The Weather Channel (http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/02/14182155-winter-storms-to-be-named-by-weather-channel) has decided to name winter storms (yes I know I am slightly late on this) as the current Nor'Easter is being called Winter Storm Athena.
I'm personally not a big fan of this. I can understand naming Nor'Easters somewhat as they are normally their own systems; however, many winter storms come as a part of cold fronts so are all cold fronts with snow involved going to be named? I doubt this would happen but does that mean that lake effect snow bands that do not move anywhere should get named as well? I just don't understand the point.
The rationale for naming notable winter storms and hurricanes would seem to me to be about the same. It helps having a name to refer to a particular storm, especially historically, so you don't have to refer to, say, the "2009 Oklahoma snowstorm".
Rather than naming all storms at the outset like is done with tropical storms, I would imagine that this naming would be applied only to storms with the potential to make a great impact (i.e. the same sort of storm that, were it a hurricane, the name would be retired).
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 07, 2012, 12:02:38 PM
Rather than naming all storms at the outset like is done with tropical storms, I would imagine that this naming would be applied only to storms with the potential to make a great impact (i.e. the same sort of storm that, were it a hurricane, the name would be retired).
My understanding was pretty similar to this. Only nor'easters (that had not already been part of a named hurricane, like Sandy) and particularly powerful Arctic cold fronts would be named. Some of their names in the list are pretty cheesy, though. Khan? Q?
Well, if Kahn turns out to be a bad storm, they can call the storm's damage "The Wrath Of Kahn". And then the Star Trek franchise lawyers will wind up owning TWC. Anbody want the ten-day forecast for Seti Alpha V?
One of the local TV stations here in NE Wisconsin (WLUK-TV, channel 11 in Green Bay and a regular poster here in AARoads) has been doing that for many years now. They use area small towns as a source of names.
Mike
I'm personally waiting for Winter Storm Gandolf. I know it's one letter off, but I'd love to hear "and they're saying that NONE SHALL PASS on the interstates today!"
Luna? Saturn? Please tell me these are named after the Sailor Moon characters!
Quote from: roadman on November 07, 2012, 12:34:51 PM
Well, if Kahn turns out to be a bad storm, they can call the storm's damage "The Wrath Of Kahn". And then the Star Trek franchise lawyers will wind up owning TWC. Anbody want the ten-day forecast for Seti Alpha V?
Same thing for Winter Storm Q. ;)
I see they're going with a Classical History theme; Greek and Roman names.
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 07, 2012, 12:02:38 PM
The rationale for naming notable winter storms and hurricanes would seem to me to be about the same. It helps having a name to refer to a particular storm, especially historically, so you don't have to refer to, say, the "2009 Oklahoma snowstorm".
Rather than naming all storms at the outset like is done with tropical storms, I would imagine that this naming would be applied only to storms with the potential to make a great impact (i.e. the same sort of storm that, were it a hurricane, the name would be retired).
The article states that nothing would be named until 2 to 3 days beforehand for that reason. I am just unsure if they could maybe name a storm after the fact like maybe a prolonged period of Lake Effect Snow dumping snow all over Michigan or something.
Here TWC states that they mainly named Athena (http://www.weather.com/news/naming-athena-20121107) due to the societal impact post-Sandy. To be honest this statement confuses me slightly more than getting me to buy into the idea.
I like the idea and think it has more to do with the twitterverse and those hashtags.
I hope that if this becomes a seriously-considered proposal, they don't just limit it to severe Northeastern weather events. A snow event of any size will usually shut down Oklahoma City for a day or two. A Northeastern forecaster would probably consider most of our snowstorms small potatoes but we are less tolerant of them, so a "big" snowstorm here will be smaller than a "big" snowstorm in Michigan or Connecticut or something.
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 08, 2012, 08:20:37 AM
I hope that if this becomes a seriously-considered proposal, they don't just limit it to severe Northeastern weather events. A snow event of any size will usually shut down Oklahoma City for a day or two. A Northeastern forecaster would probably consider most of our snowstorms small potatoes but we are less tolerant of them, so a "big" snowstorm here will be smaller than a "big" snowstorm in Michigan or Connecticut or something.
They already named Brutus (http://www.weather.com/news/weather-winter/winter-storm-brutus-naming-20121108) for a system that is supposed to bring a blizzard to Montana and western North Dakota.
Another reason for them to garner ridicule from the TWC fans of the classic days. "Winter Storm Athena will be preempted tonight for a premiere episode of Coast Guard Alaska". Lame on all kinds of levels. As lame as having nine "field-reporters" covering one storm. Where does that leave actual synoptic weather or weather maps for those who just want to know where a system is located and where it is heading?
The problem is that 99% of viewers don't want that. They want destruction and disaster and drama, rather than science!
And, quite fortunately, the National Weather Service has refused to use TWC's names.
Quote from: Alex on November 08, 2012, 09:07:30 AM
Another reason for them to garner ridicule from the TWC fans of the classic days. "Winter Storm Athena will be preempted tonight for a premiere episode of Coast Guard Alaska". Lame on all kinds of levels. As lame as having nine "field-reporters" covering one storm. Where does that leave actual synoptic weather or weather maps for those who just want to know where a system is located and where it is heading?
Maybe it's time for someone to make a competing weather network, with a more serious outlook on things. No idea how popular it would be though. Could just be that, like many other things, people wanting serious, in-depth discussion now have no choice but to turn to the Internet for the coverage they want, having been let down by traditional media sources. (Plus the WS4000 emulator to let us remember the good old days...)
It is hard as hell to find a real weather map. Usually the only place you can find them is from universities. I know what isobars and wind barbs mean, dammit, give me the real maps!
Is Weatherscan still around or did they get rid of that?
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 08, 2012, 09:56:14 AM
Quote from: Alex on November 08, 2012, 09:07:30 AM
Another reason for them to garner ridicule from the TWC fans of the classic days. "Winter Storm Athena will be preempted tonight for a premiere episode of Coast Guard Alaska". Lame on all kinds of levels. As lame as having nine "field-reporters" covering one storm. Where does that leave actual synoptic weather or weather maps for those who just want to know where a system is located and where it is heading?
Maybe it's time for someone to make a competing weather network, with a more serious outlook on things. No idea how popular it would be though. Could just be that, like many other things, people wanting serious, in-depth discussion now have no choice but to turn to the Internet for the coverage they want, having been let down by traditional media sources. (Plus the WS4000 emulator to let us remember the good old days...)
It is hard as hell to find a real weather map. Usually the only place you can find them is from universities. I know what isobars and wind barbs mean, dammit, give me the real maps!
One of my friends always joked that he could take down TWC by having a Local on the 7s. ;-) Seriously though I think TWC has kinda become like ESPN (which technically has competition but the other networks I have never found on cable) as they believe that not enough people will ever stop using their services (specifically online) that any thing they do to gain ratings and beat other networks will not hurt them overall.
Quote from: mgk920 on November 07, 2012, 12:50:11 PM
One of the local TV stations here in NE Wisconsin (WLUK-TV, channel 11 in Green Bay and a regular poster here in AARoads) has been doing that for many years now. They use area small towns as a source of names.
Mike
They've been doing it for years here in CT. WFSB, the CBS affiliate has named storms for decades. For example, last year's Snowtober storm was Winter Storm Alfred. God help us if we get to winter storm Zeus or Zoe.
Quote from: Sanctimoniously on November 08, 2012, 10:16:19 AM
Is Weatherscan still around or did they get rid of that?
Yes, it is still around.
I personally do not care even the slightest bit for this naming system. They claim it will ease confusion, but listen to this. TWC and, let's say your local NBC affiliate are calling a winter storm "Ceasar". The local newspaper could name it after an animal (ex. Wolf), the local ABC affiliate not naming it, CNN naming it after one of their popular staff members (let's say for example Anderson Cooper), the local CBS affiliate naming it after what street they're on, and the National Weather Service (obviously) doing NOTHING. Even with one or two names it gets INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT to track - except for geeks - unless the name was assigned by the National Weather Service.
"Anderson Cooper is ravaging the Northeast, while Wolf Blitzer is hammering the Great Lakes. Meanwhile, the central sections of the country are gearing up for a storm system that may organize into Piers Morgan..."
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 18, 2012, 10:45:28 PMMeanwhile, the central sections of the country are gearing up for a storm system that may organize into Piers Morgan..."
I can't think of anything more horrible.
As Stephen Fry said (say it out loud): definition of countryside = killing Piers Morgan.
Hopefully he'll end up in prison before fading to obscurity - his paper (the Mirror/Sunday Mirror), when he was editor, was far, far worse than News of the World (and indeed, all the Murdoch group put together - and perhaps every other paper, but the Daily Mail/Mail on Sunday) for illegally obtaining information - phone hacking and the like. He's also denied that he knew about it, despite the evidence pointing the other way. Judging by the delay and lack of arrest, the prosecutors are aiming to build an iron clad, air tight case against him, making sure that he gets sent down for as long as possible.
"Matty Mouron is about to dump a bunch of snow onto MDOT roadways"
Quote from: florida on November 08, 2012, 03:19:56 AM
I like the idea and think it has more to do with the twitterverse and those hashtags.
I think that's correct because it's the rationale that by far makes the most sense. I can see the benefit where you might have more than one active winter storm impacting the US at once. I think the Weather Service is just being recalcitrant. This
does seem like a gimmick on TWC's part, so I can understand the NWS's hesitation. If the names prove successful in social media then they'll probably become permanent and the usage will be much more widespread in a few years. And if not, then not.
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 08, 2012, 09:56:14 AM
Maybe it's time for someone to make a competing weather network, with a more serious outlook on things. No idea how popular it would be though. Could just be that, like many other things, people wanting serious, in-depth discussion now have no choice but to turn to the Internet for the coverage they want, having been let down by traditional media sources. (Plus the WS4000 emulator to let us remember the good old days...)
Canada has The Weather Network, which so far seems not to be buying into winter storm names (either TWC's or its own). For that reason and others, I'm liking their online weather forecasts better than TWC's for planning a trip up north between winter storms (already delayed several times by inconveniently-timed storms).
Their TV shows are too Canada- and metric-centric for the U.S. market, but maybe they could do a U.S.-specific product to horn in on TWC's market share. My own cable provider for now is Comcast, which is in TWC's corporate family, but competing cable providers like Verizon and Cox might welcome the opportunity to stick it to Comcast.
More importantly, the general populace totally has not bought into it. After "Athena", I have seen or heard a grand total of one reference to another named winter storm (Draco). People don't care.
The problem, as I see it, is that a storm has to be particularly nasty for a name to stick with people. All hurricanes are, but most snowstorms are not. You might get one or two blizzards in a year that are memorable enough to be worth naming, if that. There just isn't enough potential for an alphabetic naming system to work.
In the lowlands of the Pacific Northwest, we only get one big snowstorm a year (if that), so we just call it the snowpocalpse of 2012.
People still talk about the Blizzard Of '78 here.
Really though, while 6" of snow is a pain in the neck and doesn't happen every winter, it's still just bad weather. Wind and/or ice that knocks out power for days at a time is more memorable.
Trivia: Naming of storms comes from the English professor and novelist George R. Stewart in his 1941 novel Storm, about a storm named Maria hitting California. A fictitious weatherman named the storms on his weather map, because he was tired of thinking of them as "that storm that yesterday was centered at 127 degrees W, 45 degrees N." He was somewhat embarrassed when a co-worker learned of his storm-naming habit, thinking it just a little bit unprofessional.
Road geeks will enjoy his travelogue books U.S. 40: Cross Section of the United States of America and N.A. 1: The North-South Continental Highway, that have interesting text and many photographs from the 1950s.
Indianapolis media today's been calling the most recent snowstorm the Blizzard of 2012 (by meteorological technicality it was a blizzard,) so TWC's usage of Euclid has not been effective at all. Here too we always hear about '78, but I was born soon after so I will never have the personal experience of that storm. Even with that, today's storm may not even reach my own top five, in other words the media was being a bit over-the-top, but at least we weren't calling it Euclid!
Quote from: kkt on December 26, 2012, 05:55:06 PM
Trivia: Naming of storms comes from the English professor and novelist George R. Stewart in his 1941 novel Storm, about a storm named Maria hitting California. A fictitious weatherman named the storms on his weather map, because he was tired of thinking of them as "that storm that yesterday was centered at 127 degrees W, 45 degrees N." He was somewhat embarrassed when a co-worker learned of his storm-naming habit, thinking it just a little bit unprofessional.
I don't think so. In late 19th century, some people already named tropical cyclones that hit Australia. But it is true they started giving names to typhoons (And later to Atlantic hurricanes) soon after that novel.
In Europe all highs and lows are named by the Free University of Berlin, with different acceptance throughout the continent: For example in Spain names are unheard except if a low results to be an European windstorm (A type of extratropical cyclone, I remember Xynthia and Klaus). However, some days ago I read about Nicky, which was a really deep low over North Central Atlantic. So the TWC naming winter storms is like this: Is not unheard of, but not widespread.
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on December 27, 2012, 12:00:31 PM
In Europe all highs and lows are named by the Free University of Berlin, with different acceptance throughout the continent: For example in Spain names are unheard except if a low results to be an European windstorm (A type of extratropical cyclone, I remember Xynthia and Klaus). However, some days ago I read about Nicky, which was a really deep low over North Central Atlantic. So the TWC naming winter storms is like this: Is not unheard of, but not widespread.
Naming highs and lows seems like overkill. In the US, most people don't even know what the Hs and Ls on the map mean or why they should care.
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 27, 2012, 07:31:45 PM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on December 27, 2012, 12:00:31 PM
In Europe all highs and lows are named by the Free University of Berlin, with different acceptance throughout the continent: For example in Spain names are unheard except if a low results to be an European windstorm (A type of extratropical cyclone, I remember Xynthia and Klaus). However, some days ago I read about Nicky, which was a really deep low over North Central Atlantic. So the TWC naming winter storms is like this: Is not unheard of, but not widespread.
Naming highs and lows seems like overkill. In the US, most people don't even know what the Hs and Ls on the map mean or why they should care.
That is because the weather channel and the local meteorologists stopped informing their viewers of what such a concept means...
You're telling me. Not to mention that high school level classes don't really cover atmospheric science all that well. I remember the lightbulb going on over my head whenever they were explained in college.
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 28, 2012, 12:18:01 AM
You're telling me. Not to mention that high school level classes don't really cover atmospheric science all that well. I remember the lightbulb going on over my head whenever they were explained in college.
I remember the storm this past weekend up north was Winter Storm Gandolf. My first reaction was "can't they spell Gandalf'? Then I read their reasoning.