Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,589
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Super Snow Sunday


40/70 Benchmark

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

RGEM an improvement from the extrapolated 6z

 

on earlier extrapolated runs looked like it tracked too far south with a dual low structure that swung around to largely miss SNE too far east, sort of like GGEM. That was a red flag bothering me last night, and this 12z run is greatly reassuring.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RGEM an improvement from the extrapolated 6z

 

on earlier extrapolated runs looked like it tracked too far south with a dual low structure that swung around to largely miss SNE too far east, sort of like GGEM. That was a red flag bothering me last night, and this 12z run is greatly reassuring.

 

 

RGEM is still a bit on the edge of it's range for Sunday morning...so I'd really like to see that show up again through tonight's runs...but the 12z run would imply a hellacious CCB for central/eastern areas.

 

When you loop the hourly collab site (dryslot posted an image), you can see how the whole thing is setting up nicely for what looks to be several hours of heavy snow. But I still want to see this tonight since the RGEM at 48h isn't the highest confidence. Hopefully other 12z guidance continues to show similar solutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tip great post lost in previous thread... (copied below)

 

I've posted several times about the concerning multiple surface low reflections bouncing around, signaled on the GGEM and RGEM, that on some runs fujiwara their way to avoid a SNE hit. This is a sound explanation.

 

I wonder if the need for the best baroclinic zone is overestimated when heights are this cold... ie will a low take off much sooner as this hits ocean waters?

 

#2563 icon_share.png

Posted 14 minutes ago
promet.png
11,711 posts
Joined November 13, 2010

 

A lot of discussion about the GGEM from last night's run in these last 15 or whatever pages of this colossally impractically long thread ... But the reason for the GGEM's doing this - I suspect - is convective scheming.   Whenever there are very cold heights transported seaward, associated with near g-stream amplifiers off the EC ... I have noticed the GGEMs consummate tendency to dumbbell fictitious east ward expansions of sfc reflections ... collocating the east low pressure node almost on top of some huge QPF dump.  That's suspect off the bat

 

Hey Ray -  why don't you start chapter II for this thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It actually looks further SW and a bit stronger with the shortwave at 18 hours than the 06z run.

 

It did, but the "approach angle" if you will, in my nonmet terms, was trending sharper and sharper and it seems to have took a step the other way in that regard. Looking at hour 24

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just can't look at a printout picture of qpf and assume things with this. This setup has never happened. Everyone will do fairly well. But there are going to be some really big surprises

 

lol there are certainly reasons why a "screw zone" over CT/W Mass could happen. I wouldn't look at the RGEM/NAM and totally toss. It's completely possible that they're accurate with that depiction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...