Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4
Results 76 to 90 of 90
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,071
    Quote Originally Posted by goldenboy View Post
    Take the forecast today (which of course is from yesterday afternoon). There was, sadly, a death yesterday- but there is no mention of it in the forecast, since it came out too early. It seems to me that it's important info, that might alter people's plans. But the only way to know that is if you're on Instagram.
    .
    On Instagram they also mention the close call on Quandry.
    "True love is much easier to find with a helicopter"

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    prb, co
    Posts
    136
    I gotta agree with not liking the dynamic zone forecasts. I tend to keep close tabs on the zones I frequent, tracking a problem throughout the season. But this year with zones changing, it was hard to keep a close eye on specific issue. I think dividing summit county into vail pass/gore and 10mile/mosquito would probably do a lions share of the 'dynamic' zoning they did this year.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Montrose, CO
    Posts
    4,618
    Quote Originally Posted by goldenboy View Post

    Take the forecast today (which of course is from yesterday afternoon). There was, sadly, a death yesterday- but there is no mention of it in the forecast, since it came out too early. It seems to me that it's important info, that might alter people's plans. But the only way to know that is if you're on Instagram.

    The dynamic zones didn't provide enough info either. It's really cool if there are different problems and different ratings, but I think it's important to say WHY in the forecast discussion. Usually that info wasn't in the forecast discussion- one area might be considerable and another is moderate, but you have no idea why: is it a PWL, a bigger storm total, more wind? Who knows?

    I can't imagine how much more confusing it must be for a new bc skier. Anyway, those are my thoughts.
    Yeah, after giving it a season I'm not a huge fan either.

    Today is a good example. In fact, they even bumped the rating from low to moderate this morning after originally forecasting low for today. It didn't affect me as I looked at the temps and knew we didn't get a great freeze, but I also didn't know the forecast was updated and I'm sure many other folks didn't.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    8,296
    My take: they are still adjusting to the dynamic zones and figuring out how to best utilize it.

    When it works, I think it works REALLY well. But it's not perfect. As GB said, sometimes there's not enough info given for WHY different zones are subdivided. Other times, I have felt like the zones should be subdivided more. We had many days midwinter where the La Platas and the Cimmarons had the same forecast, yet dramatically different snowpack structures. Dividing into permanent subranges would somewhat address this, but create a lot of additional work on forecasters to publish different forecasts on days that a greater range really does have the same snowpack and conditions. I'm still optimistic that granularity will improve with time.

    Timing of forecast: coming from a Front Range perspective, I strongly believe that having a night before forecast is vitally important. It's simply impossible to go skiing on the Front Range on a midwinter weekend without being at the trailhead before the forecast used to come out. I also think that having the forecast available when creating a tour plan is helpful, and personally I would rather read the forecast in the evening when I'm wide awake vs in the morning bleary eyed. I'm in the habit of re-checking for changes in the morning and don't have a problem doing that.

    So my take? Moving in a good direction. Not perfect yet.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,489
    I have more than a few nitpicks with CAIC forecasting this season, but I am admittedly biased, so will keep it (mostly) in check.

    My biggest complaint is that since the change in forecast schedule there seems to an inability or unwillingness to update forecasts based on new and IMO highly relevant info. Sometimes it takes a half day, sometimes multiple days. Way late in listing wet slabs for CB/Gunnison zone during our big warmup, even with one entraining the entire season’s snowpack visible from town, multiple obs, etc. Weird. Am I crazy or is still no mention of yesterday’s fatality for the relevant zone? If that is not worthy of update/emphasis, what is? I could go on.

    While I’m here, am I missing something or is it (still) not possible to access obs from the app?
    Last edited by North; 04-30-2023 at 09:56 PM.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    8,296
    Quote Originally Posted by North View Post
    While I’m here, am I missing something or is it (still) not possible to access obs from the app?
    You're not missing anything, still not possible. And something that definitely needs to be addressed.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    234
    One of my peeves with the new website is that they did away with the "news" section on the home page. They used to put information on the home page that let you know if there had been a recent serious avalanche incident, along with a link to a preliminary or final report. Now you have to dig into the site further to find out about any recent serious incidents.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    19,201
    Any product, especially from a state agency, that relies upon instagram for timely dissemination of critical information is a failure.
    Is it radix panax notoginseng? - splat
    This is like hanging yourself but the rope breaks. - DTM
    Dude Listen to mtm. He's a marriage counselor at burning man. - subtle plague

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    cb, co
    Posts
    5,034
    Quote Originally Posted by North View Post

    My biggest complaint is that since the change in forecast schedule there seems to an inability or unwillingness to update forecasts based on new and IMO highly relevant info.
    Yep. Doesn't matter, they stuck with the previous afternoon "best guess" forecast rather than do an update from what I saw.

    I follow a few other centers, and I'm sorry but the CAIC is near the bottom of the list with the product that they put out.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    BLDR CO
    Posts
    959
    I like the 430 day-before forecasts. But agree that the dynamic regions is not that helpful - and a surprising number of times I've been planning somewhere right along a forecast border. Also, in the process, I feel like something is lost in the "discussion" now. It used to be specific to the set regions, and I'd get a good feel for the trending situation of the 1-2 most relevant zones by reading each day. But now the discussions cover much broader areas with then references within each to front range, park range, flat tops, etc. so from one day to the next, they tend to jumble together and I don't maintain as much general trend knowledge of my most relevant zone(s). Am I right on that? Am I remembering the prior discussion sections accurately?

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    8,296
    The forecast discussions the past few years had been trending into the "regional" style discussions like we're seeing now. They weren't always identical between zones... but if you read multiple zones it was very common for the discussion to be copy/pasted between zones within the same region.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    BLDR CO
    Posts
    959
    ^^^ Got it, some misremembering on my end

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    5,844
    Appreciate the thoughtful and honest comments here.

    CAIC is working with Simon Fraiser University and NCAR researchers to formalize user research and testing of its products. This is part of a broader effort by SFU which has similar research panels being constructed in Europe and Canada. If you're interested in participating -- you can signup here: https://caicsignup.avalancheresearch.ca/en/

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    BLDR CO
    Posts
    959
    This is great, I filled it out, happy to help if I can

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    5,844
    Quote Originally Posted by tang View Post
    This is great, I filled it out, happy to help if I can
    Sweet. The cool thing about the panel is that CAIC will be able to systematically understand how products impact differentially impact various user groups. Last week was the first big kickoff meeting of the project -- so don't expect immediate survey's in your inbox as research priorities are defined, questions/activities are designed, ethics reviews are passed, etc. Hopefully panelists will start getting regular interactions late this summer or next fall.

    Folks curious about the folks at SFU behind this can read more at http://www.avalancheresearch.ca/ or follow them on IG: https://www.instagram.com/sfu_avalancheresearch/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •