Typhoon Tip

Ha, not the most responsible take on matters buuuut, we did a tongue-in-cheek study when I was an undergrad and found that it was true! A corr. coef. existed between delayed or failed transmission of model products preceding storms that actually took place. not kidding. Someone would come out of the PC lounge of the weather lab to announce the MRF was late ...cheers and applause erupted.

Have been wondering that too, when the mid range attenuation would kick in. Models tend to lose 15 to 30% give or take as they relay through that range.

It doesn't matter who does it - just do it. like I said, the intent isn't/wasn't to shade anyone.

Not to bog down the rush ... it's fun!! But this period of time between really the 25 and Ground Hog Day has been in the indices for 10 days at this point. The greatest "non-linear" support has been 29/30/31 ... Feb 1 is still part of this total window, and could also be tapping into the background constructive interference. I want to start a thread for this, because I don't have a problem with well above normal/climo confidence for this particularly system. It would actually help it if the 26/27 event evacuates out of the synoptic scope sooner rather than later.

LOL... not meaning to be a dink or cast shade, just sayn'

It's pretty clear the GGEM is partially grabbing the low ... but only managing to shear/pull the pressure field west when it fails. I wouldn't trust this run, just sayn' what's doing there. It's significantly enough different in its handling the deep layer between the 00z and 12z to qualify as bad continuity. Those two runs have a different spectrum of implications between D.C. and PWM/D.E.M.

yeah, see I think it can. I mentioned this just a moment ago. It's really how much that geometry of the N/stream orients itself. Easily correctable from this range 'cuz we're not talking a major change there to lift everything.

There is a thread but might I recommend (Brian or Will ? ) that there be something more substance/elaborate/annotated/discussed as start? It's just an extension of this I guess. Anyway, this solution by the GFS is interestingly answering right on the heels of what Ray and I were discussing last hour, re the lack of true coastal storm development. This one's trying to make a go of a better coherence in that regard. In act, in fairness it's got one now, with sub 1000 mb ( granted not hugely so...) passing proximal to the BM. There's time to correct this all NW even more, too. I'm not sure I see why that can't happen frankly... It's really about the elbow of the N/stream out over Nebraska or thereabouts...if that kinks more SW-NE in orientation, this whole bag of isentropic bomb will plow farther N-W

Haha... It's like the GFS was late to the mid range performance, now it's trying to steal the show

I wish these event specific threads would lead off with something more substantive.... It should be a requirement.

Heh... I would at this point... there are no guidance that are zero on this thing. The causal aspect also appear straight forward, too. In fact, I'm thinking about starting one for the 30th, because that one interests me. LOL this one's an overrunning for folks that have a dopa dependency on blue qpf paint on wintry weather charts. yeah yeah

I don't know what your thoughts are on this ... but, the reason for that - I suspect - is the velocity soaked field. You know this, but velocity is expressed in both the balanced/basal geostrophic flow rate - which is high-ish because of the gradient being relatively steep through the period. But, also in the wave propagation speed... which via "Navier-Stroking" the mathematics can also be demonstrated as rooted back to gradient. Anyway, I suspect that 'leaving energy behind' is shearing physical observation of the above stressing.

i know it's 25-dollar words but it's wave harmonics - or lack thereof. The flow is too fast. The western ridge leading and during the 26/27th "continental overrunning bomb" is not oriented or behaving in such a physical manner as to set up better phasing - which is improved harmonics. Taller more robust ridge, blossoming as a trough is diving near the Dakotas or MN ..etc ... is what to look for. We " might" see a better performance int hat regard toward the 30th

Super imposed is the Lake Ontario snow belt ..

OH I hear ya! this has been a trying time for determinism - huge... one of the worst I ever remember. In fact, I'll just say I think this velocity saturation thing we're seeing in recent winters ( going back several years if not decade(s)) is really presenting challenges in being as 'old school' reliant with teleconnections - and the mass-fields that those numerics are based upon are also unusually unstable probably because the velocity is interfering with resonance. Things are having trouble setting up... Then you get those weird resonances that are superj synoptic. Like hyper driven to existence. 2015 Feb and dare I say, ... late 2025 Dec with that N. Pac odd-ball block... There's a large spectrum of behaviors that are emerging that are unusual and a lot of them I think can be mechanically/mathematically shown to be related to the U-component vector of the Navier-Stokes being extended. Fascinating ... and completely oblivious to anyone reading this sentence ...hahaha LOL sorry

I mean god! it's so frustrating dude. I typically don't wish stage 3 reproductive cancer on anyone but this motherfucker is trying my patience -

LMAO We have a current problem on my street here in Ayer where despite the fact that there are no homes/driveways geographically located on the south side of the road, this town's nimrod dumb ass fucktard keeps plowing from S --> N... We come out in the morning and we all have this plowed berm sealing us in with cardiac risks because of this dumb fucker. I dunno... it's so elegantly obtuse that maybe it's on-purpose?

wtf ... are you seeing that too ?

You know...everything in reality ... literally reality itself ( not talking semantics or figurative) came into existance because of a dizzying array of constructive and destructive interferences on-going, all scales great and small, and the history of that conflict gives birth to whatever is observed in the moment. Creation of the circumstances that lend to whatever weather is no different. Destructively interfere" is true after lag ... so, we are actually in phase 6's contribution spectrum... and phase 6 has this correlational according to CPC. Using temperature as proxy in the discussion, this doesn't strike me as supporting EC cyclogen? But you know, also, I'm not sure I'd qualify this system as an EC cyclone. It may be that the anomalous cold is in competition with this signal, and that is why we have a storm - this above is lifting back over so to speak. This thing is an southern ice storm/overrunning that surges NE. Looks to me like an overrunning/isentropic event with vague Miller A that really not moving in a typical M-A track...

There is no direct linear forcing ... the MJO produces a latent heat flux which disperses down stream, and that is adds to ridging ... troughing ..etc. That whole process, processes out any direct causality, and leaves it to vestigial ( ie. modulation, not a forcer) influence. That's all I'm saying. And it is true. I also did not say that. I said "I'm not sure I'm following..." in this case the context; I was just trying to remind people that the MJO does not set tables.

Yeah, okay ... this is not a remarkable low pressure system that is by virtue of source, toting a PWAT anomaly. It is what it is... but as it's rapidly moving and gaining latitude ( as is, in recent guidance - ), there quite a front loaded isentropic snow wall/dump. If you look closely without the dopa fixation clouding judgement haha, you'll notice that the QPF field is actually weakening as this gets higher than NYC. Support runs off and the isentropic lift weakens when that happens, and we're left with weak total cyclone parametrics lingering light to moderate snows... In total, this can perform prolifically above the climo for typical "1000 mb machinery" because of all this. Two things are true in deterministic effort here. One, what I just said. Two, model tendencies to attenuate off mid range events as they come into nearer terms. These two aspects are sort of competing with this 26/27 system. This is more of a philosophical approach here. The other thing that should be considered is that this whole mess is large, but is moving so fast - that will limit some... but, I think the more important implication of that speed is that it is exposing a problem of too much gradient in the field/which necessarily increases velocities everywhere. That is a "built in" negative interference for phasing. ...It's just supplying an argument to limit any potential of slowing this down.

Not sure what this means? The lag of the MJO is 7 to 10 days. just go with that

Guys, I'm not sure I'm following you ... but, the MJO doesn't effect the weather pattern in a direct way. It's a pattern augmentation, granted - but there is a lag. Phases that are in situ, take time to for the correlations - if those are not being suppressed. That's the other thing... if the hemisphere is in a negative interference, the MJO's conditional

Back a few pages ... I've only seen the 00z GFS and GGEM solutions - those are pushing that it was always the 29/30/31st window for the more important of the two. Again, the 26/27 is/was index valid, but the sweet range was ^ ...

it seems the operational runs are trying to organize/manifest on the short side of the index signal... which is fine. Prior it was 29/30/31 ... there's still tussle between which tho -