Map Room: Should forecasts be limited to only 5 days out.

[mikegeukes]

Map Room: Should forecasts be limited to only 5 days out.

Forecast models are not very accurate, but after 5 1/2
days, they really become more unreliable the further out
you go out in the forecast period. Often I look at ensembles
along with forecast models, to get a better idea of whats
going on in the short-range and medium range models.

Thats why I mention, we should have a cut off, in how
far we should make a forecast in the Map Room, 5 days
is what I would like to see, the further out you go, the
more wishcasting and disappointment you see in the models.

Mike

 

[Tony Lyza]

I voted yes. However, I think perhaps a new category, such as "long range outlook" may be in order. The word "forecast", to me, implies too much certainty for the later-than-five-day period. Using a different heading would help differenciate between forecasts of higher certainty from those of much lower certainty.

 

[samuel stone]

I voted "no" because I think it is important to be able to post about long range pattern changes. Examples of this would be: when it became apparent 3 or 4 days ago that we would shift into a more spring like pattern at the beggining of March. Another example would be last year at the end of May when it became apparent that we would would shift into a more southwesterly flow pattern During the first week of June. Being able to post about these situations I think is important.

I would however vote "yes" if a "long range outlook" area was made for this type of post (as Tony said). I mean think about it, if someone noticed a pertanent pattern shift and wanted to post about it they would be forced to place it in Weather and Chasing if that rule was made. So I say either keep things how ther are or make a "long range outlook" place to post in.

 

[Dick McGowan]

Who cares? I mean seriously if someone sees something on the GFS and wants to post a forecast 10 days out, let them, I see nothing wrong with it. What IS wrong with it? It may be a little of wishcasting, seeing how it is technically still "Winter", but why not?

If you don't want to read a forecast 10 days out, don't click, simple as that.

 

[Mickey Ptak]

I can see a good point in a five day rule, yet I don't see a real need for it.
It's just people like me who get a little post happy. lol. That is why I started a thread for next week’s timeframe in W&C instead of the TA. I understand how wish washy long range forecast can be, BUT it is still very fun to talk about possible chase opportunities and keep it loose.

Now just because I see a point in a five day rule I do not agree completely with it. Forecasting long is nothing short of a wishcast I understand, but if one wants to post about a particular date the TA is where it belongs. If they just want to discuss a timeframe, say perhaps a weekend and just discuss it in general I think the best place is W&C. If you think about it we don’t really have that many “long range wishcastingâ€￾ threads in the TAâ€￾ at this time.

Bottom line, IMO, keep the set dates in the TA regardless how far out the date is.

Mick

 

[David Wolfson]

I voted "yes". I think actually it should be limited to three or four days in the Map Room. The reason is that beyond that it's difficult or impossible to limit the timing to a twelve hour window or so and the location to one or a few states. Longer ranges could/should go in W&C.

 

[Jeff Snyder]

Historically, folks have posted "long-term" forecasts or discussion about large-scale pattern changes >5 days out in the Weather and Chasing forum. I think we may have had a rule about this last year or two years ago, but that's at least how most folks have dealt with this situation. If you look through last year's threads, there were several "pattern change in 2 weeks?"-type of threads in Weather and Chasing... The only real downside of posting FCST-type threads for >5-7 days out is that, as you noted, many will not verify.

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

Can't a poster or a mod delete a topic if a setup vanishes? Can't a poster simply change the topic date as the system changes its timing? What on Earth is it harming? Are there going to be several other chase ops in need of that space at the same time? I don't see what it hurts at all to have long term discussions.

 

[Shane Adams]

I don't care if someone wants to post a FORECAST thread for a system 15 days out. All I want is a REPORTS thread that isn't subjected to public scrutiny.

 

[John Gnuechtel]

Long term forecasts that don't pan out usually sink to the bottom of the list with few replies. That filters them out well enough for my use. From my (admittedly limited) point of view, this doesn't seem to represent much of a bandwidth problem. But they can and do start good discussions. Even if there isn't severe weather, there's generally at least as much insight available in ST Forecast threads compared to Area Forecast Discussions on NWS pages.

 

[Nic Wilson]

Yes, please leave the wishcasting to the Weather & Chasing forum until there is certainty regarding the synoptic set-up. And if you are going to wishcast please use the ECMWF, it beats the GFS 9 out of 10 times.

http://wwwt.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/gmb/STATS/html/acz5.html

 

[Glen Romine]

I voted to have a 5 day limit. I had an explanation for why I think that on here -but undoubtedly some would get 'upset' with my opnion. So, do whatever you want. I'm thinking about going ahead and starting up a thread for May 23. I want to be the first to recognize the chance for storms that day.... :roll:

Glen

 

[rdale]

"All I want is a REPORTS thread that isn't subjected to public scrutiny."

If you post a picture of smoke rising in the distance and claim it to be an F2 (or EF2 depending on the date ;> ) I would hope that you would welcome seasoned chasers pointing out the problem.

 

[Sheila_Ward]

No. Many forescasts the day before an event don't verify either. How do you put a date limit on it? The Map Room rules state that you can change the date of a thread, or start a new thread if needed.

If anything, you are doing folks a favor by not having them rediculed by those who realize it's silly to make a convective forecast that far out.

Yes, the holier-than-thou meterology experts are quick to jump on anyone that posts information they disagree with. Hopefully the mods will take care of this problem this season. Just because someone think it's "silly", doesn't mean it is. Let people discuss it. It may or may not verify. Who cares? It's still forecasting and some people may learn something from it.

 

[Mike Hollingshead]

I voted to have a 5 day limit. I had an explanation for why I think that on here -but undoubtedly some would get 'upset' with my opnion. So, do whatever you want. I'm thinking about going ahead and starting up a thread for May 23. I want to be the first to recognize the chance for storms that day....

:evil: (kidding!...lol)

I never saw anyone trying to say we mention stuff possible 2 months ahead. I don't think it has that much to do with being the first to notice an event either(though maybe it is for *some*). Some it is about being a chaser and getting excited something hopeful is out there and simply talking about it--not having to know the exact details at day 20 either. I figure it is a worthwhile heads up as not everyone reading the forum knows how to read models and recognize the possibility of something.

I think a 10 day limit might be more acceptable than a 5. I mean this currrent thing for this coming Saturday has been on there in some form for quite a while now. It is entirely possible it will be there in some form until it gets here. What is so bad about watching it come and changing the date on the thread title if need be? It's not like there isn't room on page 1 for it to be until the event is over.

But, I guess if there is somewhere to talk about the events on the horizon, I don't care what they do with it in the map room. It might seem silly to talk about the coming event in weather and chasing and then have to move over to the map room to a different thread on the same thing.