Today, The Northeast had its first Nor'easter which they undersized & caused many issues. The area we are talking about is Delaware/Pa. i guess the Dots assumed the "predicted rain" that was supposed to start @3, Did not start till 6 (In DE at least, PA kept getting hit with snow/Ice). They did not ice or brime anything. Is this the usual procedure with first snow? Or did they expect the rain to wash it away. I didn't see how much snow we got, But I assume it was 5 inches or more. Which shut mostly everything down, if it wasn't moving slowly. This shows that even with all the extra road preparations, and safety features you will still almost crash unless you have $400 snow tires or tire chains. I got stuck in my 2015 Nissan Altima only twice, (I will now buy tire chains to prepare for future storms). Delaware did ok on the roads, but Pa? Woah I didnt see one until I was on Darby creek road. Which He did not have a plow only salter. & Pa's hilly roads cause so much issue, they should really close some of them to thru traffic when it snows. But in all My girl & I were safe & our trip from New Castle, De to Brwn Mayr, Pa. Which usually is 45 mins turned into a 5 hour round trip. Only issue we had was hitting a curb & bending my rim. Which now causes the wheel to shake (yes I know I have to replace it).
But my main theme of this whole Thread & Story is how unprepared we are for mother nature's fury & people cannot drive at all in winter weather. We should have laws enforcing more Tire chains or Snow tires in areas that we have bad snow or cars can slide backwards down a hill causing more issues. Or crash into curbs [emoji23]. Or simply more plow trucks, cause where are they all when you need em.
iPhone
This was a hot mess today...or a cold mess. Yes, the storm was underpredicted. I thought there was some brine treatment, but as you mention...when people realized the changeover to rain wasn't happening, they all hit the roads at once (workers, school buses, trucks) and before the plows...so yes...4-6 hour commutes were the norm. There was a school district in Lancaster County PA that brought the kids back to school instead of being stuck on the road to shelter in place. I have 6 inches of snow in Chester County...after a prediction of 1.
This was one of the worst snow gridlocks of my time...as bad as the infamous John Bolaris screw up that got him fired ~ 20 years ago.
Your first sentence was key: The weather forecasters didn't predict the storm that we had. The various transportation departments don't have secret forecasts that know what's truly going to happen, so they're only going based on what everyone else sees as well. Thr weather people we're a bit slow in even forecasting anything, which didn't help with preparation.
NJDOT at least brined their roads yesterday, and it helped a little.
Chains are really only good on snowpacked roads; you wouldn't be able to drive highways or other, better treated roadways.
The fault here lies with the weather forecasting. We're being told constantly that they had better and better equipment to forecast storms, and they completely whiffed on the first storm of the season. Until the General Public makes the meteorologists responsible for their inadequate forecasts, the meteorologists will continue to Ho Hum everything and not really care. After all, they have enough fans that will forgive them and apologize for their actions. If this was nearly any other organization the same people would be calling for them to be fired!
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 15, 2018, 09:37:54 PM
This was a hot mess today...or a cold mess. Yes, the storm was underpredicted. I thought there was some brine treatment, but as you mention...when people realized the changeover to rain wasn't happening, they all hit the roads at once (workers, school buses, trucks) and before the plows...so yes...4-6 hour commutes were the norm. There was a school district in Lancaster County PA that brought the kids back to school instead of being stuck on the road to shelter in place. I have 6 inches of snow in Chester County...after a prediction of 1.
This was one of the worst snow gridlocks of my time...as bad as the infamous John Bolaris screw up that got him fired ~ 20 years ago.
Wow, so it wasn't, just me who thought it was worse then usual. Smh, they always under predict the small storms & over predict the big ones. This caused many preventable problems. & wow I wonder who will take the heat for the uptick in accidents & emergency personal.
iPhone
I was listening to KYW 1060 on the way home, and they mention how people were unprepared for the storm. I'm thinking, well wait you guys are the ones that told us that it wasn't going to be a storm. So are they underhandedly admitting that they're at fault? No they're still blaming us for not preparing for something that they didn't call for!
Quotewhen people realized the changeover to rain wasn't happening, they all hit the roads at once (workers, school buses, trucks) and before the plows
Blame the meteorologists all you want, but this here is key...doesn't matter WHAT (if anything) is falling out of the sky when this happens.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 15, 2018, 09:46:37 PM
Your first sentence was key: The weather forecasters didn't predict the storm that we had. The various transportation departments don't have secret forecasts that know what's truly going to happen, so they're only going based on what everyone else sees as well. The weather people we're a bit slow in even forecasting anything, which didn't help with preparation.
NJDOT at least brined their roads yesterday, and it helped a little.
Chains are really only good on snowpacked roads; you wouldn't be able to drive highways or other, better treated roadways.
The fault here lies with the weather forecasting. We're being told constantly that they had better and better equipment to forecast storms, and they completely whiffed on the first storm of the season. Until the General Public makes the meteorologists responsible for their inadequate forecasts, the meteorologists will continue to Ho Hum everything and not really care. After all, they have enough fans that will forgive them and apologize for their actions. If this was nearly any other organization the same people would be calling for them to be fired!
Im shocked that DE, didnt brime be roads like they usually do the day before. I guess we all thought the snow was gonna be light. The Dots always act like they have better information or they get it from somewhere else; aka National weather center. (Or whatever its called) & I think the Meteorologists & state officials will take heat for this one. The amount of cars/trucks that were in ditches & had crashed major or minor (including my self). That I seen, this is cause for better forecasting. I rather prepare for everything & be safe then to almost lose my life on a local road!!! I could have taken 476 & been safer! & lastly Tire chains cannot be driven on highways & other roads, because it will damage them? Or you will not have traction still?
iPhone
Quote from: Tonytone on November 15, 2018, 10:00:32 PM
Tire chains cannot be driven on highways & other roads, because it will damage them? Or you will not have traction still?
Might damage the roads, or more likely ruin the chains, which aren't designed for sustained driving on pavement rather than snowpack.
Studs on winter tires might work better for the driver, but not so much for pavement. Some states, even really snowy ones like Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan, don't allow them at all (https://www.ustires.org/studded-snow-tire-regulations-passenger-cars).
Quote from: Tonytone on November 15, 2018, 08:58:29 PM
We should have laws enforcing more Tire chains or Snow tires in areas that we have bad snow or cars can slide backwards down a hill causing more issues. Or crash into curbs [emoji23].
One time I was driving easily on snow on all-weather tires, until I got to an intersection where the snow was packed in to ice, and there were cars waiting at the intersection. Shitshitshitshitshitshitshit!! Thinking quick, I deliberately skidded into the right curb to stop myself. It worked, but I knocked the steering out of alignment for several years until I got it fixed.
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on November 15, 2018, 10:57:51 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 15, 2018, 08:58:29 PM
We should have laws enforcing more Tire chains or Snow tires in areas that we have bad snow or cars can slide backwards down a hill causing more issues. Or crash into curbs [emoji23].
One time I was driving easily on snow on all-weather tires, until I got to an intersection where the snow was packed in to ice, and there were cars waiting at the intersection. Shitshitshitshitshitshitshit!! Thinking quick, I deliberately skidded into the right curb to stop myself. It worked, but I knocked the steering out of alignment for several years until I got it fixed.
That plan works better then crashing & you're insurance going up to numbers that make you're head hurt. But they should really work on ways of heating intersections up via ground wires or something. Because the slowdown really causes people to pack that icedown & make it hard to move. I wish the same would have happened for me. Now I have a bent rim & probably some arm control issues. That will take me some time to fix.
iPhone
I don't know if its fair to blame drivers 100%. Some fault lies in poor forecasting, some in lax governmental snow regulations, some in schools and businesses staying open when they shouldn't be...etc. This is besides the fact that some areas of the country don't get enough practice with snow to know how to drive in it. When schools or businesses require you to come in, you really have no choice but to venture out or call in sick (the latter not always being an option). Here in the PNW, we get snow maybe two or three days a year; barely enough for me to learn how to drive in it, as much as I would like to learn.
I think other provinces have similar laws, but British Columbia requires M+S tires on most roads outside the Lower Mainland and areas of Vancouver Island between 01 Oct and 31 March.
(https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/driving/winter/images/signs.png)
And even in areas where people are used to snowy conditions, people are more mobile than ever. You can have 100,000 people from Minnesota driving in snowy conditions just find, but that one guy from Alabama who moved there last year and has never driven in it can skid into a truck closing the entire roadway. Or even a guy driving thru from Alabama can cause the same havoc.
Quote from: Tonytone on November 15, 2018, 11:03:54 PM
That plan works better then crashing & you’re insurance going up to numbers that make you’re head hurt. But they should really work on ways of heating intersections up via ground wires or something. Because the slowdown really causes people to pack that icedown & make it hard to move. I wish the same would have happened for me. Now I have a bent rim & probably some arm control issues. That will take me some time to fix.
While it would be nice, it'll never really happen. People with heated floors in their house run numerous lines immediately below the tile or floor planks; a fraction of an inch from the surface. There's absolutely no way to do the same with asphalt and concrete on roadways. There's been a few areas that have tried and tested deicing-type stuff on bridges. These things cost millions for very short stretches of roadway, and it's nearly unheard of for the system to keep working after a year or two.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 15, 2018, 09:48:37 PM
I was listening to KYW 1060 on the way home, and they mention how people were unprepared for the storm. I'm thinking, well wait you guys are the ones that told us that it wasn't going to be a storm. So are they underhandedly admitting that they're at fault? No they're still blaming us for not preparing for something that they didn't call for!
The TV stations were saying the same thing...which pissed me off. I literally heard a "we have been on top of this all along." The NWS screwed this up as well...they changed the Winter Weather Advisory to a Winter Storm Warning in the early afternoon...after we already reached the 3 inch mark N&W of the city.
Quote from: froggie on November 15, 2018, 09:53:53 PM
Quotewhen people realized the changeover to rain wasn't happening, they all hit the roads at once (workers, school buses, trucks) and before the plows
Blame the meteorologists all you want, but this here is key...doesn't matter WHAT (if anything) is falling out of the sky when this happens.
The problem is...the forecast led to DOTs keeping their plows in. One inch with temps above 32 and a change to rain = plows in. What happened by 11AM was...two inches and snowing hard and temps dropped to 28. The forecasters didn't predict a drop in temps...which, whenever it snows here, the temps always seem to drop a few degrees at the beginning. 33 vs 28 is a huge difference.
Quote from: Tonytone on November 15, 2018, 10:00:32 PM
I could have taken 476 & been safer!
iPhone
I'm not so sure about that yesterday. Just a tiny bit further north, I-76, US 202, and US 422 were all literal parking lots yesterday afternoon because of stuck cars and trucks.
People on the road this morning apparently didn't take the part about "bridges freeze before road surface" seriously. Speed limit on this road is 50 mph. I usually do 55 and I'm one of the slower people on the road there (I'm aware of recent speed enforcement efforts). Today I crawled past this scene at about 2 mph. There's an overpass just behind my vantage point that crosses three railroad tracks and the Metrorail tracks and I guess people didn't slow down, hit an icy surface, and spun out.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181116/d5e1c12390eeaa53f6d669293c565cd7.jpg)
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 16, 2018, 09:16:29 AM
People on the road this morning apparently didn't take the part about "bridges freeze before road surface" seriously.
I'd argue this kind of thing happens because some states post the "bridge ices before road" sign before almost every single bridge on a freeway. When people see that sign so often, especially during most of the year when it's not snowing, they tune it out.
But that's a piece of knowledge that's especially important to driving in cold, snowy/icy conditions. Everyone should know that black ice forms on top of overpasses, as well as underneath them. I once nearly lost control on black ice on I-80 in Salt Lake, going under this overpass (https://goo.gl/maps/M7p9xBKHp4S2). I don't think I'll ever forget it.
Also, to everyone in here who is armchair-quarterbacking the forecast: those forecasters go through a lot of training to do the job they do. IMO, suggesting that they "don't care" or purposely mislead the general public is a little bit offensive.
I think a lot of people don't understand why overpasses and bridges freeze first, regardless of the signs. (Virginia doesn't post that sign at every one of them, but then I don't think it would have mattered today.)
Are you telling me people don't understand that, Cold air under the bridge causes Ice to form? We might as well not even have iPhones , if a person can't figure that out. I bet you after this, The Dots & Weather channels will be more inclined to "safety first" "Prepare for the worst, hope for the best, etc"
iPhone
I am positive a lot of people don't know that and I suspect they've never thought about it. That is, if you told them why it happens I'm sure it would make sense to them, but I doubt most people have ever considered it at all.
Quote from: US 89 on November 16, 2018, 09:29:52 AM
Also, to everyone in here who is armchair-quarterbacking the forecast: those forecasters go through a lot of training to do the job they do. IMO, suggesting that they "don't care" or purposely mislead the general public is a little bit offensive.
It's not a question of "don't care" or "purposely mislead"...but when you're wrong (especially because Mother Nature can throw curves at any time), just say so. Say something like "the storm developed in a way we couldn't predict" or "the temps didn't act they way we and our models thought it would." I understand that sh*t happens; just say so. Be honest.
But to imply that you were right, when you weren't - which happened on at least two Phila stations yesterday - is disingenuous at a minimum.
In this specific case...when, at 6AM, you say "one inch of snow at 32 with rising temps" and at 12N, you already have three inches of snow at 28 with falling temps, you (or the models) weren't right. And if you change your forecast at 12N, you can't say at 6PM you were on top of it. And that's the reason why plows weren't out. And bedlam.
And I'll say...I think weather forecasters get a little bit of a shaft because news stations use weather in their ratings competition...so I'm sure there's pressure they have to deal with.
Mass transit wasn't immune from yesterday's lingering storm either. Busses were sliding along streets & downed catenary wires, due to wind/ice build-up on nearby tree branches falling on them, caused the closure of at least two SEPTA Regional Rail lines (the one I use, Media/Elwyn, being one of them) as well as Amtrak.
As of earlier this morning, SEPTA's Paoli/Thorndale & Amtrak's Keystone lines (between Philly & Harrisburg) were still shut down.
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 15, 2018, 09:37:54 PMThis was one of the worst snow gridlocks of my time...as bad as the infamous John Bolaris screw up that got him fired ~ 20 years ago.
I remember that fiasco very well; however, there are two differences vs. yesterday's storm.
1. Bolaris overpredicted/overeacted to the then-upcoming storm (it was much less severe). The opposite of what happened yesterday.
2. Bolaris'/NBC-10's forecast back then was the only one that went that extreme; the other stations, thankfully, did not. In contrast,
all of the stations (and not just in the Philadelphia area) grossly underpredicted yesterday's storm.
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 16, 2018, 10:59:42 AM
Mass transit wasn't immune from yesterday's lingering storm either. Busses were sliding along streets & downed catenary wires, due to wind/ice build-up on nearby tree branches falling on them, caused the closure of at least two SEPTA Regional Rail lines (the one I use, Media/Elwyn, being one of them) as well as Amtrak.
As of earlier this morning, SEPTA's Paoli/Thorndale & Amtrak's Keystone lines (between Philly & Harrisburg) were still shut down.
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 15, 2018, 09:37:54 PMThis was one of the worst snow gridlocks of my time...as bad as the infamous John Bolaris screw up that got him fired ~ 20 years ago.
I remember that fiasco very well; however, there are two differences vs. yesterday's storm.
1. Bolaris overpredicted/overeacted to the then-upcoming storm (it was much less severe). The opposite of what happened yesterday.
2. Bolaris'/NBC-10's forecast back then was the only one that went that extreme; the other stations, thankfully, did not. In contrast, all of the stations (and not just in the Philadelphia area) grossly underpredicted yesterday's storm.
There were two with Bolaris...about a few weeks before that massive overprediction, he (and other stations) had a massive underprediction that was very similar to yesterday. That day, I left for work late (when it was supposed to be raining) and it was snowing, and I turned around and avoided the eventual massive commutes. The overprediction is the one that got him fired in the end...
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 16, 2018, 09:11:54 AM
Quote from: froggie on November 15, 2018, 09:53:53 PM
Quotewhen people realized the changeover to rain wasn't happening, they all hit the roads at once (workers, school buses, trucks) and before the plows
Blame the meteorologists all you want, but this here is key...doesn't matter WHAT (if anything) is falling out of the sky when this happens.
The problem is...the forecast led to DOTs keeping their plows in. One inch with temps above 32 and a change to rain = plows in. What happened by 11AM was...two inches and snowing hard and temps dropped to 28. The forecasters didn't predict a drop in temps...which, whenever it snows here, the temps always seem to drop a few degrees at the beginning. 33 vs 28 is a huge difference.
I haven't looked at the specific situation down that way (which given the timing you mentioned I'm guessing is Philly-area), but speaking from long personal experience, all it takes is a temperature difference of 1F at the right altitude to make the difference between snow, sleet, rain, or some combination thereof. When your temperatures at the surface and the bottom few thousand feet of atmosphere are hovering near freezing to begin with, this becomes a very tricky and low-confidence forecast, because it doesn't take much of a temperature change to completely flip that precip type. Mesoscale models are good but not THAT good. Meteorologists should have communicated the uncertainty, and road managers should have taken that uncertainty and been prepared to deploy on short notice.
Quote from: froggie on November 16, 2018, 11:48:16 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 16, 2018, 09:11:54 AM
Quote from: froggie on November 15, 2018, 09:53:53 PM
Quotewhen people realized the changeover to rain wasn't happening, they all hit the roads at once (workers, school buses, trucks) and before the plows
Blame the meteorologists all you want, but this here is key...doesn't matter WHAT (if anything) is falling out of the sky when this happens.
The problem is...the forecast led to DOTs keeping their plows in. One inch with temps above 32 and a change to rain = plows in. What happened by 11AM was...two inches and snowing hard and temps dropped to 28. The forecasters didn't predict a drop in temps...which, whenever it snows here, the temps always seem to drop a few degrees at the beginning. 33 vs 28 is a huge difference.
I haven't looked at the specific situation down that way (which given the timing you mentioned I'm guessing is Philly-area), but speaking from long personal experience, all it takes is a temperature difference of 1F at the right altitude to make the difference between snow, sleet, rain, or some combination thereof. When your temperatures at the surface and the bottom few thousand feet of atmosphere are hovering near freezing to begin with, this becomes a very tricky and low-confidence forecast, because it doesn't take much of a temperature change to completely flip that precip type. Mesoscale models are good but not THAT good. Meteorologists should have communicated the uncertainty, and road managers should have taken that uncertainty and been prepared to deploy on short notice.
Agreed with all points (and yes, Philly area). Many times TV meterologists don't communicate the uncertainty (in their race to be claimed "most accurate", and road managers definitely fell way short. I had a outpatient medical procedure scheduled for yesterday that, in looking at the forecast on Tues morning, knew the temp ranges and precip were too close, and was able to reschedule...so I avoided the mess yesterday.
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 16, 2018, 11:55:18 AM
Quote from: froggie on November 16, 2018, 11:48:16 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 16, 2018, 09:11:54 AM
Quote from: froggie on November 15, 2018, 09:53:53 PM
Quotewhen people realized the changeover to rain wasn't happening, they all hit the roads at once (workers, school buses, trucks) and before the plows
Blame the meteorologists all you want, but this here is key...doesn't matter WHAT (if anything) is falling out of the sky when this happens.
The problem is...the forecast led to DOTs keeping their plows in. One inch with temps above 32 and a change to rain = plows in. What happened by 11AM was...two inches and snowing hard and temps dropped to 28. The forecasters didn't predict a drop in temps...which, whenever it snows here, the temps always seem to drop a few degrees at the beginning. 33 vs 28 is a huge difference.
I haven't looked at the specific situation down that way (which given the timing you mentioned I'm guessing is Philly-area), but speaking from long personal experience, all it takes is a temperature difference of 1F at the right altitude to make the difference between snow, sleet, rain, or some combination thereof. When your temperatures at the surface and the bottom few thousand feet of atmosphere are hovering near freezing to begin with, this becomes a very tricky and low-confidence forecast, because it doesn't take much of a temperature change to completely flip that precip type. Mesoscale models are good but not THAT good. Meteorologists should have communicated the uncertainty, and road managers should have taken that uncertainty and been prepared to deploy on short notice.
Agreed with all points (and yes, Philly area). Many times TV meterologists don't communicate the uncertainty (in their race to be claimed "most accurate", and road managers definitely fell way short. I had a outpatient medical procedure scheduled for yesterday that, in looking at the forecast on Tues morning, knew the temp ranges and precip were too close, and was able to reschedule...so I avoided the mess yesterday.
At least in NJ, the trucks had salt and plows were on the trucks all day.
However, there were two issues here: This was a midday storm, so traffic in the morning was normal: Kids went to school; Adults went to work. Midday storms are always the worst because everyone's already out. Compounding this was that most forecasts called for the snow to quickly turn over to rain, and by midday the changeover would occur. When it became obvious that changeover wasn't occurring, schools started letting out, people started leaving their offices on their own, and offices eventually closed. Roads started becoming jammed with an unusual amount of traffic.
Now, the next question is: Where are the plows and salt trucks? They don't have the magical ability to plow roads filled with traffic. If they were on the road, they would be inching along with everyone else. So by putting them on a jammed highway, they're nearly in a useless situation.
It's tough. Unless everyone stays home in the morning, this will always happen. And if everyone stays home and this didn't happen, there'd be a lot of heat on people for making them stay home for no reason.
And the people that cause this mess - the Meteorologists - escape unharmed.
But the Dots usually do a good job of making their own weather prediction's & go off of that. Why they misjudged yesterday, was confusing. If something major would have happened then who would have taken that "Fall" ?
iPhone
Quote from: Tonytone on November 16, 2018, 12:42:16 PM
But the Dots usually do a good job of making their own weather prediction’s & go off of that. Why they misjudged yesterday, was confusing. If something major would have happened then who would have taken that “Fall”?
iPhone
Actually, they don't. They use the same forecasts we use. They may get it from a different source, but ultimately, all weather forecasting has a base of the National Weather Service or Accu-Weather.
There's been plenty of times where they've had too much equipment available for a storm that never materialized. Again, that's based off of publicly available weather forecasts. That becomes money wasted...money that could've been spent repaving and widening roads.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2018, 01:01:34 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 16, 2018, 12:42:16 PM
But the Dots usually do a good job of making their own weather prediction’s & go off of that. Why they misjudged yesterday, was confusing. If something major would have happened then who would have taken that “Fall”?
Actually, they don't. They use the same forecasts we use. They may get it from a different source, but ultimately, all weather forecasting has a base of the National Weather Service or Accu-Weather.
There's been plenty of times where they've had too much equipment available for a storm that never materialized. Again, that's based off of publicly available weather forecasts. That becomes money wasted...money that could've been spent repaving and widening roads.
If you're using AccuWeather, the Weather Channel, or another similar source, you should not be making official plans. The primary goal of news outlets like that is not to provide accurate forecasts, it's to make money.
DOTs do hire their own meteorologists on occasion, and often times the NWS will coordinate with a DOT regarding the forecast. At least that's what UDOT and the NWS SLC office do.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2018, 01:01:34 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 16, 2018, 12:42:16 PM
But the Dots usually do a good job of making their own weather prediction’s & go off of that. Why they misjudged yesterday, was confusing. If something major would have happened then who would have taken that “Fall”?
iPhone
Actually, they don't. They use the same forecasts we use. They may get it from a different source, but ultimately, all weather forecasting has a base of the National Weather Service or Accu-Weather.
There's been plenty of times where they've had too much equipment available for a storm that never materialized. Again, that's based off of publicly available weather forecasts. That becomes money wasted...money that could've been spent repaving and widening roads.
Wow, that's actually shocking. Reminds me of the time a couple years back around 2010-11 snow season. I first moved up here to Delaware & mind you, I had only seen snow a couple times. But this snow season, was the last time I've seen snow that high. About the size of cars. At the end of that winter season, they said we got 75 inches of snow! Holy shit. I don't think we will see it like that again. But IIRC, Deldot had done pretty well on snow removal. Even though, the snow didn't melt till the summer. They handled those high 1 foot + snow amounts well. Was it because of state of emergencies that were called & the fact that cars were not allowed on roads?
iPhone
Wow, it was the opposite of that up here in the Albany area... snow was forecast 8-12 inches at one point (we got no rain at all), and it feels like we got significantly less.
Incidentally, even the amount of snow that happened still feels like too little for schools to let out early... the only time I remember getting out of school early for snow was one storm where there was already 2' on the ground and it was continuing to snow hard! If it's going to be snowing when you leave no matter when you leave, no point in leaving early unless the roads will become impassible. Seems to me like the roads would have been a lot better if schools and offices had remained open, allowing the plows a chance to get the situation under control prior to the afternoon rush.
Around here, it was Tuesday when everyone was caught off guard, as a snow squall that wasn't forecast moved through during the night and had everything iced over the next morning. The morning rush was carmageddon for anyone who didn't live in Albany or immediate suburbs on the same side of the rivers, with many people taking hours just to go a couple miles (my boss left for work around 6:30, normally gets here around 7, but wasn't in until 9:30 or 10). There was even a period where it was literally impossible to drive from the east side of the Hudson to the west using anything other than the Thruway.
Quote from: US 89 on November 16, 2018, 01:07:33 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2018, 01:01:34 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 16, 2018, 12:42:16 PM
But the Dots usually do a good job of making their own weather prediction's & go off of that. Why they misjudged yesterday, was confusing. If something major would have happened then who would have taken that "Fall" ?
Actually, they don't. They use the same forecasts we use. They may get it from a different source, but ultimately, all weather forecasting has a base of the National Weather Service or Accu-Weather.
There's been plenty of times where they've had too much equipment available for a storm that never materialized. Again, that's based off of publicly available weather forecasts. That becomes money wasted...money that could've been spent repaving and widening roads.
If you're using AccuWeather, the Weather Channel, or another similar source, you should not be making official plans. The primary goal of news outlets like that is not to provide accurate forecasts, it's to make money.
DOTs do hire their own meteorologists on occasion, and often times the NWS will coordinate with a DOT regarding the forecast. At least that's what UDOT and the NWS SLC office do.
I've been told that NYSDOT residences use AccuWeather and will be out plowing if any amount of snow has even a chance of falling.
Quote from: jakeroot on November 16, 2018, 03:40:36 AM
Some fault lies in ... businesses staying open when they shouldn't be ... When schools or businesses require you to come in, you really have no choice but to venture out or call in sick (the latter not always being an option).
I work in cable, so the worst weather–especially ice–brings our busiest work. If there's one day you
don't want to call in sick, it's the day of a huge winter storm. Not only are there already customers waiting for their scheduled appointments, but there are also downed lines that need to be re-hung. I found this out on my second day of work: the roads were covered in ice, and I wasn't sure if the office would be shut down or not. I decided to come in just in case, and the place was hopping with activity. Re-hanging downed drops can be a cable tech's best-paying day if they get paid by the point and not hourly. Each job is so many points, and all you have to do is stick a ladder on the pole, reattach the drop to the pole or house, and move on to the next job. It's good money.
I've worked here since 2008, and I can only remember maybe three times when we were given the green light by the service provider(s) to call customers and encourage them to reschedule due to weather. And, even then–except maybe once–the customers were afforded the right to say no and keep their appointment for that day. But it doesn't matter, because I was the one calling them, so I had to be in the office to do that anyway.
We cover large markets in Kansas, Lincoln (NE), Kansas City, NW Arkansas, Tulsa, and OKC; we used to cover markets in Omaha and Dallas as well. I remember when Dallas was hit by the huge snowstorm a few years ago, I was calling customers to reschedule, and one lady was going on about how the people of Dallas were milking the storm for all it was worth, shutting businesses down for three days in a row...
I remember once, they closed I-135 on the north side of Wichita–while I was on it heading to work in the morning. I had to figure out an alternate route, ended up having to pass a stuck tow truck at a stoplight and several drivers who couldn't make it up an overpass and had started sliding backwards. I was 25 minutes late to work and still the first one there. One of the VPs gave me a gift card in appreciation. The ice didn't melt from the undercarriage of my minivan for a whole week.
Quote from: US 89 on November 16, 2018, 01:07:33 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2018, 01:01:34 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 16, 2018, 12:42:16 PM
But the Dots usually do a good job of making their own weather prediction's & go off of that. Why they misjudged yesterday, was confusing. If something major would have happened then who would have taken that "Fall" ?
Actually, they don't. They use the same forecasts we use. They may get it from a different source, but ultimately, all weather forecasting has a base of the National Weather Service or Accu-Weather.
There's been plenty of times where they've had too much equipment available for a storm that never materialized. Again, that's based off of publicly available weather forecasts. That becomes money wasted...money that could've been spent repaving and widening roads.
If you're using AccuWeather, the Weather Channel, or another similar source, you should not be making official plans. The primary goal of news outlets like that is not to provide accurate forecasts, it's to make money.
DOTs do hire their own meteorologists on occasion, and often times the NWS will coordinate with a DOT regarding the forecast. At least that's what UDOT and the NWS SLC office do.
The primary source of any weather forecast comes from the NOAA as they're the one sending satellites into space. The 2 main paths of getting that info to the public is via the NWS and Accu-Weather. The Weather Channel uses the NWS. Accu-weather sells their info to numerous meteorologists and media stations. No matter who or where you get your weather from, it's come from NOAA satellite equipment, which fed its info to those two sources.
While, yes, the Weather Channel is designed to make money, why would they call for snow in some areas and not others? Why not just say the entire nation will be under a blizzard warning for the next 3 months? Why did they call for rain in areas that got snow yesterday? So the theory that they're out there just to make money is easily rebuked.
DOTs do hire their own meteorologists, but they're there to give them specialized info for localized areas. The info still came from NWS or Accu-Weather. Not Channel 6 ABC Accu-Weather, but from Accu-Weather's main source of info.
Philly's main NWS office is in Mt. Laurel, NJ. And the various TV stations that contract with the NWS will interview them often. And they're going to tell us how great they were...or why their models didn't predict what happened.
Quote from: kphoger on November 16, 2018, 01:30:48 PM
I remember once, they closed I-135 on the north side of Wichita—while I was on it heading to work in the morning. I had to figure out an alternate route, ended up having to pass a stuck tow truck at a stoplight and several drivers who couldn't make it up an overpass and had started sliding backwards. I was 25 minutes late to work and still the first one there. One of the VPs gave me a gift card in appreciation. The ice didn't melt from the undercarriage of my minivan for a whole week.
Love stories like that.
A friend of mine moved to the Atlanta area several years ago from Delaware. She was stuck on the highway during the minor snowfall blast they had a few years ago. So she took her car into the median and just drove. Made great time she said!
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2018, 01:41:04 PM
Quote from: US 89 on November 16, 2018, 01:07:33 PM
If you're using AccuWeather, the Weather Channel, or another similar source, you should not be making official plans. The primary goal of news outlets like that is not to provide accurate forecasts, it's to make money.
While, yes, the Weather Channel is designed to make money, why would they call for snow in some areas and not others? Why not just say the entire nation will be under a blizzard warning for the next 3 months? Why did they call for rain in areas that got snow yesterday? So the theory that they're out there just to make money is easily rebuked.
I'll go even further. Because the primary goal of news outlets like that is to make money, it is in their own best interest to provide accurate forecasts. Doing shoddy work at forecasting could lead to a loss of profit. You should therefore have even more confidence in them than if they
didn't profit on weather forecasting.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2018, 01:44:15 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 16, 2018, 01:30:48 PM
I remember once, they closed I-135 on the north side of Wichita—while I was on it heading to work in the morning. I had to figure out an alternate route, ended up having to pass a stuck tow truck at a stoplight and several drivers who couldn't make it up an overpass and had started sliding backwards. I was 25 minutes late to work and still the first one there. One of the VPs gave me a gift card in appreciation. The ice didn't melt from the undercarriage of my minivan for a whole week.
Love stories like that.
A friend of mine moved to the Atlanta area several years ago from Delaware. She was stuck on the highway during the minor snowfall blast they had a few years ago. So she took her car into the median and just drove. Made great time she said!
Just this past Monday morning, we had a little bit of snow here. There was apparently a wreck on Kellogg (US-54/400) that had my entire half of the freeway closed. I ended up sitting in traffic for 30 minutes until the wreck was cleared. But I almost decided not to wait. When I realized how bad the jam was, I was still within striking distance of a curb and a grassy neutral space between the main roadway and the frontage road. There was even a set of tire tracks there to let me know someone else had had the same idea. My car has 4WD too, to boot. But I decided against it. Mainly because I have trouble getting my car back
out of 4WD, so I try to use it as little as possible.
Quote from: jeffandnicoleActually, they don't. They use the same forecasts we use. They may get it from a different source, but ultimately, all weather forecasting has a base of the National Weather Service or Accu-Weather.
Only in the sense that the raw data originates with the NWS's parent agency. You're conflating forecasts with base data, which is just not the case in reality.
Quote from: kphoger on November 16, 2018, 01:30:48 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 16, 2018, 03:40:36 AM
Some fault lies in ... businesses staying open when they shouldn't be ... When schools or businesses require you to come in, you really have no choice but to venture out or call in sick (the latter not always being an option).
I work in cable, so the worst weather–especially ice–brings our busiest work. If there's one day you don't want to call in sick, it's the day of a huge winter storm.
Obviously service-related jobs are excluded from that, as there are people actively relying on those services. When I worked in the hotel industry, employees who were working during snowstorms would stay overnight at the hotel and keep working the next morning. If you weren't working the prior evening, but worked in the AM, you were still expected to show up, even if you'd be late. There's 166 rooms at the hotel. It would be a disaster if everyone called out, so you're not allowed to with storms.
We got about 6 inches here in the Rochester area, with lower totals to points north and west, and higher totals to points south and east. It was certainly early - the biggest pre-Thanksgiving storm I remember, ever - but not unmanageable. Plow stakes went in a few weeks ago, signifying it wasn't THAT out of the ordinary. However, I really do get a kick out of the East Coast's inability to handle large snowfalls. Our roads were completely clear by this morning - in fact traffic was moving better this morning than it usually is.
Wow, though. I had Google Maps open (with live traffic turned on as usual) last night around 5:30. At that time, every main road in the entire NYC area - radiating at least 50 miles - was solid red. And I don't mean the regular red, I mean the dark red that's closer to maroon, meaning completely stopped. I do a lot of browsing on Google Maps and I have never seen anything that intense before. It was just a really, really bad combination. It was bad here, too, but as I said, it is almost laughable at times, given how much better Upstate NY is at handling snow than the East Coast. Sure, it wasn't exactly pleasant to wake up to all that snow, but no one really batted an eyelash. Business as usual. To be expected between Halloween and mid-April.
Good thing I wasn't the forecaster on that system :bigass:
Amazing that all the snow is gone & all thats left is the piles the plows pushed. Looking forward to this great snowy season & the fun this thread will bring!!!
iPhone
It certainly didn't help on Thursday that there is no NOAA Weather Radio station in New York.
Quote from: jakeroot on November 16, 2018, 03:40:36 AM
I think other provinces have similar laws, but British Columbia requires M+S tires on most roads outside the Lower Mainland and areas of Vancouver Island between 01 Oct and 31 March.
In more northerly areas of BC the requirement extends to April 30th.
Regardless, snow tires/chains/studs are... not a thing anywhere along the northeast corridor. Not for ordinary cars anyway. You'll see transit agencies put chains on buses in anticipation of storms, but no one owns a set of any of these things for their own personal use. Nor should they, because it isn't necessary. The climate here is not cold enough to create blowing/drifting snow as a constant thing even when the sun is shining and it last snowed three days ago, and DOTs typically try to achieve and maintain bare pavement as soon as they can.
Bare all-weather tires are absolutely fine for our purposes... and having some sort of traction add won't compensate for the fact that some people, in spite of having to drive in snow multiple times every year, are inept at doing so.
And as the Bayonne Bridge fiasco shows (it was closed for several hours because someone tried to drive the incline up onto it at a crawl and got stuck), it only takes one idiot to screw things up for everyone else.
Quote from: 02 Park Ave on November 17, 2018, 02:51:19 PM
It certainly didn't help on Thursday that there is no NOAA Weather Radio station in New York.
They still haven't relocated the transmitter?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2018, 12:40:42 PM
It's tough. Unless everyone stays home in the morning, this will always happen. And if everyone stays home and this didn't happen, there'd be a lot of heat on people for making them stay home for no reason.
And the people that cause this mess - the Meteorologists - escape unharmed.
This is a joke, right? You're admitting that the meteorologists are stuck between a rock and a hard place, but you go on to blame them anyway for being in a no-win situation.
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 18, 2018, 07:39:16 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2018, 12:40:42 PM
It's tough. Unless everyone stays home in the morning, this will always happen. And if everyone stays home and this didn't happen, there'd be a lot of heat on people for making them stay home for no reason.
And the people that cause this mess - the Meteorologists - escape unharmed.
This is a joke, right? You're admitting that the meteorologists are stuck between a rock and a hard place, but you go on to blame them anyway for being in a no-win situation.
Unfortunately, no, they're not joking. They are serious blaming meteorologists for people's inability to drive in bad weather. I don't need a weather report to tell me it's snowing and that the roads are wet and possibly icy. That means for driving to slow down and be cautious.
If you were involved in a collision, imagine trying to convince a judge or a police officer that your crash was the weather forecasters' fault. Good luck with that.
Quote from: Super Mateo on November 18, 2018, 03:58:00 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 18, 2018, 07:39:16 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2018, 12:40:42 PM
It's tough. Unless everyone stays home in the morning, this will always happen. And if everyone stays home and this didn't happen, there'd be a lot of heat on people for making them stay home for no reason.
And the people that cause this mess - the Meteorologists - escape unharmed.
This is a joke, right? You're admitting that the meteorologists are stuck between a rock and a hard place, but you go on to blame them anyway for being in a no-win situation.
Unfortunately, no, they're not joking. They are serious blaming meteorologists for people's inability to drive in bad weather. I don't need a weather report to tell me it's snowing and that the roads are wet and possibly icy. That means for driving to slow down and be cautious.
If you were involved in a collision, imagine trying to convince a judge or a police officer that your crash was the weather forecasters' fault. Good luck with that.
Hold on, I'm not gonna say that people should judge the roads on meteorologists. But isn't that their job? Why have police if they aren't gonna protect & serve? Why have roads if they aren't used for cars/people? Everyone has a job & that job, helps other people, if it is information or literally a team building a house together. If we don't work together. How will S**t get done? Yes saying the meteorologists misjudged info got me into accident, would not work. But if they would have had that information correct. Would that same person or other people have gotten into an accident? Don't just think about yourself when you make statements about others. If that was the case all intersections would be uncontrolled and/or a 4 way stop sign, since everyone knows what to do.
iPhone
Quote from: Super Mateo on November 18, 2018, 03:58:00 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 18, 2018, 07:39:16 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2018, 12:40:42 PM
It's tough. Unless everyone stays home in the morning, this will always happen. And if everyone stays home and this didn't happen, there'd be a lot of heat on people for making them stay home for no reason.
And the people that cause this mess - the Meteorologists - escape unharmed.
This is a joke, right? You're admitting that the meteorologists are stuck between a rock and a hard place, but you go on to blame them anyway for being in a no-win situation.
Unfortunately, no, they're not joking. They are serious blaming meteorologists for people's inability to drive in bad weather. I don't need a weather report to tell me it's snowing and that the roads are wet and possibly icy. That means for driving to slow down and be cautious.
If you were involved in a collision, imagine trying to convince a judge or a police officer that your crash was the weather forecasters' fault. Good luck with that.
So nicely oversimplified.
In my opinion, the issue with this specific storm, and the related commutes that took 4-7 hours in SE PA / S NJ / N DE were as follows:
1. The majority of the weather forecasts that morning called for minimal snow (coating to 2 inches dependent on location) to start after the rush hour with temps rising from around 32 and an changeover to rain mid-morning to mid-afternoon. Some of those forecasts specified that the snow was going to be mainly on grassy surfaces.
2. In my opinion, that led to minimal preparation by the area DOTs.
3. In my opinion, that led to all of the schools remaining open as normal.
4. In my opinion, that led everyone to go about their normal morning commutes to work and school on dry roads.
5. By mid-morning, the temps had in fact not risen, but dropped into the upper 20s, which caused the snow to stick quickly and not changeover to rain.
6. At this point, schools started early dismissals, which lead to people leaving work early, which lead to offices closing, all while DOTs were scrambling to get crews out.
7. The gridlock all over the place ensued not just with accidents, but with many vehicles unable to get up icy unsalted unplowed hills, particularly as plows became stuck within the gridlock.
The main issue in my opinion in this case is the combination of the inaccurate forecast, plus the panic of everyone hitting the roads all at once instead of waiting things out. Though with schools closing early, some/many did not have a choice.
An earlier post pointed out that mid-week storms are particularly rough in this area, which is true.
And I am willing to concede that weather forecasting isn't ever a 100% guarantee. But the main issues I have with the weather forecasters in this area are:
1. There is so much bragging of how accurate each of them are, and they deliver their forecasts as iron-clad precision. In this storm, there wasn't a hint in any of the forecasts of the potential of prolonged icing with a slight temp drop.
2. In mid-afternoon, several forecasters were asserting that their forecasts were correct.. Which is correct in that their 12N forecasts were correct, but not the morning ones.
Hey morons. Ever heard the story about the "boy who cried wolf"? I won't re-hash, but a few things need saying.
1) Meteorologists rely on models to predict the weather. These models aren't always in agreement, so you have to go on past reliability. Of course, that reliability is based on every other weather event beforehand, so there's no true best model.
2) Even if all models are in agreement, there is no certainty that the weather event will happen. After all, they're still predicting the future!
3) Forecasting the worst model and then hoping it doesn't happen isn't a smart way to forecast. It leads to over-preparation, wasted resources, and increasing ignorance over time thanks to increasingly poor reliability.
If the next event is forecasted as "huge" and then under-performs, people still throw the meteorologists under the bus for making them worry, prepare, etc. See how they can't win?
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 06:44:26 PM
Hold on, I'm not gonna say that people should judge the roads on meteorologists. But isn't that their job? ...
They
did do their job. As froggie pointed out, the forecast was likely not one with high confidence. Could they have underscored that more in broadcasting the forecast? Sure. But then people will just rip them for being uncertain, and some idiots will call them even more lazy because knowing with certainty is, in their minds, supposed to be the forecasters' job.
As I said, it's no-win for them.
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 18, 2018, 11:43:31 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 06:44:26 PM
Hold on, I'm not gonna say that people should judge the roads on meteorologists. But isn't that their job? ...
They did do their job. As froggie pointed out, the forecast was likely not one with high confidence. Could they have underscored that more in broadcasting the forecast? Sure. But then people will just rip them for being uncertain, and some idiots will call them even more lazy because knowing with certainty is, in their minds, supposed to be the forecasters' job.
As I said, it's no-win for them.
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
iPhone
I'm not even going to entertain that thought because the entire notion is absurd.
Welcome to the world.
iPhone
Quote from: jakeroot on November 18, 2018, 08:14:04 PM
Hey morons. Ever heard the story about the "boy who cried wolf"? I won't re-hash, but a few things need saying.
1) Meteorologists rely on models to predict the weather. These models aren't always in agreement, so you have to go on past reliability. Of course, that reliability is based on every other weather event beforehand, so there's no true best model.
2) Even if all models are in agreement, there is no certainty that the weather event will happen. After all, they're still predicting the future!
3) Forecasting the worst model and then hoping it doesn't happen isn't a smart way to forecast. It leads to over-preparation, wasted resources, and increasing ignorance over time thanks to increasingly poor reliability.
If the next event is forecasted as "huge" and then under-performs, people still throw the meteorologists under the bus for making them worry, prepare, etc. See how they can't win?
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
The temperature should be displayed in the format of "37±5". That would help some.
Quote from: Tonytone on November 16, 2018, 10:38:59 AM
Are you telling me people don't understand that, Cold air under the bridge causes Ice to form?
Yeah, I would say most people don't understand it. Or at least, they never considered it. I drove I-57 down to southern Illinois on 11/9, where this was exactly the case. We passed 5 cars in ditches downstream of overpasses. And I was still the only one to put my flashers on and slow down to 35mph going over each overpass.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on November 19, 2018, 10:18:17 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 16, 2018, 10:38:59 AM
Are you telling me people don't understand that, Cold air under the bridge causes Ice to form?
Yeah, I would say most people don't understand it. Or at least, they never considered it. I drove I-57 down to southern Illinois on 11/9, where this was exactly the case. We passed 5 cars in ditches downstream of overpasses. And I was still the only one to put my flashers on and slow down to 35mph going over each overpass.
Wow, so I guess people think those "Bridges freeze before roadway" signs, are just there for trucks or something? Who gives these people licenses? I hope they didn't get them @ Drives Ed in high school.
Makes me wonder, do I take life to seriously, or the lead amounts are different in every cities water.
iPhone
Quote from: Tonytone on November 19, 2018, 10:21:33 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on November 19, 2018, 10:18:17 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 16, 2018, 10:38:59 AM
Are you telling me people don't understand that, Cold air under the bridge causes Ice to form?
Yeah, I would say most people don't understand it. Or at least, they never considered it. I drove I-57 down to southern Illinois on 11/9, where this was exactly the case. We passed 5 cars in ditches downstream of overpasses. And I was still the only one to put my flashers on and slow down to 35mph going over each overpass.
Wow, so I guess people think those "Bridges freeze before roadway" signs, are just there for trucks or something? Who gives these people licenses? I hope they didn't get them @ Drives Ed in high school.
Makes me wonder, do I take life to seriously, or the lead amounts are different in every cities water.
iPhone
Those signs are uncommon in Illinois if they even exist at all. Also, there are a lot of discrepancies between driver's-education booksmarts and the practical needs for skills to develop as an actual driver.
The road seen in my photo doesn't have those signs. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any of them in the immediate Fairfax County area, but I would not be surprised to learn I'm wrong. Shouldn't really matter, as the overpasses at the Springfield Interchange have frozen over a couple of times and gotten ample media coverage, but I think people just get on autopilot in the mornings, and no doubt some of the people who crashed were looking at their phones instead of driving.
In the Street View link below, the pileup seen in my photo further up the thread was located roughly where that bus on the right is in the distance. I was in the far right lane heading to the loop-around ramp to go to the parking garage at the Metro station. This is the first time I ever recall that particular overpass freezing over (assuming it was–I didn't feel anything out of the ordinary as I drove across it, but then I was absolutely crawling due to slowed traffic from the pileup).
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7672494,-77.1641531,3a,75y,283.93h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRNnnvsGXkHpS01K3CtfbCg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 18, 2018, 11:43:31 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 06:44:26 PM
Hold on, I'm not gonna say that people should judge the roads on meteorologists. But isn't that their job? ...
They did do their job. As froggie pointed out, the forecast was likely not one with high confidence. Could they have underscored that more in broadcasting the forecast? Sure. But then people will just rip them for being uncertain, and some idiots will call them even more lazy because knowing with certainty is, in their minds, supposed to be the forecasters' job.
As I said, it's no-win for them.
The TV forecasts that morning, as most were, were stated with the normal implication of high confidence. "Here's what WILL happen, hour by hour." And that's my issue. If you're going to constantly state high accuracy (in a field where high accuracy isn't always even possible), then yes, you're going to face criticism. As, as I've said a few times...when you double-down on your accuracy in the moments when you weren't accurate, then you'll face criticism. And in addition, as I've said, at least in this area, there is a lot of competition between TV stations around forecast accuracy...and when they are right, we get a lot of self-posturing and patting-on-the-back comments.
TV stations, at least here, all brag about taking the available data and fine-tuning based on their expertise. The NWS forecast that morning spoke of only moderate confidence.
For the record, I did not go out that day, as I know that forecasting is not an exact science, and it seemed too iffy for me. So I was saved the hassle of 4-7 hour commutes that day.
I can't speak for anyone else here...but my comments on this post were mainly for this specific storm, in this area. The experiences I've had with the forecasters in the Philly area are vastly different than the ones in the Rochester NY area, which has much less hype and are much more cautionary...in what I think is a tougher geography for weather.
I think early dismissals didn't help matters, because eventually the temperatures *did* go up and the snow *did* change over to rain, maybe not enough to do much good for some people, but I left work at 6 PM (as usual) and the snow was in the process of being washed away. I've been in situations like this before when the forecast was a lot more accurate. Businesses and schools largely don't close on the forecast of bad weather due to the forecasts not being accurate enough. They close when the bad weather starts, even if the forecast is for it to end before evening commute. I once had to climb the hill I've lived on at the time while it was covered with ice, even though it was *already* above freezing, and the ice melted 2 hours later.
The weather forecasters do their jobs the best they can. People don't understand probabilities when it comes to weather. My grandfather, quite well-educated, constantly grumbles about this "percentage nonsense". "Just tell me if it will rain." So the TV forecasts do just that, at the expense of things like this happening. Because, honestly, would you do anything differently if they told you that there was a 20% chance the snow would continue beyond the 2 PM that was forecast? What if it was 5%? I am actually somewhat of an amateur meteorologist, and I made a judgement for myself (on whether to go to work) based on the facts. It was already 32 degrees. There was no cold air for the storm to tap into, except evaporational cooling, which is usually very temporary. Its energy was coming from the Atlantic (50 degree water temperature) and the Gulf of Mexico (a lot warmer). It was a daytime storm in November. The sun angle during daytime will prevent all but the heaviest of snow from sticking except late November through early February. Everything had to happen just right (wrong?) for there to be accumulations on roads. Obviously it did, but there was no reason to believe it would.
As for the DOTs, I often feel like they have better information, as I've seen them spreading brine before storms that the NWS were underforecasting. This was true this time as well, since the portion of the Atlantic City Expressway that was affected by the storm was salted by the time I was making my way to work (yes, I know it's not run by NJDOT, just an example).
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 11:46:17 PM
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
God. Put God in jail. For not doing what the meteorologists said to.
How the heck can you even entertain the thought of mandating correct results for
predicting the future?
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 11:46:17 PM
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
God. Put God in jail. For not doing what the meteorologists said to.
How the heck can you even entertain the thought of mandating correct results for predicting the future?
I can entertain that thought. If meteorologists are not judged on their abilities to forecast, then they can do no wrong. That strikes me as just a severe a position as throwing them in jail.
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 11:46:17 PM
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
God. Put God in jail. For not doing what the meteorologists said to.
How the heck can you even entertain the thought of mandating correct results for predicting the future?
They wouldn't go to jail for not "predicting the future" they would get in trouble for false statements that cause more harm then help" if weather models are "predictions" why would you tell people to follow it & then it doesn't happen. Sounds a lot like a placebo effect to me. Weather channels should just say "This is a prediction, we wont know for sure until the first few hours" but just be ready for it." Instead of positively stating, over & over, that the facts are correct, & it's going to happen just like it says. Either the weather is something that can never be truly followed, technology isn't powerful enough yet, or they just wing most of the "predictions they come up with" .
iPhone
Quote from: Rothman on November 19, 2018, 02:48:20 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 11:46:17 PM
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
God. Put God in jail. For not doing what the meteorologists said to.
How the heck can you even entertain the thought of mandating correct results for predicting the future?
I can entertain that thought. If meteorologists are not judged on their abilities to forecast, then they can do no wrong. That strikes me as just a severe a position as throwing them in jail.
But they
are judged on their abilities to forecast. If they perform poorly enough, people will stop trusting them, stop watching them or listening to them, and *gasp* then the station will have bad ratings.
Quote from: Tonytone on November 19, 2018, 02:51:45 PM
They wouldn't go to jail for not "predicting the future" they would get in trouble for false statements that cause more harm then help" if weather models are "predictions" why would you tell people to follow it & then it doesn't happen. Sounds a lot like a placebo effect to me. Weather channels should just say "This is a prediction, we wont know for sure until the first few hours" but just be ready for it." Instead of positively stating, over & over, that the facts are correct, & it's going to happen just like it says. Either the weather is something that can never be truly followed, technology isn't power enough yet, or they just wing most of the "predictions they come up with" .
If you honestly believe that weather forecasts are ever anything more than predictions, then you need a serious dose of reality. It's like requiring "Contents may be hot" to be put on coffee cups. No shit it's hot. No shit it's just a prediction.
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:56:47 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 19, 2018, 02:48:20 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 11:46:17 PM
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
God. Put God in jail. For not doing what the meteorologists said to.
How the heck can you even entertain the thought of mandating correct results for predicting the future?
I can entertain that thought. If meteorologists are not judged on their abilities to forecast, then they can do no wrong. That strikes me as just a severe a position as throwing them in jail.
But they are judged on their abilities to forecast. If they perform poorly enough, people will stop trusting them, stop watching them or listening to them, and *gasp* then the station will have bad ratings.
Quote from: Tonytone on November 19, 2018, 02:51:45 PM
They wouldn't go to jail for not "predicting the future" they would get in trouble for false statements that cause more harm then help" if weather models are "predictions" why would you tell people to follow it & then it doesn't happen. Sounds a lot like a placebo effect to me. Weather channels should just say "This is a prediction, we wont know for sure until the first few hours" but just be ready for it." Instead of positively stating, over & over, that the facts are correct, & it's going to happen just like it says. Either the weather is something that can never be truly followed, technology isn't power enough yet, or they just wing most of the "predictions they come up with" .
If you honestly believe that weather forecasts are ever anything more than predictions, then you need a serious dose of reality. It's like requiring "Contents may be hot" to be put on coffee cups. No shit it's hot. No shit it's just a prediction.
Thats not a prediction, thats a fact. The coffee is made with boiling hot water, I didn't ask for a "Iced Coffee" I asked for a "Coffee" so I know its gonna be
A-Hot
Or
B-Really Hot
iPhone
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:56:47 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 19, 2018, 02:48:20 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 11:46:17 PM
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
God. Put God in jail. For not doing what the meteorologists said to.
How the heck can you even entertain the thought of mandating correct results for predicting the future?
I can entertain that thought. If meteorologists are not judged on their abilities to forecast, then they can do no wrong. That strikes me as just a severe a position as throwing them in jail.
But they are judged on their abilities to forecast. If they perform poorly enough, people will stop trusting them, stop watching them or listening to them, and *gasp* then the station will have bad ratings.
If you honestly believe that weather forecasts are ever anything more than predictions, then you need a serious dose of reality. It's like requiring "Contents may be hot" to be put on coffee cups. No shit it's hot. No shit it's just a prediction.
Maybe thats the problem, they are treating Weather jobs more like paperwork, & less like the threat to safety that it is.
iPhone
Quote from: Tonytone on November 19, 2018, 03:04:42 PM
Maybe thats the problem, they are treating Weather jobs more like paperwork, & less like the threat to safety that it is.
Do you honestly believe meteorologists just shrug it off when their bad predictions cause major gridlock and injuries? Do you honestly believe they just don't care, any more than if it were bad grammar in a report? Do you honestly believe people who have made it their career to predict the weather for thousands or millions of people don't take seriously the weight of what they do for a living? My goodness, what cynicism! Predicting the weather is not a perfect science. Everybody knows that. No need to label a prediction as a prediction, because it's
obvious.
If I take to heart the certainty with which a news commentator says such and such a sports team will win a game, and then I go and bet my life savings on that game–do you seriously think I should be able to blame the news commentator when I lose, insisting that he should have prefaced what he said with the words "This is a prediction, we won't know for sure until the fourth quarter"??
Honestly, I think forecasts are wrong more than they're right. But when they predict partly cloudy skies and 75 and it's really sunny and 80, no one will complain. If they predict a half inch of rain and we only get a quarter inch, it's not a big deal.
A difference of 5 degrees when it involves the freezing point makes a huge difference. But the forecast was just as wrong when the high of 80 was 5 degrees off the prediction of 75.
Are meteorologists graded and somehow promoted or demoted based on their forecasts? At least the ones on TV don't seem to be. To the TV stations, it's more about looks and personalities.
Quote from: Super Mateo on November 18, 2018, 03:58:00 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 18, 2018, 07:39:16 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2018, 12:40:42 PM
It's tough. Unless everyone stays home in the morning, this will always happen. And if everyone stays home and this didn't happen, there'd be a lot of heat on people for making them stay home for no reason.
And the people that cause this mess - the Meteorologists - escape unharmed.
This is a joke, right? You're admitting that the meteorologists are stuck between a rock and a hard place, but you go on to blame them anyway for being in a no-win situation.
Unfortunately, no, they're not joking. They are serious blaming meteorologists for people's inability to drive in bad weather. I don't need a weather report to tell me it's snowing and that the roads are wet and possibly icy. That means for driving to slow down and be cautious.
If you were involved in a collision, imagine trying to convince a judge or a police officer that your crash was the weather forecasters' fault. Good luck with that.
I, for one, am not blaming the meteorologist for people's bad driving. I'm blaming the meteorologist for not correctly predicting the weather.
Schools and businesses have all decided to come in on a regular schedule based on the forecasts leading up to Thursday, and even Thursday morning, based on those forecasts. By noontime, clearly the forecasts weren't accurate. But now what do you do? Do you go back to the same meteorologists that messed up the forecast and suddenly trust them on the current forecast, or do you have to continue to second-guess the forecast? I don't blame a single person if they decided they couldn't wait any longer and closed school/work early, because if the 7am forecast was proven wrong by noontime, what are the chances that the noon forecast will continue to be proven wrong at 5pm? At some point, decisions need to be made.
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 18, 2018, 11:43:31 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 06:44:26 PM
Hold on, I'm not gonna say that people should judge the roads on meteorologists. But isn't that their job? ...
They did do their job. As froggie pointed out, the forecast was likely not one with high confidence. Could they have underscored that more in broadcasting the forecast? Sure. But then people will just rip them for being uncertain, and some idiots will call them even more lazy because knowing with certainty is, in their minds, supposed to be the forecasters' job.
As I said, it's no-win for them.
If you go back to last Wednesday, they clearly decided that the storm wasn't going to impact many people. And we're not talking one or two meteorologists; we're talking every one that gave a forecast in multiple cities and nationally. In this region, we have every major network covered times 3. If there was a lot of uncertainty, we would see forecasts all over the place. The forecasted weather was pretty much locked in, viewable via many different sources.
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 11:46:17 PM
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
God. Put God in jail. For not doing what the meteorologists said to.
How the heck can you even entertain the thought of mandating correct results for predicting the future?
Because meteorologists and news channels make it well known that they are the best, most informative source of weather information, with the Mega 50,000 watt satellites and weather forecasts that can predict the weather down to the blade of grass in your yard. They're not telling you they were correct 37% of the time. They're telling you that they are the most reliable of all of them. So yes, the public expects them to be correct, because they're advistising it in every which way except for the phrase "we are always correct".
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 03:15:39 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 19, 2018, 03:04:42 PM
Maybe thats the problem, they are treating Weather jobs more like paperwork, & less like the threat to safety that it is.
Do you honestly believe meteorologists just shrug it off when their bad predictions cause major gridlock and injuries? Do you honestly believe they just don't care, any more than if it were bad grammar in a report? Do you honestly believe people who have made it their career to predict the weather for thousands or millions of people don't take seriously the weight of what they do for a living?
How many of them said "Whoops?" to their viewers?
I mentioned, I was listening to the radio on the way home and the reporters were saying "Why were people so unprepared for this storm?". Well, what am I supposed to do - see a forecast for sun and bring an umbrella and snow shoes? At some point, there needs to be some trust in the forecast. When the news stations act like we're at fault for not being prepared, that certainly makes it seem like they try absolving themselves from blame as much as possible.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on November 19, 2018, 10:18:17 AM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 16, 2018, 10:38:59 AM
Are you telling me people don't understand that, Cold air under the bridge causes Ice to form?
Yeah, I would say most people don't understand it. Or at least, they never considered it. I drove I-57 down to southern Illinois on 11/9, where this was exactly the case. We passed 5 cars in ditches downstream of overpasses. And I was still the only one to put my flashers on and slow down to 35mph going over each overpass.
The problem is, it's not the speed that you're going while going over the overpass, it's how steady and straight you are holding the steering wheel (without using the brakes) while going over the overpass. You can go 35 mph, but if you tap the brake or turn the wheel, you'll still spin out.
I'd like to see the data you're using to make the statement that the forecasters are wrong more than they're right.
Pixel 2
When I was first getting into weather forecasting as a hobby 20 years ago, the statistics were that a 36-hour forecast is correct 80% of the time. Forecasts beyond that were generally unreliable except for predicting major patterns (relatively accurate placement of high and low pressure areas, etc). Still, conventional wisdom was, "tomorrow will be almost exactly like today" is more accurate than any forecast that has been made. However, it's when a radical change in conditions is to occur that forecasts are most useful. Nowadays, short term forecasts are just a bit more accurate (normally placed at 82%) and long-term ones have gotten a lot better (70% or higher).
Unfortunately, big disruptive events are hardest to forecast correctly. Remember the shock of meteorologists when their models correctly predicted the path and strength of Hurricane Sandy days in advance? But even then, the forecasts are immensely helpful. After all, it *was* forecast that a storm system would move through the area and there would be at least *some* snow. Imagine if that information was not available at all (maybe because you put all the meteorologists in jail).
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2018, 03:37:29 PM
Well, what am I supposed to do - see a forecast for sun and bring an umbrella and snow shoes?
If I saw a forecast that said we would receive a couple of inches of snow and then it would start to clear up–you can bet your sweet bippy I'd be prepared for much worse weather. Hearing that sort of forecast, I would know that just being off a couple of degrees would mean vastly different results. Anytime there's precipitation and the temperature is at or near the freezing point, I
always assume there might be a lot more snow and ice than what the forecast predicts. To me, that's just common sense.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2018, 03:37:29 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 11:46:17 PM
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
God. Put God in jail. For not doing what the meteorologists said to.
How the heck can you even entertain the thought of mandating correct results for predicting the future?
Because meteorologists and news channels make it well known that they are the best, most informative source of weather information, with the Mega 50,000 watt satellites and weather forecasts that can predict the weather down to the blade of grass in your yard. They're not telling you they were correct 37% of the time. They're telling you that they are the most reliable of all of them. So yes, the public expects them to be correct, because they're advistising it in every which way except for the phrase "we are always correct".
...
you cannot be serious
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 03:15:39 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 19, 2018, 03:04:42 PM
Maybe thats the problem, they are treating Weather jobs more like paperwork, & less like the threat to safety that it is.
Do you honestly believe meteorologists just shrug it off when their bad predictions cause major gridlock and injuries? Do you honestly believe they just don't care, any more than if it were bad grammar in a report? Do you honestly believe people who have made it their career to predict the weather for thousands or millions of people don't take seriously the weight of what they do for a living? My goodness, what cynicism! Predicting the weather is not a perfect science. Everybody knows that. No need to label a prediction as a prediction, because it's obvious.
If I take to heart the certainty with which a news commentator says such and such a sports team will win a game, and then I go and bet my life savings on that game–do you seriously think I should be able to blame the news commentator when I lose, insisting that he should have prefaced what he said with the words "This is a prediction, we won't know for sure until the fourth quarter"??
Ohhhh okkk, now this is a debate; lets say for example.. A political party believed in a set of beliefs & didn't even care about what the other political party had to say, because their beliefs didn't match their own. This is setting the stage as a game. & now you're team will fight with my team on who's beliefs are better. Even tho both beliefs are probably incorrect or not the solution. Now if both sides know what the real issue is , but focus on other issues that aren't as important. Are they being cynical? I wouldn't say meteorologists don't care. But I wouldn't say they do. I wonder if "Hurricane Shultz" prediction for that day was wrong. I believe he is known as one of the best meteorologists the Northeast Tristate area has.
& I know that bets & lotteries are a scam so I wouldn't bet much into that either.
iPhone
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 04:22:34 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2018, 03:37:29 PM
Well, what am I supposed to do - see a forecast for sun and bring an umbrella and snow shoes?
If I saw a forecast that said we would receive a couple of inches of snow and then it would start to clear up–you can bet your sweet bippy I'd be prepared for much worse weather. Hearing that sort of forecast, I would know that just being off a couple of degrees would mean vastly different results. Anytime there's precipitation and the temperature is at or near the freezing point, I always assume there might be a lot more snow and ice than what the forecast predicts. To me, that's just common sense.
And herein lies the problem. I (emphasize "I") agree with this. But the vast majority of the general public
does not think this way. And definitely did not think this way last week.
Common sense isn't very common these days.........
Quote from: jakeroot on November 19, 2018, 05:42:39 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2018, 03:37:29 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 11:46:17 PM
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
God. Put God in jail. For not doing what the meteorologists said to.
How the heck can you even entertain the thought of mandating correct results for predicting the future?
Because meteorologists and news channels make it well known that they are the best, most informative source of weather information, with the Mega 50,000 watt satellites and weather forecasts that can predict the weather down to the blade of grass in your yard. They're not telling you they were correct 37% of the time. They're telling you that they are the most reliable of all of them. So yes, the public expects them to be correct, because they're advistising it in every which way except for the phrase "we are always correct".
...
you cannot be serious
At least in the Philadelphia area, this is seriously true. They advertise the ability to give forecasts down to your street.
In my time in the Rochester NY area, it was much much less so.
So maybe it's a regional thing?
I've always thought it would be a good idea to present forecasts in terms of degrees of certainty. But how many people would actually understand it?
"We're forecasting two inches of snow in the morning with increasing temperatures and rain in the afternoon. There's a 50 to 60 percent chances that there will be more snow than forecast, and a 20 to 30 percent chance that the temperature will remain cold enough for snow to continue into the afternoon."
That may be a good forecast, accurately reflecting the likelihood of different outcomes, but what could people do with that information?
This reminds me of the time when I looked at the weather forecast for a place in west Texas and there was a 10% chance of rain and a tornado warning. If you see a tornado headed toward you do you just go about your business because it's so unlikely to rain at your location? It was an accurate forecast. A rain storm affected a small portion of the area, and the "possibly severe" storm turned out to be quite severe. Whatever the forecast is, you have to adapt to what actually happens. I remember being under a flash flood warning and ice storm warning at the same time. There was very heavy rain, and if the temperature had been a degree or two colder it would have caused a horrendous ice storm. The forecasters explained the range of what might happen, and we had to be ready for either liquid or solid flooding. I think that was a good approach, telling the public about both outcomes that were likely so we could prepare for either. I agree that forecasters should put less emphasis on projecting confidence and should portray their level of certainty. However, people, including transportation authorities, would have to pay more attention to the likelihoods and not expect exact predictions. And they need to be realize that forecasts are not perfect and should be ready for whatever is in the range of likely outcomes. When there's any chance of snow or ice, the road crews should be ready for it.
**Plot twist**
All the news stations in the Philly/Tri-state area use the same satellites. [emoji23][emoji23]
iPhone
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 19, 2018, 08:50:47 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 19, 2018, 05:42:39 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2018, 03:37:29 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 11:46:17 PM
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
God. Put God in jail. For not doing what the meteorologists said to.
How the heck can you even entertain the thought of mandating correct results for predicting the future?
Because meteorologists and news channels make it well known that they are the best, most informative source of weather information, with the Mega 50,000 watt satellites and weather forecasts that can predict the weather down to the blade of grass in your yard. They're not telling you they were correct 37% of the time. They're telling you that they are the most reliable of all of them. So yes, the public expects them to be correct, because they're advistising it in every which way except for the phrase "we are always correct".
...
you cannot be serious
At least in the Philadelphia area, this is seriously true. They advertise the ability to give forecasts down to your street.
In my time in the Rochester NY area, it was much much less so.
So maybe it's a regional thing?
It's not the forecasters. It's that people are actually so dimwitted as to actually believe a journalist with a meteorological degree could be accurate down the millimetre. Fucking ridiculous expectation. I don't give a shit how accurate they tell viewers they are. Anyone with even a modicum of common sense would know that the future isn't decided. Things change. No forecast is ever 100% accurate. They only say they're "super accurate" to gain viewers (since that's their actual job). Anyone who's doped into believing weathermen are a sentient Mother Nature should go back to living under a rock.
To anyone who says that weathermen should be super accurate: if they invented a way to accurately predict weather down the millimetre, they'd all be millionaires. But because they're only sometimes right, most are solidly middle class.
Quote from: Tonytone on November 19, 2018, 05:59:57 PM
I wouldn't say meteorologists don't care. But I wouldn't say they do.
This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. Of course meteorologists care about what they do. They're human just like the rest of us: prone to mistakes, but also prideful in their hard work. But keep in mind, they don't do this on their own. They're also susceptible to the idiocy of their bosses, who probably do demand that their forecasts are attached to a pronouncement of "most accurate weather, all the time!", regardless of how realistic that is. Related to that is their unwillingness to admit to making mistakes.
Quote from: wxfree on November 19, 2018, 08:55:20 PM
I've always thought it would be a good idea to present forecasts in terms of degrees of certainty. But how many people would actually understand it?
That is something I was trying to get at. Meteorologists could present it in multiple shades of gray, but then mouthbreathers would go "WELL IS IT GOING TO RAIN OR SNOW? MAKE UP YOUR GODDAMNED MIND!"
Quote from: jakeroot on November 20, 2018, 12:52:13 AM
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 19, 2018, 08:50:47 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 19, 2018, 05:42:39 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 19, 2018, 03:37:29 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 19, 2018, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 18, 2018, 11:46:17 PM
So again. If there were a law requiring correct results of weather... who would go to jail?
God. Put God in jail. For not doing what the meteorologists said to.
How the heck can you even entertain the thought of mandating correct results for predicting the future?
Because meteorologists and news channels make it well known that they are the best, most informative source of weather information, with the Mega 50,000 watt satellites and weather forecasts that can predict the weather down to the blade of grass in your yard. They're not telling you they were correct 37% of the time. They're telling you that they are the most reliable of all of them. So yes, the public expects them to be correct, because they're advistising it in every which way except for the phrase "we are always correct".
...
you cannot be serious
At least in the Philadelphia area, this is seriously true. They advertise the ability to give forecasts down to your street.
In my time in the Rochester NY area, it was much much less so.
So maybe it's a regional thing?
It's not the forecasters. It's that people are actually so dimwitted as to actually believe a journalist with a meteorological degree could be accurate down the millimetre. Fucking ridiculous expectation. I don't give a shit how accurate they tell viewers they are. Anyone with even a modicum of common sense would know that the future isn't decided. Things change. No forecast is ever 100% accurate. They only say they're "super accurate" to gain viewers (since that's their actual job). Anyone who's doped into believing weathermen are a sentient Mother Nature should go back to living under a rock.
To anyone who says that weathermen should be super accurate: if they invented a way to accurately predict weather down the millimetre, they'd all be millionaires. But because they're only sometimes right, most are solidly middle class.
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 20, 2018, 07:48:00 AM
But keep in mind, they don't do this on their own. They're also susceptible to the idiocy of their bosses, who probably do demand that their forecasts are attached to a pronouncement of "most accurate weather, all the time!", regardless of how realistic that is.
Question: Is it actually the meteorologists themselves who boast about how accurate their forecasts are, or is that simply what some booming voice says on TV over the ad?
Most weather forecasters depend on a myriad of computer models that do a lot of complex spatial calculations. So the ability to predict the weather, as it is, transcends what humans are capable of, anyway. On the human side of things, meteorologists will probably either try to take an average of the computer models, take note of the most common result of the dozen or so models they look at, or draw upon past personal experience to decide which model looks the most realistic. In short, it's all computer-based anyway.
If there's a very narrow corridor of precipitation resulting from a storm whose track is difficult to predict, some people expecting snow because of the forecast won't get any, while certain spots expecting snow will get the brunt of the precipitation. That might have been what happened in the Mid-Atlantic a few days ago.
Quote from: kphoger on November 20, 2018, 11:10:51 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 20, 2018, 07:48:00 AM
But keep in mind, they don't do this on their own. They're also susceptible to the idiocy of their bosses, who probably do demand that their forecasts are attached to a pronouncement of "most accurate weather, all the time!", regardless of how realistic that is.
Question: Is it actually the meteorologists themselves who boast about how accurate their forecasts are, or is that simply what some booming voice says on TV over the ad?
It probably depends. To be honest, I don't really watch TV news so I have no idea.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on November 20, 2018, 11:23:07 AM
Most weather forecasters depend on a myriad of computer models that do a lot of complex spatial calculations. So the ability to predict the weather, as it is, transcends what humans are capable of, anyway.
I wouldn't discount the idea of near perfect forecasts some time in the future. If we get enough observational resolution to know exactly what the conditions are at every point on earth and every elevation in the atmosphere, and enough computer memory and processing power to run simulations based on that much data you could theoretically achieve 100% accuracy given the right programming / historical data.
QuoteOn the human side of things, meteorologists will probably either try to take an average of the computer models, take note of the most common result of the dozen or so models they look at, or draw upon past personal experience to decide which model looks the most realistic. In short, it's all computer-based anyway.
They also look at model trends. If the current model has the storm further north than 6 hours ago, and that is further north than 12 hours ago, it is assumed that the models are probably still too far south. The local ones will also know the local quirks, not down to a block, but, for example the urban heat island effect will mean Philadelphia and its adjoining areas will be warmer than elsewhere. The pinelands in NJ will be colder at night under clear skies. Coastal areas will usually be affected by the ocean water temperature (warmer than elsewhere in winter, cooler in summer).
So, people expect weather forecasting to be more like this...
...and less like Steve Martin in
L.A. Story (if you don't get the reference, you seriously should watch the movie).
Quote from: jakeroot on November 20, 2018, 12:52:13 AM
people are actually so dimwitted as to actually believe a journalist with a meteorological degree could be accurate down the millimetre. Fucking ridiculous expectation. I don't give a shit how accurate they tell viewers they are. Anyone with even a modicum of common sense would know that the future isn't decided. Things change. No forecast is ever 100% accurate. They only say they're "super accurate" to gain viewers (since that's their actual job). Anyone who's doped into believing weathermen are a sentient Mother Nature should go back to living under a rock.
To anyone who says that weathermen should be super accurate: if they invented a way to accurately predict weather down the millimetre, they'd all be millionaires. But because they're only sometimes right, most are solidly middle class.
If you're ever in Wichita, I'll buy you a beer.
Quote from: bzakharin on November 20, 2018, 12:13:54 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on November 20, 2018, 11:23:07 AM
Most weather forecasters depend on a myriad of computer models that do a lot of complex spatial calculations. So the ability to predict the weather, as it is, transcends what humans are capable of, anyway.
I wouldn't discount the idea of near perfect forecasts some time in the future. If we get enough observational resolution to know exactly what the conditions are at every point on earth and every elevation in the atmosphere, and enough computer memory and processing power to run simulations based on that much data you could theoretically achieve 100% accuracy given the right programming / historical data.
QuoteOn the human side of things, meteorologists will probably either try to take an average of the computer models, take note of the most common result of the dozen or so models they look at, or draw upon past personal experience to decide which model looks the most realistic. In short, it's all computer-based anyway.
They also look at model trends. If the current model has the storm further north than 6 hours ago, and that is further north than 12 hours ago, it is assumed that the models are probably still too far south. The local ones will also know the local quirks, not down to a block, but, for example the urban heat island effect will mean Philadelphia and its adjoining areas will be warmer than elsewhere. The pinelands in NJ will be colder at night under clear skies. Coastal areas will usually be affected by the ocean water temperature (warmer than elsewhere in winter, cooler in summer).
1. I for one do not see us getting 100% accuracy. First, what is 100% accuracy? I do see us getting a much better accuracy though. To use that data, you have to have the computional power to sift through that data. I don't see us getting anything more than citywide trends 99% correct. Everything else is too complicated to predict rather than display. (Models vs Radar screens [warnings])
2. Yes. I tend to go with the local news stations over the NWS forecasts, but for the most part I use the NWS as their data is more complete and freely available (For now at least)
Quote from: kphoger on November 20, 2018, 12:28:45 PM
So, people expect weather forecasting to be more like this...
What gets me about that scene is how the wiper blades are never turned off, even after it stops raining.
Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2018, 12:44:50 PM
What gets me about that scene is how the wiper blades are never turned off, even after it stops raining.
Like about 10% of the drivers out there.
That and high-speed wipers for a light sprinkling just... perplex me.
Quote from: kphoger on November 20, 2018, 01:10:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2018, 12:44:50 PM
What gets me about that scene is how the wiper blades are never turned off, even after it stops raining.
Like about 10% of the drivers out there.
That and high-speed wipers for a light sprinkling just... perplex me.
Seriously. I try to use my wipers as little as possible because the sound and visual interruption bother me.
Quote from: jemacedo9 on November 19, 2018, 08:50:47 PM
At least in the Philadelphia area, this is seriously true. They advertise the ability to give forecasts down to your street.
In my time in the Rochester NY area, it was much much less so.
So maybe it's a regional thing?
There is good reason no one in Rochester claims to be able to accurately predict the weather. They would be the laughingstock of the county. Everybody around here knows that weather is unpredictable to start with, and
our weather is even less predictable than unpredictable.
Also, we are not scared of snow (again, unlike the East Coast) so it really does not matter to us whether we get nothing, 2 inches, or 2 feet. Schools would not close in any of those scenarios. Nobody would consider leaving work early in any of those scenarios, either. And that is the key difference.
Quote from: jakeroot on November 20, 2018, 12:52:13 AM
It's not the forecasters. It's that people are actually so dimwitted as to actually believe a journalist with a meteorological degree could be accurate down the millimetre. Fucking ridiculous expectation. I don't give a shit how accurate they tell viewers they are.
Oh, you won't believe the dimwittedness that exists...
I'm Facebook friends with our local meteorologists Facebook pages. They'll post the weather maps and expected snowfall amounts. People will constantly post: "How much do you think we'll get in (my town)". I mean, seriously - look at the fricken map. I'm hoping these people have some sense of where they live, so by looking at the map they can see if they're in the 3" - 6" range, or the 6" - 10" range. And even then, they want more specifics.
Quote from: kphoger on November 20, 2018, 01:10:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 20, 2018, 12:44:50 PM
What gets me about that scene is how the wiper blades are never turned off, even after it stops raining.
Like about 10% of the drivers out there.
One of my Turnpike toll-collecting stories: Driver pulls into my lane. I ask if she's tired. She's a little shocked by my question, but says yes, she is. I said, I can tell - your windshield wipers are on, your car's dry and it hasn't rained for hours. At least she laughed.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 21, 2018, 03:18:14 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 20, 2018, 12:52:13 AM
It's not the forecasters. It's that people are actually so dimwitted as to actually believe a journalist with a meteorological degree could be accurate down the millimetre. Fucking ridiculous expectation. I don't give a shit how accurate they tell viewers they are.
Oh, you won't believe the dimwittedness that exists...
I'm Facebook friends with our local meteorologists Facebook pages. They'll post the weather maps and expected snowfall amounts. People will constantly post: "How much do you think we'll get in (my town)". I mean, seriously - look at the fricken map. I'm hoping these people have some sense of where they live, so by looking at the map they can see if they're in the 3" - 6" range, or the 6" - 10" range. And even then, they want more specifics.
Like any meteorologist, they'll try their best. But it's up to viewers to understand the caveats with weather prediction, namely the whole "predicting the future" aspect.
Quote from: kphoger on November 20, 2018, 12:28:45 PM
So, people expect weather forecasting to be more like this...
https://youtu.be/cI7ctWyXl5s
That seems to be the case, yes. :ded:
Quote from: kphoger on November 20, 2018, 12:28:45 PM
If you're ever in Wichita, I'll buy you a beer.
:cheers:
But wait, there's more! Why does the "Weather Channel" make such good predictions on Big Storms? They just don't cover you're local area, which is the bad part.
iPhone
Quote from: Tonytone on November 21, 2018, 03:45:28 PM
But wait, there's more! Why does the "Weather Channel" make such good predictions on Big Storms? They just don't cover you're local area, which is the bad part.
I think people are more willing to give the Weather Channel a pass, since they aren't "local". For some reason, expectations of local forecasters are much higher. To a degree, that's fair, as local forecasters are more likely to be familiar with local weather patterns. But to the degree that forecasting is still just predictions, people don't give credit where it's due, and are happy to take it away when weathermen aren't 100% correct.
Quote from: jakeroot on November 21, 2018, 03:52:34 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 21, 2018, 03:45:28 PM
But wait, there's more! Why does the "Weather Channel" make such good predictions on Big Storms? They just don't cover you're local area, which is the bad part.
I think people are more willing to give the Weather Channel a pass, since they aren't "local". For some reason, expectations of local forecasters are much higher. To a degree, that's fair, as local forecasters are more likely to be familiar with local weather patterns. But to the degree that forecasting is still just predictions, people don't give credit where it's due, and are happy to take it away when weathermen aren't 100% correct.
Seems reasonable, Weather people go through hell. I give it to them, but all the local weather channels in our area seem the same to me. I can flip thru all the channels during a storm, & they all have the same "maps" same "predictions" & the same stories. Only difference I see is the people & the climate of their audience.
iPhone
Quote from: Tonytone on November 21, 2018, 03:56:53 PM
I can flip thru all the channels during a storm, & they all have the same "maps" same "predictions" & the same stories. Only difference I see is the people & the climate of their audience.
Which implies that given the same data, they're all coming up with the same, largely correct results.
Or it's a massive conspiracy.
I'll let the audience decide.
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 21, 2018, 04:24:13 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 21, 2018, 03:56:53 PM
I can flip thru all the channels during a storm, & they all have the same "maps" same "predictions" & the same stories. Only difference I see is the people & the climate of their audience.
Which implies that given the same data, they're all coming up with the same, largely correct results.
Or it's a massive conspiracy.
I'll let the audience decide.
Every so often, I'll see a meteorologist disagree with what the models are predicting, based on his or her years of experience in the region. But it's always an older person with a lot of years under the belt who dares deviate from the models.
Quote from: kphoger on November 21, 2018, 04:38:15 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on November 21, 2018, 04:24:13 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 21, 2018, 03:56:53 PM
I can flip thru all the channels during a storm, & they all have the same “maps” same “predictions” & the same stories. Only difference I see is the people & the climate of their audience.
Which implies that given the same data, they're all coming up with the same, largely correct results.
Or it's a massive conspiracy.
I'll let the audience decide.
Every so often, I'll see a meteorologist disagree with what the models are predicting, based on his or her years of experience in the region. But it's always an older person with a lot of years under the belt who dares deviate from the models.
I have seen (younger) meteorologists disagree with what's being displayed on the screen ("This model seems to be underestimating blah blah blah, we'll probably hit 50") but of course the onscreen graphics, and the website, are still displaying 45.
^ The onscreen graphics are often part of the same software package that is using their in-house model, which is not the same as the weather models the NWS and academics typically use.
Quote from: Tonytone on November 21, 2018, 03:45:28 PM
But wait, there’s more! Why does the “Weather Channel” make such good predictions on Big Storms? They just don’t cover you’re local area, which is the bad part.
iPhone
Oh, they're no better either. There was a storm last year that they majorly whiffed on...the same one the locals whiffed on as well. In fact, The Weather Channel issued what may be one of the longest non-apologies on record: https://weather.com/storms/winter/news/winter-storm-stella-northeast-bust-march-2017/ . You'd have to find all the forecasts and stories just before the storm didn't hit as expected to see how much hype this storm got.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 23, 2018, 01:40:09 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 21, 2018, 03:45:28 PM
But wait, there's more! Why does the "Weather Channel" make such good predictions on Big Storms? They just don't cover you're local area, which is the bad part.
iPhone
Oh, they're no better either. There was a storm last year that they majorly whiffed on...the same one the locals whiffed on as well. In fact, The Weather Channel issued what may be one of the longest non-apologies on record: https://weather.com/storms/winter/news/winter-storm-stella-northeast-bust-march-2017/ . You'd have to find all the forecasts and stories just before the storm didn't hit as expected to see how much hype this storm got.
In the old days of the Weather Channel; if Jim Cantore was broadcasting in your neighborhood, your area was screwed weather-wise. :-D
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 26, 2018, 02:03:13 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 23, 2018, 01:40:09 PM
Quote from: Tonytone on November 21, 2018, 03:45:28 PM
But wait, there's more! Why does the "Weather Channel" make such good predictions on Big Storms? They just don't cover you're local area, which is the bad part.
iPhone
Oh, they're no better either. There was a storm last year that they majorly whiffed on...the same one the locals whiffed on as well. In fact, The Weather Channel issued what may be one of the longest non-apologies on record: https://weather.com/storms/winter/news/winter-storm-stella-northeast-bust-march-2017/ . You'd have to find all the forecasts and stories just before the storm didn't hit as expected to see how much hype this storm got.
In the old days of the Weather Channel; if Jim Cantore was broadcasting in your neighborhood, your area was screwed weather-wise. :-D
Jim cantore? He's the best we got, he has clips of the rare "Thunder snow" & he's pretty cool to watch, he always got the Tri-State area thru the worst storms.
iPhone