How about the recent weather forecast?

[seeveebee]

Here's what bothers me with local Mets: they all go with a default forecast and tweak it.

You can't tell me that ONE Meteorologist thought: "hey, we got a good shot at heavy Easterly winds blowing off a 37 degree Ocean and a real chance this thing is a mostly rain event with very little snow accumulation".

But no...you get a default 7-9" inches for greater Boston, 12" + for hot spots South of Boston and EVERYONE tweaks plus or minus that default. This always happens. If you notice in recent storms, WHDH tends to be on the low end of snow accumulations, NECN ALWAYS goes bonkers with numbers way at the high end---and the others are stuck in the middle.

Kudos to WHDH, though, THEIR forecasts called for very little accumulation along the entire immediate COAST..that at least was accurate.

You CAN NOT tell me some one thought--gee, this thing has a really decent shot of not being much.

PROBLEM IS THIS; NO ONE has ever got fired for predicting TOO MUCH Snow.

But, you get IN BIG TROUBLE if you MISS the storm. Old timers will you about the legendary Jack Kent. He missed the big one and it almost offset 25 years of excellent forecasting.

The safest forecasters are the ones that accurately forecast 12 of the last 5 big storms.

this is a real disservice to viewers. I hope they understand how the game is played.

[fox25rox]

Feb 16, 2010 12:06:27 GMT -5 rogertv said:

Try it on a station in Boston and see the numbers TANK. New Englanders LOVE to hear their weather and in great detail.

While I totally believe the latter of what you said is true. Did we really need David Brown in this morning to help JC?

That's when it becomes ridiculous.

[BTVNadmin]

Feb 16, 2010 13:28:23 GMT -5 seeveebee said:

Here's what bothers me with local Mets: they all go with a default forecast and tweak it.

You can't tell me that ONE Meteorologist thought: "hey, we got a good shot at heavy Easterly winds blowing off a 37 degree Ocean and a real chance this thing is a mostly rain event with very little snow accumulation".

But no...you get a default 7-9" inches for greater Boston, 12" + for hot spots South of Boston and EVERYONE tweaks plus or minus that default. This always happens. If you notice in recent storms, WHDH tends to be on the low end of snow accumulations, NECN ALWAYS goes bonkers with numbers way at the high end---and the others are stuck in the middle.

Kudos to WHDH, though, THEIR forecasts called for very little accumulation along the entire immediate COAST..that at least was accurate.

You CAN NOT tell me some one thought--gee, this thing has a really decent shot of not being much.

PROBLEM IS THIS; NO ONE has ever got fired for predicting TOO MUCH Snow.

But, you get IN BIG TROUBLE if you MISS the storm. Old timers will you about the legendary Jack Kent. He missed the big one and it almost offset 25 years of excellent forecasting.

The safest forecasters are the ones that accurately forecast 12 of the last 5 big storms.

this is a real disservice to viewers. I hope they understand how the game is played.

I believe you mean Don Kent; Jack Chase was the anchor of the newscast on which Kent was the meteorologist. Bonus points for anyone who can name Chase's fresh-faced, new-in-town replacement!

[fox25rox]

Jack Williams

[leftylucy]

Feb 15, 2010 23:09:30 GMT -5 fox25rox said:

Ugh, that didn't happen on air. Maybe over the phone to the Herald writer?

I give up.......

Bouchard issued an apology on his twitter account and then on the 10 *and* 11 o'clock casts that night. Just because you didn't see it or didn't read it doesn't mean that didn't happen.

[BTVNadmin]

Feb 16, 2010 14:05:25 GMT -5 fox25rox said:

Jack Williams

Incorrect!

[newser]

Was the replacement for Jack Chase a guy named David Scott?

[BTVNadmin]

I thought it was someone else, but you may be right.

[seeveebee]

I stand corrected..I DID mix up Don Kent and Jack Chase. See, if Don nailed that big storm, I never would have messed up his name .

David Scott DID Anchor at Channel 4, though I don't recall if he was the specific replacement for Jack Chase (he may have been a LITTLE later)

[BTVNadmin]

I had always umderstood it to be some newbie named Randy Price.

[leftylucy]

Feb 16, 2010 18:02:20 GMT -5 BTVNadmin said:

I had always umderstood it to be some newbie named Randy Price.

Chase retired from WBZ on Jan.15, 1982.

In mid-January 1982, Randy moved from a Toledo station WTVB and joined Linda Harris to work a revamped early morning show called "Eyewitness News, the First Edition" at Ch.4. Price and Harris replaced Jack Chase on early morning news while John Henning who came over from Ch.7 took over from Chase on Noon news.

[rbreton]

Feb 16, 2010 13:28:23 GMT -5 seeveebee said:

You can't tell me that ONE Meteorologist thought: "hey, we got a good shot at heavy Easterly winds blowing off a 37 degree Ocean and a real chance this thing is a mostly rain event with very little snow accumulation".

You also can't tell me that one computer model predicted it. While that isn't an excuse for getting it wrong at all, there was no indication such events would unfold. There WERE indications there would be a sharp northern fringe to the accumulating snow---and nearly all forecasters mentioned that. However, most thought it would set up over southern NH---not over Boston.

[seeveebee]

rbreton, fair enough. Good point. Perhaps this is NOT the most opportune time to vent over certain meteorologists' tendencies. But one certain meteorologist had a broad brush 16 inches accumulation forecast in a large stretch from Rhode Island to the South Shore of Massachusetts.

Huh? As a weather news consumer, I could even tell you there was no way the mass. east coast would get anything approaching what , say, Taunton, would get..As I pointed out, WHDH did the best at dramatically scaling back coastal accumulations 24 hours plus before the event.

Is the mega, broad brush heavy accumulation forecast laziness, incompetence, or simply covering your butt in case the unexpected but possible "big one" hits. I strongly suspect the latter. And I've seen this happen before. Thats my point.

Meteorologists locally FULLY understand that those who accurately forecast 12 of the next 5 big storms--"hit it". Those who accurately forecast 4 of the next 5 big storms could find themselves out of work.

Thats my point.

[godshammgod]

Feb 16, 2010 13:28:23 GMT -5 seeveebee said:

Here's what bothers me with local Mets: they all go with a default forecast and tweak it.

You can't tell me that ONE Meteorologist thought: "hey, we got a good shot at heavy Easterly winds blowing off a 37 degree Ocean and a real chance this thing is a mostly rain event with very little snow accumulation".

But no...you get a default 7-9" inches for greater Boston, 12" + for hot spots South of Boston and EVERYONE tweaks plus or minus that default. This always happens. If you notice in recent storms, WHDH tends to be on the low end of snow accumulations, NECN ALWAYS goes bonkers with numbers way at the high end---and the others are stuck in the middle.

Kudos to WHDH, though, THEIR forecasts called for very little accumulation along the entire immediate COAST..that at least was accurate.

You CAN NOT tell me some one thought--gee, this thing has a really decent shot of not being much.

PROBLEM IS THIS; NO ONE has ever got fired for predicting TOO MUCH Snow.

But, you get IN BIG TROUBLE if you MISS the storm. Old timers will you about the legendary Jack Kent. He missed the big one and it almost offset 25 years of excellent forecasting.

The safest forecasters are the ones that accurately forecast 12 of the last 5 big storms.

this is a real disservice to viewers. I hope they understand how the game is played.

One Boston meteorologist told me in private that he was worried the storm would be a dud (at least for some parts of MA). Yet, that person was not confident enough in the forecast to go on air with it. I won't identify the station to protect the meteorologist and myself.

I think this is the case where it is better to be incorrect in predicting a major storm and getting a dud, rather than predicting a minor rain event and getting 8+ inches. Obviously, neither scenario is ideal.

[tekengfcc]

Nothing worse than waking up to 18 inches of partly cloudy on your driveway.