742 
are selected for presentation, and the units or quantities 
in which the selected elements are plotted or combined. 
Most of the infinite possible variations of presentation 
and analysis of synoptic weather data appear to have 
been introduced into weather-forecasting practice at 
one point or another. The horizontal or quasi-horizontal 
distribution of the weather elements is on occasion 
represented in constant-level charts, isobaric, isen- 
tropic, or tropopause contour charts, isobaric or isen- 
tropic thickness charts, isopyenic contour charts, etc. 
Most of these charts, together with corresponding 
change charts, are prepared at more or less arbitrarily 
selected levels, contain varying combinations of the 
weather elements, and are subjected to variable analy- 
tical techniques. Similarly the vertical cross-section 
charts are plotted along selected meridians, selected 
latitude parallels, selected airways, or selected lines of 
raob stations; they are prepared alternately only for 
the lower flight-levels or through the tropopause, and 
they are analyzed for a great variety of combinations 
of the meteorological elements and quasi-horizontal 
surface intersections. Likewise the vertical structure of 
the atmosphere as obtained from raob soundings at 
selected points is represented by a great variety of 
energy diagrams, notably by the adiabatic diagram 
(Neuhoff or Stiive), the tephigram, the aerogram (ema- 
gram), the equivalent-potential temperature diagram 
(Rossby) and a number of other less frequently used 
permutations of the basic thermodynamic diagram. 
What have been the consequences of this great pro- 
fusion of synoptic-analytical tools? They have been 
essentially disadvantageous, for the following reasons: 
a. There is extremely little gained, in proportion to 
the effort expended, by the preparation of a large num- 
ber or great variety of presentations of the same synop- 
tic data. It is true that specific requirements for dif- 
ferent types of forecasts may best be met by some 
variation in the presentation of synoptic data, but this 
desirable variation is comparatively small and has little 
bearing on the great variety of synoptic tools which 
have been developed, and which are largely redundant, 
merely slicing the same information in different ways. 
b. A great amount of time and effort, which might 
better be turned to more constructive use is consumed 
in the nonproductive manipulation of the elements, 
units, and coordinates used in the synoptic presenta- 
tion and analysis of meteorological data. The same 
criticism of waste of time can be made of much of the 
effort to base weather forecasting on the statistically 
most probable or normal sequence of change or move- 
ment of the weather pattern. 
c. The principal positive harm which this multi- 
plicity of synoptic tools causes is that of confusing the 
forecaster. It is quite impossible to assimilate and in- 
tegrate mentally a synoptic picture which is presented 
in too great complexity and on too many charts. Fur- 
thermore, synoptic and forecasting techniques vary so 
greatly from one forecast center to another that any 
forecaster is likely to be confused as soon as he leaves 
his own bailiwick or the system to which he has become 
accustomed Where forecasting is as empirical and as 
WHATHER FORECASTING 
dependent as it remains today upon the forecaster’s 
experience and his mental awareness of similarities and 
dissimilarities of synoptic patterns, this confusion and 
lack of precision and clarity in his mind with respect 
to comparative significant details of the synoptic pat- 
terns can be very demoralizing. This one factor, coupled 
with the relatively short forecasting experience of many 
forecasters today, probably accounts largely for the 
widespread failure of practical forecast performance in 
recent years even to begin to keep pace with the increase 
of available synoptic information. 
The remedy for the present confusion of techniques 
for the presentation, analysis, and extrapolation (prog- 
nosis) of synoptic weather patterns obviously lies in 
elimination, simplification, and standardization. This 
is an immediate problem which should be faced on the 
basis of our present knowledge. The long-range problem 
of increasing our basic understanding of atmospheric 
circulations and of developing correspondingly scien- 
tific forecast techniques must be considered quite apart 
from the immediate problem of simplifying and stand- 
ardizing present routine forecast practice. 
The mere accomplishment of such simplification and 
standardization will doubtless be of far greater sig- 
nificance to the performance of short-range and daily 
weather forecasting than will the selection of one parti- 
cular system of analysis and prognosis rather than 
another. However, any such program calls for a real 
effort to devise an objective system of verification by 
which forecasting skill can be rated and synoptic tools 
evaluated. The principal emphasis must be placed on 
simplification, to select from the great variety of synop- 
tic charts and analytical techniques now in use a mini- 
mum number of charts and a technique of analysis 
which will present as clearly and comprehensively as 
possible the essential features of the changing synoptic 
pattern. This presentation must vary somewhat with 
the type of forecast desired and with the broad cli- 
matological zones, but such necessary variation should 
be kept to a minimum, and standardized at least to the 
extent that forecasters performing similar work in similar 
climatic zones can speak the same language to one 
another, which is far from being the case today. This 
standardization should not at all discourage practicing 
forecasters from doing forecasting research, particu- 
larly on local or regional problems, but it does mean that 
the performance and practical application of such re- 
search should always be supplementary to, and not a 
substitute for, the standard prognostic procedure, at 
least not until it has been officially tested and approved 
as part of that procedure. 
Obviously, to be really effective, such a program of 
standardization of synoptic analysis and prognosis must 
be developed and applied on an international scale, by 
a strongly centralized international meteorological or- 
ganization, and it should be coordinated, by this same 
organization, with the similar program for weather ob- 
servations which is outlined above. 
Probably less is to be gained in extended and long- 
range forecasting by standardization and simplification 
of the synoptic techniques of analysis and prognosis 
