Does location affect forecast?

I'm not regionally biased in the least about tomorrow's probs...because the action is centered around my region! :p

Actually, I believe that there is a certain amount of regional bias to my TA posts...mostly because if I can't head in a particular direction, I probably won't forecast for it (unless it looks like a real doozy).

Tomorrow, though, I can honestly say that (IMO) the best chance of significant, chaseable tornadoes will be in N TX. Central Oklahoma is under a moderate, too, but I'd rather drive and see a tornado than sit at home and see a squall line.

Gabe
 
Originally posted by Aaron Kennedy

Would you drive to SD from OK for a marginal severe risk? I wouldn't.

If I thought there was a good chance to see tornadoes, of course. Done it before (and missed it all by 45 minutes.) Point being, when someone ignores an event only because they don't want to drive, that IMO isn't a chaser. If they don't think the set-up is worth the drive, that's a whole other ball of wax.
 
Originally posted by Bryce Stone
I think most everyone has missed the point of the discussion. See my last post above. Specifically, how does your regional bias affect (and should it affect) your forecast post in TA?

Doesn't affect them at all. I look for where the bst tornado potential will be, period. Whether or not it's close to me is of no consequence.

Why should anything effect a forecast other than observational data and models? You can focus on your area of choice if you're limited to or biased to a given spot, but that doesn't change the weather. I will never tell myself western OK looks better when I know S Nebraska is the place to be. You'd be a fool to do that IMO.

Example: Right now WC KS and N TX look better than anywhere in OK for tomorrow. Sad, but true.

Choosing the closer target is often times a decision made out of neccesity, but there's no reason to pretend that's the best place to be when it's really not. This is turning into psych 101 :lol:
 
Back
Top