Thought this was pretty cool since we are all so dependent on weather predictions.
The NOAA upgraded the core of their GFS weather model.
The NOAA upgraded the core of their GFS weather model.
Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
New weather prediction model
- Thread starter unitink72
- Start date
vlittle
Well Known Member
Interesting...
For those interested, weather forecasting was a key problem for the mathematics of Chaos theory. Chaos: Making a New Science is the only book I have read three times and I will read it again. It will fundamentally change how you look at the world.
Fractional dimension objects, yeah! (How to occupy space with zero volume).
For those interested, weather forecasting was a key problem for the mathematics of Chaos theory. Chaos: Making a New Science is the only book I have read three times and I will read it again. It will fundamentally change how you look at the world.
Fractional dimension objects, yeah! (How to occupy space with zero volume).
Weather in Canada
Many years ago, I was sitting in Muskegan Michigan, waiting on weather to cross lake Michigan on the way to Oshkosh. We were sitting in front of a TV watching the weather channel and we were talking to a retired US Navy pilot who was also going to Oshkosh with his son. When he learned we were from Canada, he said he always wanted to fly in Canada because we didn't have any weather up there. He laughed at my bemused look and said come with me I"ll show you. On the FBO monitor her showed me the weather map and sure enough above the border on the screen it was just white....no weather shown. He said "see, officially no weather above the border". I'm glad to show this screen shows we do, in fact have weather in Canada.
Many years ago, I was sitting in Muskegan Michigan, waiting on weather to cross lake Michigan on the way to Oshkosh. We were sitting in front of a TV watching the weather channel and we were talking to a retired US Navy pilot who was also going to Oshkosh with his son. When he learned we were from Canada, he said he always wanted to fly in Canada because we didn't have any weather up there. He laughed at my bemused look and said come with me I"ll show you. On the FBO monitor her showed me the weather map and sure enough above the border on the screen it was just white....no weather shown. He said "see, officially no weather above the border". I'm glad to show this screen shows we do, in fact have weather in Canada.
gmcjetpilot
Well Known Member
Read the article with the rose color glasses off:
" “Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere” (or FV3) dynamical core, which simulates the basic atmospheric physics at the heart of this endeavor, a change that has been in the works for a while." It goes on to say the weather community does not think the results are so good. My take on it is, man can not predict climate or weather absolutely because it is out of our control and factors we don't understand, random, mother nature knows....
Obviously weather predictions in short term can be accurate, especially with local knowledge of experts. Now that all the local flight stations local as well as weather observers and forecasters are long gone, WX predictions relies mostly on computer algorithms or "models" from people 1000 mile away. Accuracy degraded in the 80's and 90's because of the loss of local knowledge. These computer models involve assumptions and a lot of data, technology has improved... However the "ASSUMPTION" part is an issue. All I want to know is the WX above Mins at time arrival regardless of "Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere".
We now have extensive satellite data since the 60's to present day. We have more data about ocean water temperatures, more stations reporting weather real time. Before internet they had weather teletype or faxes. Most of the world is not as well observed as USA. Only in the last 100-130 years have we got "good" data for North America. "Good" is a relative term, in that it's a mercury thermometer read by a human, who has to make reading at precise times to capture max and mins. (They did have some max/min reading thermometers)
ALL WEATHER is due to uneven heating and cooling of the earths surface. This is all driven by the SUN and planetary motion. Of course night it is cooler and day hotter in general. Depending on latitude it is colder in winter than summer. We know we have Westerly winds middle latitudes between 30 and 60 degrees, drives North America weather patterns and upper wind patterns. These are all knows, observed. They still launch weather balloons to get lapse rate and winds. Aircraft with IRS and GPS can get real time weather (winds and temps) and transmit that. Then there is terrain and water, that effects weather, and on and on. All this sounds great. Yet weather or climate is not 100% predictable. They get weather predictions wrong. We have to accept that, regardless of the new "Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere" model.
So the point is? Long term predictions the further out, the more uncertain, because man can not control weather. Weather in a word is not completely predictable sometimes. Not to get political this is why claims or predictions of extreme global climate change decades out are so bad... You still see weather predictions 24 hours or 7 days from now being off. You see bad weather being predicted and nothing happens. You see storms and bad weather pop-up that was not predicted. I would not be surprised if this new model gets canned and they put the previous program back in the mix. I suspect they will use both in parallel. WHAT DRIVES THIS? They say super computers that can make more calculations. Back to my point, super computers can't predict weather, because weather is controlled by SUN, Planetary motion and phenomenons we don't control that are random.
" “Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere” (or FV3) dynamical core, which simulates the basic atmospheric physics at the heart of this endeavor, a change that has been in the works for a while." It goes on to say the weather community does not think the results are so good. My take on it is, man can not predict climate or weather absolutely because it is out of our control and factors we don't understand, random, mother nature knows....
Obviously weather predictions in short term can be accurate, especially with local knowledge of experts. Now that all the local flight stations local as well as weather observers and forecasters are long gone, WX predictions relies mostly on computer algorithms or "models" from people 1000 mile away. Accuracy degraded in the 80's and 90's because of the loss of local knowledge. These computer models involve assumptions and a lot of data, technology has improved... However the "ASSUMPTION" part is an issue. All I want to know is the WX above Mins at time arrival regardless of "Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere".
We now have extensive satellite data since the 60's to present day. We have more data about ocean water temperatures, more stations reporting weather real time. Before internet they had weather teletype or faxes. Most of the world is not as well observed as USA. Only in the last 100-130 years have we got "good" data for North America. "Good" is a relative term, in that it's a mercury thermometer read by a human, who has to make reading at precise times to capture max and mins. (They did have some max/min reading thermometers)
ALL WEATHER is due to uneven heating and cooling of the earths surface. This is all driven by the SUN and planetary motion. Of course night it is cooler and day hotter in general. Depending on latitude it is colder in winter than summer. We know we have Westerly winds middle latitudes between 30 and 60 degrees, drives North America weather patterns and upper wind patterns. These are all knows, observed. They still launch weather balloons to get lapse rate and winds. Aircraft with IRS and GPS can get real time weather (winds and temps) and transmit that. Then there is terrain and water, that effects weather, and on and on. All this sounds great. Yet weather or climate is not 100% predictable. They get weather predictions wrong. We have to accept that, regardless of the new "Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere" model.
So the point is? Long term predictions the further out, the more uncertain, because man can not control weather. Weather in a word is not completely predictable sometimes. Not to get political this is why claims or predictions of extreme global climate change decades out are so bad... You still see weather predictions 24 hours or 7 days from now being off. You see bad weather being predicted and nothing happens. You see storms and bad weather pop-up that was not predicted. I would not be surprised if this new model gets canned and they put the previous program back in the mix. I suspect they will use both in parallel. WHAT DRIVES THIS? They say super computers that can make more calculations. Back to my point, super computers can't predict weather, because weather is controlled by SUN, Planetary motion and phenomenons we don't control that are random.
Last edited:
