Hi Chris, and Chuck.
Yes, we had this discussions (not rant) before. Being a weather man
myself, I feel I have to put a few words in here - and stop lurking
for a moment ;-)
I agree which you Chris that you can make very good weather
predictions yourself now, short term ones that is. But do you (like
me) not use those automate products you despise of yourself then?
That is what good weather services nowadays do too: the man-machine
mix is very very powerful, much more than either the man or the
machine alone.
I have seen it all happen. I used to be an old-fashioned
meteorologist, being educated and trained in the late sixties and the
early seventies. Models just started being developed, and were very
poor at that. And observations (made by humans) from all over the
globe were very important as the only direct input - both for the
models and for the old meteorologists drawing their weather maps. I
remember myself cursing when a particular ship observation somewhere
in the north Atlantic was missing on one of our 3-hourly maps, and we
had to wait for the next one... remember we didn't have any real time
satellite imagery then. And we sometimes asked pilots, who had just
crossed that ocean, what weather had been during their flights - to
have some extra information on top of the regular one.
But the satellite imagery getting better and almost real time has made
the big difference. That and the use of highly sophisticated weather
radar (Doppler type). Together those have made a lot of the human
obervations redundant. And both are so easily accessible nowadays,
that you can indeed make your own weather prediction for a few hours
ahead, just as well as a professional forecaster. Of course you will
need some skills to interpret all these images, but a pilot like you
certainly will have had the training to build those skills.
Could you do without a web site (one of the many) like this one:
http://www.meteox.com/h.aspx?r=&jaar=-3&soort=satradar
and this one
http://www.sat24.com/frame.php?html=view&country=gb
?
If you need more examples I will happily oblige!
For one to five days ahead it is a bit different. You (or I) would not
be able to make any better guess than "tomorrow will be like today"
with slight modifications for the days after that. But this is where
the numerical models come in to do the work for us. They have been
developed to do the main process of thinking what possible evaluations
can be made of the observations (satellite, radar, human, and
automated ground stations) of the actual weather. And they give us
basic predictions which are so good, that we weather persons usually
only have to make a few futile choices during and in particular at the
end of the numerical process. These choices are important, of course,
and their value should not be neglected. But none, neither
professional nor amateur meteorologist, nowadays could do a proper job
without the results of the numerical models.
Here in Holland the success rate for a one-day forecast used to be 78%
back in the sixties. And remember that flipping a coin for head or
tail already gives you 50%, and plainly deciding that the "weather
tomorrow will be the same as today" will yield a 65-70% score! All the
effort we made was for that extra 10-15%. But now, thanks to the
machinery doing the bulk of the work for us, the succes rate has risen
to 85%.
I don't have the actual figures for 5-day forecasts, but they are in
the same order.
And even our 10-day forecasts (have a look here:
http://www.knmi.nl/waarschuwingen_en_verwachtingen/ensemble.html
and pardon the Dutch) are pretty good.
When you know what important long term decisions are taken nowadays
with those outlooks as a basis you would be astonished, I think.
Building contractors, breweries, the national energy grid - just to
name a few: they all think it a big nuisance if the daily update of
those forecasts is one or two hours late. Their decisions depend on
it, and the deciders have learned to see its value.
I agree strongly with you on one issue: the local conditions being
very important. Topography indeed. But unless things are very
different in the UK from here in the Netherlands, no
micro-meteorological forecasts (as we call them) are ever made on
basis of a machine prediction only.
I agree that in this case the interpreting human work will always be
necessary - simply because numerical weather models with a resolution
grid fine enough for that purpose do not exist. Or perhaps the models
do, but not the machines to give a timely result...
I made a long walk today - not without first giving the precip radar
and the "cloud satellite" a good look, like I always do. That, and a
good educated guess for the next hours, will be enough for my personal
use, like yours I guess. But please do rely on the weather services
when you need a forecast for a few days in advance. We really cannot
beat them - at least not without sharing their input i.e. the model
output.
Well, that was my contribution for 2008 ;-)
but I must admit I am enjoying to post it, OT as it may be.
Frank
Frank van Lindert
Utrecht NL.
On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 16:01:18 +0100, you wrote:
>
>Thanks, Chuck.
>
>I don't know how accurate you have found the forecast, but I am less
>and less confident in their accuracy in Europe. You see the Met
>Office seems to be relying more and more on computer modelling to
>interpret the current situation and trends. This sort of works for
>regions or larger areas, but is useless for smaller areas which are
>normally affected by local conditions, topography or water. I have
>found over the last year or 2 that I can make more useful forecasts
>than the automated product of the Met Office and I suspect that the
>NOAA is no different. Back in the days when we had more people
>observing and forecast nothing was perfect but we had a better chance
>of knowing what might happen tomorrow, or (perhaps) the next day. But
>to pretend that they can forecast up to 5 days ahead for local
>conditions is just loopy ...
>
>... but I suspect that I have rehearsed this point of view (rant)
>before on the List, perhaps even to you, Chuck ;-)
>
>Chris
>
>On 21 Sep 2008, at 14:42, <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
><chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > wrote:
>
>> I've been using the following NOAA graphical forecast link for a
>> couple of years but I've never run into anyone else who knows about
>> it. It's especially handy when traveling. Choose the area of
>> interest on the map and then slide your mouse up and down the
>> various columns to see the map change with time.
>> <http://www.weather.gov/forecasts/graphical/sectors/conusWeek.php>
>
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|