Modern forecasting almost largely requires meteorological satellites. Sure, anyone with enough expertise may look up at the sky and examine the existing cloud kinds, motion directions, convection evidence, humidity, wind chill, etc., but that only applies to the region they're in, for a maximum of two days. How can they possible know what is happening now or what will be happening fifty, one hundred, or a thousand kilometers distant next week with only the evidence of their senses?
Using satellites.
These devices really capture images of the weather throughout a whole continent, and sometimes even more. I regularly notice cloud formations in satellite photographs that stretch from London to Nova Scotia on the east and west sides, respectively.
Another thing that satellites help meteorologists accomplish is to identify the kind of weather patterns that are headed in that direction, long before anyone can spot signs of them in the sky. They provide the very best early indication of impending problems that we have.
There is yet more. I assume that everyone is aware of the melting of the polar ice caps. So, meteorologists utilize satellites to track the pace of melting and take it into account when making their forecasts, along with a few other relevant scientific fields. They are able to state with certainty that the melting rate is increasing in this way.
Another valuable function of satellites is the monitoring of extreme weather, particularly tropical storms and cyclones. Meteorologists with experience can predict when a tropical storm is going to intensify into a hurricane and can provide the necessary warnings.
However, they are unable to account for issues like spinning in a supercell thunderstorm or an on-ground tornado. They can't detect something so little with their optical equipment.
But even so, as you presumably now realize, weather satellites are really indispensable.
Thank you,
Eddie
