How Much Do You Use or Remember?

[NoFoggyIdea]

So over the holiday's I was digging through boxes looking for decorations etc. I came across some of my boxes from college that had a lot of my Met notes in them. I looked through the boxes and over the notes and realized that I don't use a lot of what I learned in college to forecast today. Do you feel that your forecasting ability has diminished or improved since being out of college. I have been out of college between 10-15 years.

[Bureau Chief]

Hell my degree is in a totally different field so I guess I aint using any of what I learned in college/

[Ping-Pong Ball]

So much has changed in the past 15 years when it comes to forecasting the weather. Sure the science is the same, the Hypsometric Equation has not changed, and the laws of thermodynamics are set in stone; however, the technology we have access to allows us ways to forecast the weather today that were not available 10-15 years ago.

To me, forecasting is more about a routine I've become comfortable with. Yet, with the ever changing technology available at my finger tips, I try not to get too set in my ways with what I look at or use when putting a forecast together.

A nice thing about this site, is tips or sites other use that I did not know about that I discovered after there mentioning on WX-Line (i.e. thanks Wxcaster & RDALE).

From college, I remember what I need to know to put together an accurate forecast. With that said, as improvements are made in the data that's available for my use, new learning will need to occur on my part to stay ahead of the game. For example, I need to hone my skills and bone up my knowledge on Dual-Polarimetric Doppler Radars. I know little on this new technology. When it becomes, widely available, I'd like to be confident with it so I can use it to fullest advantages.

Forecasting the weather isn't so much what we learned in college, but is more about staying current with latest tips, tools, & techniques. It's more about keeping an open mind where instead of remembering, we never stop learning.

[NoFoggyIdea]

Do you really use the Hypsometric Equation in day to day forecasting? I don't. . especially since I have 5,6 and 10 to forecast for in a limited time. Any suggestions on boning up on stuff that I havn't used in about 7 years?

[Big Country]

2 separate posters have said the phrase "boning up..."

waiting for tony's comment in 3...2...1...

[MI_Wxman]

Okay, up on the soapbox for a moment....

Since my education was based around Operational Forecasting skills - I guess I would say I haven't lost anything (and I'm pushing 25 years now). I use everything I learned and the only thing that has changed is the automation of a process I used to do by hand. Analysis on black and white paper has turned into a colored map where many can't find vorticty and to show a frontal boundary from a 100-500 mb thickness chart seems a distant memory since many rely on the aviation charts. How I miss those days of difax charts! :)

I guess it depends on where you recieved your education.
I won't divulge any names, but another meteorologist attended a US Coast Guard Aviation meteorology seminar that I put on and this person had trouble grasping the basics of aviation wx. Reading a surface obs (decoding it) plotting a full sfc plot. Reading a pilot report and understanding it.

I'll bet if I laid out a Skew-T chart and TTAA, TTBB, PPBB data that most of you couldn't plot the secondary levels and struggle at the mandatory level of data.

How about differentiating warm barotropic, warm baroclinic and dynamic from each other?

It's not uncommon - but many who attended 4 year colleges lose alot of what they learned because much of what you learn you can't use in your day-to-day routine. Please don't take what I say as a slam... But the difference was in the 5 hours a day for 6 months of experiencing "operational forecasting" whereas others spent only 2 weeks (2 hours a week) in the same environment. Thats 18 hours per coursework vs. 600 hours for 6 months. If the colleges added an "operational Forecasting" section and made the class from 8 to noon 5 days a week, plot and analyze maps, hang them, brief the instructors every morning, verify your forecast from the day before - and if you blow it... write a forecast review, you'd develop pretty intricate forecasting skills!

To summerize:
I'd keep all your notes and shelve them for reference as having that available will make you stronger over time.

Okay.... I'm done.... Sorry for the rant....

[NoFoggyIdea]

Rant noted. Next please. HAHA.

[wx or not]

I was in college in the 70's. Hell, I can't even remember what classes I took anymore! Something about clouds, yeah, maybe convection, okay, but I basically threw that stuff out years ago. If I were in the private sector with a forecasting job, I could spend more time developing models. As it stands now, I can barely find the time to work out chromakeys.:)

[baldingwxguy]

You know, this is an interesting topic. I'm one of those MSU-ers, from before they even beefed up the program (as in, pre-2000). As I read some of the stuff from Turd (which by the way, cracks me up ever time I read the name), I realize, "oh crap, he's right. I don't remember how to do that." I remember that there is a hypsometric equation, but I couldn't tell you what it is without looking it up. I remember going through the raw sonde data and plotting it, but I couldn't do it now without brushing up on how to read the numbers. I feel like I can make a pretty good forecast most of the time. I reason things out as I look at data, and don't just buy MOS as some do. But, I feel bad that I can't recall all the "meat" that I feel like I should know. I knew it at one time...but...as Turd said, we've gotten away from the hands-on-thik-it-through forecasting technique and moved to a much more automated way of doing it. Is that bad? I don't know, I guess.

[Golfball_Size_Hail]

My professor once said something like,

There are rid-and-readers, good forecasters, very smart talented forecasters, and freaking geniouses. The latter can basically look at the broad pattern think it through without looking at MOS/Models, etc.

Will I ever be a freaking genious, unless God wills it, unlikely. But, I would like to use my operational background, continue to study this crazy weather, learn from my mistakes, and try to get better and better. The things you forget probably weren't all that valuable in the first place or out-dated, but I will once and in a while look through my old notes and find things that I should still know...that reminds, I should brush up! Studying for the CBM brought a lot back, but not it's starting to slide again.

[Wedge]

I learned a bunch of theory and equations in school, but didn't really ever get a chance to apply that knowledge until my first job. You learn forecasting from actually doing it, not in a classroom.

I once had a chief tell me there are modelers and then there are forecasters. Anyone can read a computer model. I see it all the time where a meteorologist looks at the model data (whether it be raw numbers or forecast maps) and regurgitates it. They say things like "Model A has this solution and Model B has this solution so we took the difference." Whereas a forecaster can better interpret the data and come up with their own solution. They can read the subtle clues in the model and they know the biases and the model physics. This can only come from having an understanding of how the atmosphere works and having experience forecasting for a certain area. My college notes haven't seen the light of day since May '99, but I know exponentially more about the science now then when I did when I graduated

[Golfball_Size_Hail]

Your namesake sure goes against the models and takes some regional knowledge to figure out!

[MI_Wxman]

Wedge has it right and hit another nerve..... Anybody can take raw MOS data , find the average and come up with a number. But when asked why... answering that "Model "A" says this and Model "B: says that so I took the average", isn't the way to forecast. You're "statistically" putting a forecast map together. If you busted.... who do you blame? Model "A"? Model "B", "yourself"? You made the final decision.

Probably the best way to get in the trenches and become a good operational forecaster is to go back and see why your forecast didn't verify. Don't just say "Well, the models slowed it down", find out why. And don't ignore what you don't know..... Do this 2-3 times a week and you will strengthen your forecast skill. I know.... sounds like a pain in the butt.... But it will benefit you.

Here's another question... How many of you have a Local Area Forecast Product for your station? Kind of like a binder or notebook of terrain induced differences that would influence the macro forecast put out by the NWS or from the models? Things that are observed when certain conditions are expected but not normally covered in the daily Forecast Discussion?

[Golfball_Size_Hail]

We don't have a ton of ASOS around, Ocean and Gulf nearby, plus Mountains, so terrain plays a big influence...when there is a storm nearby that is. Can't remember the last time we had a "real" one of those though.

Any hooo, models usually have a pretty big range here, and won't pic up on some mesoscale features/microscale. Downsloping is common, increases heating and drying normally. Sea breeze interaction sometimes. CAD, usually stronger than models, and lasts longer. Just a few of our local effects.

I'd say downsloping is the easiest correction, CAD can be tricky to stick your neck out on.

[NoFoggyIdea]

Glad to know that I am not the only one that thinks, " Oh crap! I should know all of the meat everyday but when it comes down to it .. . I have to really dig to pull it back to the forefront of my mind." I consider myself a decent forecaster and still battle the ever so present," I can never bust! If I bust then I don't deserve this position" attitude. However, I learned a long time ago that things change and all I can do is learn why I busted on my forecast and make a mental note.
Another interesting point is that as a forecaster you do learn the certain nuances(sp?) of an area and why it will be warmer/ colder etc due to terrain. That got me to thinking about if I work in a certain area for 20 years and learn the region I would feel I am a good forecaster. However, pick me up and plop me in a new location, new state and I doubt that I would nail a forecast everyday.

[Ping-Pong Ball]

Do you really use the Hypsometric Equation in day to day forecasting?

No, and you seriously missed my point. Which was the concepts taught have not changed (ie in this case the relationship between temperature & pressure heights or the impact of the thickness of layers in the atmosphere on your forecast); however, the way we utilize and analyze the data at our finger tips on a daily basis have changed greatly since I was in school and will continue to vastly change.

Heck, at my first TV Gig, I had black & white difax charts, where the NGM was king and if the dot matrix printer got jammed, ran out of paper, or was knocked off-line between the end of the Friday night newscast and when I came in on Saturday afternoons, I'd be screwed. At the gig, the first hour of the shift was always spent was processing (ie tearing off) the copious amount of stuff the printer had printed. Most of what came off that difax printer years ago, would not even be looked at today when preparing a forecast. That's all I'm saying :)

[PTP WX]

I learned a bunch of theory and equations in school, but didn't really ever get a chance to apply that knowledge until my first job. You learn forecasting from actually doing it, not in a classroom.

I once had a chief tell me there are modelers and then there are forecasters. Anyone can read a computer model. I see it all the time where a meteorologist looks at the model data (whether it be raw numbers or forecast maps) and regurgitates it. They say things like "Model A has this solution and Model B has this solution so we took the difference." Whereas a forecaster can better interpret the data and come up with their own solution. They can read the subtle clues in the model and they know the biases and the model physics. This can only come from having an understanding of how the atmosphere works and having experience forecasting for a certain area. My college notes haven't seen the light of day since May '99, but I know exponentially more about the science now then when I did when I graduated

Man, I knew you were smart Wedge!

We had an operational forecasting class in college, it was good. But it was also nearly 20 years ago and the technology is out of date. I would say I am an exponentially better forecaster now than when I came out of school. I do many things that were learned after my degree on a regular basis. Techniques, research, and curiosity can go a long way.

[NoFoggyIdea]

No, and you seriously missed my point. Which was the concepts taught have not changed (ie in this case the relationship between temperature & pressure heights or the impact of the thickness of layers in the atmosphere on your forecast); however, the way we utilize and analyze the data at our finger tips on a daily basis have changed greatly since I was in school and will continue to vastly change.

Heck, at my first TV Gig, I had black & white difax charts, where the NGM was king and if the dot matrix printer got jammed, ran out of paper, or was knocked off-line between the end of the Friday night newscast and when I came in on Saturday afternoons, I'd be screwed. At the gig, the first hour of the shift was always spent was processing (ie tearing off) the copious amount of stuff the printer had printed. Most of what came off that difax printer years ago, would not even be looked at today when preparing a forecast. That's all I'm saying :)


Ping Pong:
I too started out in my first three to four shops ripping the difax and analyzing. I didn't miss your point at all just was poking fun at the equation part of your answer that is all.