Nor'easter Monday or not?

MAXUM · 01-12-2008, 12:00 PM

Great stuff... although what you describe makes me even a bit more confused. I take it that the more detailed the model is the more accurate, in theory, it should be at making it's cacluations. Yet you seem to indicate that not all models are the same I assume do to the differences in detail. If that's the case, does that make you tend to favor one versus the other? Seems like that is not always the case where every weather prediction seems to reference multiple models. Why bother with models that are less likely to be accurate?

One of the most fascinating things I find is how storms are predicted to form even though looking at the surface maps the storm doesn't exist. This up and coming storm is a great example of that. How the heck is it you know for a fact that storm is going to form off the coast in the location suggested? Maybe it's that I don't quite understand the dynamics of how the pressure varitions form, high versus low. For that matter what plays into how strong a high or low pressure area becomes?

Funny you mention Jim Cantore, I don't think I have ever seen a guy that get more excited about the weather than he does.

Just as a side note, I'm a licensed HAM and went through ARES (sky warn) spotter training when I lived in CO and was a very active participant in the sky warn program. Matter of fact I've been on several storm chases for super cell t-storms and tornados, what a thrill. Anyways the class I went to was taught by the national weather service and I just simply could not get enough of it. For the record tornados are best observed from a great distance, those things are scary as well as unpredicatable.

Maybe we need a special weather tutorial thread!

01-12-2008, 12:00 PM	#9
MAXUM Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Kuna ID Posts: 2,755 Thanks: 244 Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts	Great stuff... although what you describe makes me even a bit more confused. I take it that the more detailed the model is the more accurate, in theory, it should be at making it's cacluations. Yet you seem to indicate that not all models are the same I assume do to the differences in detail. If that's the case, does that make you tend to favor one versus the other? Seems like that is not always the case where every weather prediction seems to reference multiple models. Why bother with models that are less likely to be accurate? One of the most fascinating things I find is how storms are predicted to form even though looking at the surface maps the storm doesn't exist. This up and coming storm is a great example of that. How the heck is it you know for a fact that storm is going to form off the coast in the location suggested? Maybe it's that I don't quite understand the dynamics of how the pressure varitions form, high versus low. For that matter what plays into how strong a high or low pressure area becomes? Funny you mention Jim Cantore, I don't think I have ever seen a guy that get more excited about the weather than he does. Just as a side note, I'm a licensed HAM and went through ARES (sky warn) spotter training when I lived in CO and was a very active participant in the sky warn program. Matter of fact I've been on several storm chases for super cell t-storms and tornados, what a thrill. Anyways the class I went to was taught by the national weather service and I just simply could not get enough of it. For the record tornados are best observed from a great distance, those things are scary as well as unpredicatable. Maybe we need a special weather tutorial thread!