Exposé! Insider Finds REAL Forecast Flaw

What Happened to the Snow?!

We, at the Insider, are tuned into YOU. While we were thrilled to report on the havoc and mayhem that raged across our area in the past few weeks, many of our readers were perplexed by what some feel were inaccurate predictions. But the big question being asked by all the major weather outlets is "Did We Get it Wrong?"We are happy to say we did NOT. We were on top of this storm from the beginning and did not make any predictions about snowfall totals until we could say with absolute certainty a range and the probability for that range (See weather map in previous post).

That said, we are not so arrogant as to ASSUME we are the ONLY news outlet you rely on. And since that is the case, we felt we owed it to you, to try to figure out where things went awry for our fellow meteorologists and the weather models they enjoy gazing upon.

Various outlets have tried to explain exactly what happened. We find it disturbing that some weather people are actually APOLOGIZING. We KNOW weather forecasting as among the most challenging things for mankind to predict. If it were easier, lines could be set and wagering at your local Weather Book would be part of our culture. There is no need to apologize when weather professionals were SO CLOSE to getting this spot on.
Some Explanations:

Nick Wiltgen of The Weather Channel explains, "We were beaten by the snow band. Snowfall forecasting involves the intersection of many variables on scales from local to global: atmospheric pressure patterns, wind directions, air temperatures at various levels of the atmosphere, and the amount of moisture in the air." 




As you can see above, these are VERY complex calculations indeed, that even weather SUPER models would have trouble dealing with.

"Winter storms almost always exhibit sharp edges, or gradients, in snowfall,” says Jonathan Erdman, a digital meteorologist at The Weather Channel. "In Juno's case, the gradient in snowfall was predicted to lie right over the most populous metro area in the country. If you were in central and eastern Long Island, Juno probably delivered what you expected. If you're in the five boroughs, however, perhaps the storm didn't match what you had been hearing."

This same explanation COULD be used to explain what happened in the Chester County area. But wait, there's more. One forecaster said a trough suddenly popped up over Altoona, Pa., Tuesday night and blocked swirls of snow over New York City from reaching Philadelphia, Trenton and lower Bucks County. One can only assume this rogue trough blew off the ground from a poorly run horse farm in the western part of the state. Harrisburg is currently working hard to legislate trough containment systems to prevent an incident like this from hampering weather forecasts in the future. "While this trough has left us with egg on our face, we are just relieved no one in our viewing audience was crushed by it, as it probably did not fall from the sky til it was out to sea, with the snow," said a caring John Bolaris.

This too, is valid. Snow band gradients and flying troughs are hazards all hard core weather watchers must contend with. However, we at the Insider feel we know what really went wrong.

All local reports start with information produced by the National Weather Service. From there, they apply there own algorithms and data they collect locally. Here's what really happened:



First the air pressure gradients were calculated, not real tough, and no mistakes made.



More complex calculations are used to plot the exact path of the storm, taking into account flying barnyard equipment. At this point, ALL SYSTEMS ARE GO! Recall, for ALL accounts of Snowmageddon 3.0 and 3.5 they were dead on with the timing of the snow, the fact that it would come in multiple waves, and that it would pull out of our area, move north and pound New England. Check, check AND check.

So what happened to the snow? We received this from a NOAA insider. Look:



Notice, at the very END of this complex equation, a tired coffee fueled meteorologist at NOAA sloppily set up their long division problem, and misplaced the decimal point. By sliding it up and to the right the actual values in inches were multiplied by 10!!!! Reports of 8-12 inches were off from the start! However, if you use the corrected values, 0.8-1.2 inches, the forecast now falls right in the predicted range. This decimal point mix up clearly explains EXACTLY what happened in our area. Troughs and gradients aside, I'd say for the most part, they were one power of 10 away from nailing this dead on.