Forecasting Skill going downhill ???

[Billy Griffin]

Just curious for discussion... after seeing the big "screw up" today on OUN's 10:37am forecast discussion calling for Armageddon, how do the rest of you feel on SPC's and Norman's seemingly "lack of" ability to forecast this year.

Yeah, in their defense, I do understand weather is no "exact" science, and it never will be perfect, but the episode that happened earlier was uncalled for. If you're not aware of what happened and the wording issued earlier, go to the TARGET thread and read on 6/10 "talk".

Just in my opinion, that was very unprofessional and of poor taste. To emphasize the "end of the world" is just stupid.

To me, it appears our forecasters are "crying wolf" a great deal this year. No excuse to me, they've got the tools to forecast this stuff correctly... that HIGH RISK day on Sat... NEVER should have been HIGH... Moderate only. They have the tools for soundings, obs, etc. - I think they're jumping the gun way too much and you know what... THE PUBLIC ARE THE ONES WHO WILL SUFFER. It's human nature to become unattentive when it keeps turning up false positives.

For example... how often do we worry about our Homeland Security and whether it's orange or yellow? Does anyone know what it is today? Doubt it (don't cheat).

We grow complacent. That's just human nature. But to contribute to it by making rediculous forecasts... I just don't understand.

Any thoughts? And please, please, please oh please, don't take this as an insult to those of you who have a much deeper meteorology education and background than I. I'm only trying to say that perhaps, they should exercise more caution before trying to create a panic. For example, for those of you in OKC area, look at how the media covers weather now. It's almost got to the point where it's too much. Come on, admit it.

 

[nickgrillo]

Billy, as for today, AFDs change as forecasters change and focuses change. I wouldn't worry about it...

As for SAT, where do you get that it didn't require a HIGH risk? Almost everything that day supported a widespread tornado outbreak, although I guess those few factors that didn't, surpressed the rest of the threat... But I don't know why you would say that...

 

[Andrew Francis]

I enjoy the hardcore coverage of the OKC metropolitan area media. Sometimes they blow it out of proportion and such, but at least they cover it, i was in St. Louis once and there were warnings all over the area, and not even close to the coverage as OKC..etc...some may find this good, some may not. Anyways, I just put myself in their situation...if a high risk threat appear possible on a certain day and you don't mention any of it in your forcast - say on that day of risk, a major outbreak occurs and you left the public uninformed...I think forecasters that often "expect the worse" are some of the best. I certainly would not want to say its going to be sunny and no storms, and then see three supercells blow up on the radar. Just because there is a slim chance, doesn't mean there is no chance.

But whatever, I love storms and stuff like all of you here, so I too, often "hope for the worst" (in weather sense).

 

[Jeff Snyder]

Originally posted by Billy Griffin
Just curious for discussion... after seeing the big \"screw up\" today on OUN's 10:37am forecast discussion calling for Armageddon, how do the rest of you feel on SPC's and Norman's seemingly \"lack of\" ability to forecast this year.

Yeah, in their defense, I do understand weather is no \"exact\" science, and it never will be perfect, but the episode that happened earlier was uncalled for. If you're not aware of what happened and the wording issued earlier, go to the TARGET thread and read on 6/10 \"talk\".

Just in my opinion, that was very unprofessional and of poor taste. To emphasize the \"end of the world\" is just stupid.

To me, it appears our forecasters are \"crying wolf\" a great deal this year. No excuse to me, they've got the tools to forecast this stuff correctly... that HIGH RISK day on Sat... NEVER should have been HIGH... Moderate only. They have the tools for soundings, obs, etc. - I think they're jumping the gun way too much and you know what... THE PUBLIC ARE THE ONES WHO WILL SUFFER. It's human nature to become unattentive when it keeps turning up false positives.

For example... how often do we worry about our Homeland Security and whether it's orange or yellow? Does anyone know what it is today? Doubt it (don't cheat).

We grow complacent. That's just human nature. But to contribute to it by making rediculous forecasts... I just don't understand.

Any thoughts? And please, please, please oh please, don't take this as an insult to those of you who have a much deeper meteorology education and background than I. I'm only trying to say that perhaps, they should exercise more caution before trying to create a panic. For example, for those of you in OKC area, look at how the media covers weather now. It's almost got to the point where it's too much. Come on, admit it.

First off, AFDs are intented for other WFOs and meteorologically-minded folks -- they are NOT intended for the general public. Additionally, just because a pm AFD from OUN DOESN'T mention a huge event doesn't mean forecast thinking has changed that much. Some AFDs are very detailed and in-depth (many long paragraphcs), while others are simple and general (one short paragraph). I caution reading into the details of AFDs too much, as each forecaster writes things his/her own way. IMO, the best (more detailed) AFDs from OUN come from Miller and James.

Convective forecasting is anything but perfect. Models bust, forecasters bust -- nobody forecasts perfectly. There are days in which I have disagreed with particular forecasts (e.g. SPC forecasts), but that's the deal with forecasting -- it IS subjective (interpretation of models, weighing of model output, utilization of observations to verify validity of models, pattern recognition, etc). SPC forecasters (particularly on significant severe weather days) spend a LOT of time preparing forecasts, so I certainly respect their forecasts (though that doesn't mean that my forecasts always align with theirs). If I were much better I'd have bagged every signficant tornado in the plains so far this year...

Forecasts (NWS, SPC, etc) are people too; as such, they can't always be 100% objective. I don't fault some forecasts for seeming to be 'jumping the gun' or whatnot. Just go back to Feb/March threads on here and read about how excited folks get about 1000-1500 CAPE...

Regarding the comment of "the public are the one who will suffer" -- believe me, the SPC forecasters know this as well as anyone. To think that SPC and NWS forecasters and mets don't care about false alarms is ludicris. But, they shouldn't be expected to answer to you, me, or anyone other than those who deal with official verifications. If so, I'll ask you to justify every time one of your forecasts busts.

While the particular am AFD from OUN was strongly-worded, nowhere in there did it say the "end of the world" was coming or that this was armageddon. And, contrary to the title of your thread, severe convective forecasting has greatly improved in the past couple of decades (as I'm sure you are aware). I don' thtink there have been any more 'busts' this year than in previous years.

 

[Billy Griffin]

Why does every post always turn into a debate, then the next thing, an argument? Can't we all just love one another> LOL

Okay, first off... why I (just me personally) do not think Saturday warranted a HIGH was simply because I could see the CAP was basically gone. I just felt everything was going to go up all at once, which it basically did. Sure, winds and instability were right, but I had a feeling it was going to be a big "cluster" or MCS thing. Further south, where I should have stayed to begin with, it was better capped but probably still didn't warrant a "high" because of the scattered nature.

I'm only going on the meteorological definition of HIGH and just in my thinking, even though we did have a few good tornadoes, it wasn't a widespread outbreak. Not a 5/3/99, Not a 5/4, etc. etc. - that's all I'm trying to say. Nothing meant to offend anyone, nothing meant to get anyone mad, just me thinking out loud.

As far as media coverage of weather, yes... I do believe that coverage is done and done well. Again, I'm just saying that things could, perhaps, be toned down a little.

We must remember that "most" of the public do not share our enthusiasm for severe weather. When we have AFDs going out calling for the Rapture, I'm afraid it just creates more panic. I know, here in the office for example, the first thing people did after that discussion was out was to come running down to my office and asking how bad it really was going to be. One lady even commented on how she might leave Oklahoma for the weekend. Face it, it does sound silly, but some folks are just terrified of weather. Yet again, I'm only saying that it did seem a little (a lot) inappropriate to use wording like that so far out.

Yes, warn the public, make them aware and diligent... but don't scare them to death and don't call for "women and children first" until all the facts are there. That's all I'm trying to say folks.

One more thing, not picking at you Nick, but honest... how many MAJOR severe weather reports came out of Saturday? I lost count, but in comparison to other high risk days that have verified, looks pretty slim.
I know, sounds like "Monday morning quarterback forecasting", but I did honestly see this a bit over-forecast as some others did too.

Finally folks, I just wanted to start a discussion, not a war. :wink:

 

[mikegeukes]

Here is a part of the AFD, that Billy was talking about:

REGARDING LATE WEEK...HAVE A VERY STRONG FEELING THAT SOMETHING BIG IS BREWING. LOOKING AT PROGGED LONGWAVE PATTERN - WITHOUT GETTING BOGGED DOWN IN DETAILS - THE SETUP LOOKS ABOUT AS POTENT FOR WIDESPREAD/SIGNIFICANT SEVERE WX IN THE CENTRAL U.S. AS THIS FORECASTER HAS SEEN IN NEARLY 25 YEARS OF OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE.

SCREAMING MESSAGE IS THAT POTENTIAL WILL EXIST FOR 1 OR MORE SIGNIFICANT CENTRAL-U.S. SEVERE WX OUTBREAKS...BEGINNING AS EARLY AS THU BUT MORE LIKELY IN THE FRI-SAT-SUN PERIOD. PLAN TO HIT THIS HARD IN THE NOON HWO.

Mike

 

[Billy Griffin]

Caviat to the last comment Jeff... a lot of the public do read the forecast discussion. Yes, I know it's for more of a meteorological reading and interpretation, but it's also right there on their webpage, so folks do read it.

Case in point, a lot of folks here at the Postal center read it and then I'm inundated with questions on how bad the weather's going to get.
See how it states "screaming message"... it's words like that which do create quite an emphasis, if not panic, in a lot of people and then it gets the local media around here all in a "tither".

It wasn't five minutes past that discussion appearing until I get bombarded with questions from other staff here, plus my phone rings from the TV station, and I hear, quote: "get ready for tragic stuff this weekend." (name withheld)

Shouldn't we calm down and say, "whoa... looks like we'd better be ready for some potential severe weather this weekend?"

Anyway, interesting discussions. Perhaps I should rename the title though. What I really meant was instead of skill going downhill is that I think we're pressing the red button a little too quickly on occasion.

In other words, creating panic is not a good thing. To me, if we spent more focus on educating, rather than alarming, that's a good approach.

 

[Mike Parker]

Gary Lezak (the NBC meteorologist in KC) has chimed in on the OUN comments.
http://blogs.scripps.com/kshb/weather/


IMO I believe the comments were a little pre-mature. If this person ends up being correct then I will eat my words but come on, 4 and 5 days out and implying as good as or better set up than May 3, 1999. I totally respect the job those guys and gals do and realize they are so much more educated in the science of weather than I am but look at what one comment can do. My question is why would a trained professional with obviously at least 25 years experience say that in a public setting? Would they not know the implications of their actions? It just seemed a little strange to see that excited of wordage so far out from an event.

 

[David Drummond]

One thing I think you guys are missing though that sticks in my mind. The forecaster has 25 YEARS of experience forecasting. I would have to think you log a lot of pattern recognition in that period of time.

Whether or not he should have said it publicly this far out or not remains to be seen when the event gets here. But when ANYONE with 25 years of experience says something like that about something in their profession, I am darn sure going to perk up my ears and pay attention.

Who posts on StormTrack with that much experience forecasting storms?

Again, whether he's right or not will remain to be seen, but he obviously saw some sort of pattern emerging that alarmed him even with all of his years of seasoning.

 

[Billy Griffin]

All I can say is that "if" he was so right... WHY DID THEY TOTALLY CHANGE THE DISCUSSION JUST A FEW HOURS LATER ???

Not trying to continue or get a heated argument started, and sure, in his/her statement it basically says they have 25+ years forecasting experience.

Totally uncalled for this far in advance. Now, come Thursday if things start shaping up, then I'd say mention that in the HWO... alert the public that severe weather is likely over the weekend, and do everything you can to emphasize the importance of that.

When I read wording like that, and quote: 25 years !!! - makes me think we should all prepare for a tri-state tornado. That kind of outbreak would be relative to the Ohio Valley outbreak in 1974... let's see, that's about 25 years ago (or so), correct?

I mean, come on, how can you predict or even "assume" something like that this far in advance ????

 

[Jason A.C. Brock]

Chill dude. Take your Xanax. Id rather be overly prepared for the chance of severe weather and it not happen then to be unprepared for it and it does ANY day. Most people are not chasers...... They need all the preparedness they can get.

 

[Billy Griffin]

Yeah, and don't get me wrong... sure would like to see something like that, I'll admit it. LET'S JUST KEEP ALL THE TORNADOES IN OPEN COUNTRY = EMPHASIS !!

I'm just saying that kind of outbreak, a "most potent in over 25 years" means something like 4/3-4/4, 1974, or 4/11, 1965 !!!!!

IF he was going to use strong wording... how 'bout, "current models are indicating a potent weather system capable of producing significant severe weather over the weekend." "All interests should stay informed on the latest HWOs and AFDs throughout the central US on this potentially significant severe weather weekend." ??????????

I guess I'm having a problem with the guy saying 25+ years. That takes us back past some rather major tornado outbreaks, some of even recent decades. Anyone remember 4/23/1991 - Andover, KS? How 'bout '95 and the Pampa / TX panhandle stuff? Some of those days are even historic or eventful, but saying "over 25 years" just beats all.

Sure, he may see something amazing, but let the models and forecasts come into better perspective BEFORE saying something like that.

PS: took the Xanax. :wink:
You guys are taking this all wrong. I'm not mad. I just hate to see the public getting alarmed like this way too soon... because, if it doesn't happen, you're wrong. What'll happen is most will say "here we go again", and unfortunately the next time it does verify, then we'll hear all these folks claim they "had no warning".

Now, I'm done with this thread. Everyone have a great evening.

 

[Jeff Lawson]

All things considered, it is rather strange to see that sort of content in a discussion attached to a morning update. All the more strange is that neither the 12Z GFS or ECMWF suggest the sky is falling, continued active pattern aside. Given the timing of the update, I assume the forecaster had just finished processing those particular model solutions.

So, yeah, it is kind of weird.

 

[Kiel Ortega]

First, remember what Jeff said...AFDs are written by different people...they don't have to have continuity.

Next, 25 years only takes us to 1980...so the outbreaks mentioned above are out.

Next, the models have been in perspective and consistent (FINALLY!)...last week I noticed the GFS setting the situation up with its forecasts for today and tomorrow. A friend of mine has been trying to get his dad to come down so he could chase because of how persistant the GFS has been. I haven't paid much attention to the GFS runs since last week (not for late this week anyways), but what it has progged for tomorrow is what it had progged for tomorrow nearly a week ago. It's not the exact same (I think the UA speeds are a little slower), but it's similar enough for my eyebrows to raise a little. Further, looking at the handling the GFS has of the shortwave, it's movement seems similar to May 4, 2003...real quick through the Plains and towards to the NE over a good, moist surface, IMO (but that's for the forecast thread).

Everyone once in awhile uses strong language in their forecasts, amatuer and professional alike (see this board's forecast threads on certain days for example).

 

[David Drummond]

Billy, I have to ask...

IF he turns out to be right and this turns out to be the mother-of-all-outbreaks......

Are you going to be just as vehement about how he was right about that outbreak, that far in advance?