Brent wrote:WeatherNewbie wrote:orangeblood wrote:
It was the first to sniff this one out though (almost 2-3 days before Euro)....yes it appears to have a somewhat cold bias but was only off by 50-100 miles from almost a week out, impressive in my book!!! Inside of 120 hrs, go with the Euro...outside of that, I've preferred the GFS for pattern recognition
this always amazes me about people in general (not singling out anyone) when it comes to weather predictions. the storm travels thousands of miles and people like to call it a bust when it misses the location by 50 miles in the end. getting it within 50 miles over the course of thousands of miles is pretty damn accurate. same thing when it's raining at 33 degrees and they call it a bust when there is no frozen precip. to use a football analogy, it's like equating going 3 and out with driving 80 yards and getting stopped on the 1 yard line just because the result was no TD.
I get it... but it had how many runs with Dallas getting significant snow for 3 or 4 days straight. I get that WF Isnt that far away and its not a large error but from an IMBY perspective it sucks.
Meanwhile the Euro always showed rain in Dallas and never waivered and that's the likely scenario
Both the GFS and Euro were on opposite sides of the forecast. The Euro having the snow axis up near Lubbock, the GFS near and some times east of DFW. They both trended towards each other and met in the middle. There were a quite a few people here who thought that'd happen. This was pure model bias showing up until the time frame got closer and eventually the models found a middle ground. I wouldn't call this a win or loss for either models, they were just kind of doing what they're supposed to do. At least we didn't have a model go rogue(like the UkMet did during Barry lol).