand...
The map itself is fine bc it assumes a 10:1 ratio. The use of the map is incorrect. A quick look at any sounding says many of these areas even if they were to miraculously to pull that much qpf as snow would more likely see 5-7:1 ratios. Add in a generally above freezing sfc and you get these totals are well above reality
 
SD said:
The map itself is fine bc it assumes a 10:1 ratio. The use of the map is incorrect. A quick look at any sounding says many of these areas even if they were to miraculously to pull that much qpf as snow would more likely see 5-7:1 ratios. Add in a generally above freezing sfc and you get these totals are well above reality
Click to expand...

So, what's the point in even having the maps if they are wrong? Why can't they be fixed to show reality?
 
Brick Tamland said:
So, what's the point in even having the maps if they are wrong? Why can't they be fixed to show reality?
Click to expand...

Well that's why I suggested you look at snow depth here, it's obviously not perfect either but way superior to any snow ratio clown map you'll see. This map only shows the 10:1 ratio snow falling from the sky. Off the top, take out like 30-40% of that, then cut that in half again to account for sleet, then an additional inch or so of liquid equivalent to include melting as the snow is heated by the warm ground from below and above via above freezing sfc temps. At the end, you're left with almost next to nothing which is what the NAM snow depth output shows.

1609945264825.png
 
Webberweather53 said:
Well that's why I suggested you look at snow depth here, it's obviously not perfect either but way superior to any snow ratio clown map you'll see. This map only shows the 10:1 ratio snow falling from the sky. Off the top, take out like 30-40% of that, then cut that in half again to account for sleet, then an additional inch or so of liquid equivalent to include melting as the snow is heated by the warm ground from below and above via above freezing sfc temps. At the end, you're left with almost next to nothing which is what the NAM snow depth output shows.

View attachment 63453
Click to expand...

Maybe from now on this should be the only map posted if all the other ones are usually way overdone. I just don't see the point of even looking at them if they can't be trusted to be correct.
 
Brick Tamland said:
Maybe from now on this should be the only map posted if all the other ones are usually way overdone. I just don't see the point of even looking at them if they can't be trusted to be correct.
Click to expand...

Use logic and deductive reasoning for a second. In places like Minnesota, Colorado, places that get substantial snowfall, etc, those maps would be more accurate on a regular basis because they wouldn’t be dealing with WAA, warm ground temps, or mixing issues anywhere near as often.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top