Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,611
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

NYC/PHL: January 25-27 Potential Bomb Part 4


earthlight

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 987
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It definitely seems more amplified than the 18 run. I don't know if it's much colder..thicknesses are actually higher and surface temps/850's actually seem rather similar. Maybe a hair colder.

Its essentially a dialed back version of the 12z run (I try not to compare anything to the 18z nam, lol), with a touch more cold air coming in on the backside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paging dtk, paging dtk...

I'm not sure if I should bite or not....it's not cut and dry and there is no way to divide good forecasts into good model versus good DA (or both) without doing a ton of experimenting. BTW, they have a REALLY good model AND really good initialization.

The JMA model is better than people realize (at least in terms of verification). It's in the same ballpark as the UK/GFS overall (lately).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest stormchaser

Im thinking its becoming more and more likely that this thing is OTS. That kicker is just modeled too consistently. It will have more of an impact then some here are giving credence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

surface pressure is calculated based on the physics of the energy and flow of the upper atmosphere as described by the model, and thus must be true to what the model has described at 300mb and 500mb. Your argument is invalid.

I'm fairly certain I read on a HPC website, or some type of NWS website, that the NAM confuses those areas of deep convection for low pressure development. I understand what you are saying, but some times the surface doesn't match up with what the model depicts above it. This has happened many times before and I think this is happening again, especially earlier on as the low comes out of the Gulf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nam_namer_078_500_vort_ht.gif

I don't see what is kicking it off the coast this run....

It seems now that we waited and hoped for a new pool of cold air to enter the Northeast, the PV that is responsible is setting up shop over Hudson Strait and is not allowing the system to come North. There is too strong of a flow around it and it's displacing the confluence well to the North and East.

Maybe I'm misreading the map and it has more to do with the kicker, can any red taggers chime in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

0z Nam is a close miss for the coast. It's Just offshore. Surface temps are around freezing for NYC and Philly at hour 75.

The run keeps my interest high. But I'd be getting a little concerned if I lived in State College, BGM, or ALB. It looked for a while like those inland areas might finally get a good pasting. Less likely now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The run keeps my interest high. But I'd be getting a little concerned if I lived in State College, BGM, or ALB. It looked for a while like those inland areas might finally get a good pasting. Less likely now.

The GGEM is the only model left that brings the storm inland--and it's own ensembles have abandoned it. I don't think there's much support left for that...but I have seen crazier things happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The run keeps my interest high. But I'd be getting a little concerned if I lived in State College, BGM, or ALB. It looked for a while like those inland areas might finally get a good pasting. Less likely now.

The big question is, if the low came closer, would it be as cold? tough call with so many variables like dynamics etc but if it did I would venture it would be like the euro, snow to rain back to snow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still can't get over how different the Euro is than the nam/gfs right now with 1-2" of liquid for a lot of people while the NAM/GFS are just scraping the coast. Going to be interesting to see who folds to who.

all seems to be the vorts track and how close to the coast it comes....

I'm betting on a compromise of the two sides, as usually happens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every single piece of guidance outside of the NAM/GFS bring the system across the eastern side of the Appalachian Mountains..across Land (inland) ..these two models are the only two that are not doing that...could they be correct? Possibly...Likely..no ..especially considering that even the respected means of the GFS..also take it on the eastern side of the mountains across Land.

Too much confidence being put in a model that was not created to look at anything beyond 48 hrs ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GGEM is the only model left that brings the storm inland--and it's own ensembles have abandoned it. I don't think there's much support left for that...but I have seen crazier things happen.

Yup. Completely agree. Only reason I still thinks an slightly inland track is possible is because with this high amplitude, southern stream trof - if it starts going negative a little early down in Texas, the door is wide open to pump up heights right up through Buffalo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every single piece of guidance outside of the NAM/GFS bring the system across the eastern side of the Appalachian Mountains..across Land (inland) ..these two models are the only two that are not doing that...could they be correct? Possibly...Likely..no ..especially considering that even the respected means of the GFS..also take it on the eastern side of the mountains across Land.

Too much confidence being put in a model that was not created to look at anything beyond 48 hrs ...

I assume you are talking about the NAM, which btw has been bouncing around all over the place the last 24 hrs....your statement supports the long-range NAM.

With that said, the GFS should be in it's golden range with the 0Z run, no?

I'm eager to see if it starts shifting more towards the Euro. Methinks it will. Sticking with the seasonal storm pattern for the winter seems like the safest route at this time and we've seen this act played out before this season with the models.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every single piece of guidance outside of the NAM/GFS bring the system across the eastern side of the Appalachian Mountains..across Land (inland) ..these two models are the only two that are not doing that...could they be correct? Possibly...Likely..no ..especially considering that even the respected means of the GFS..also take it on the eastern side of the mountains across Land.

Too much confidence being put in a model that was not created to look at anything beyond 48 hrs ...

The problem is that some of the "inland" models only bring it up to a certain point on land, then jump east out to sea before hitting our area good. Some may see that as an indication of them trending toward the NAM/GFS. There is still so much uncertainty, no one should be arguing for a single solution now. I mean, look at what the pros at HPC put out today... a swath of snow along the I-81 corridor with a discussion basically saying "we don't have a damn clue".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume you are talking about the NAM, which btw has been bouncing around all over the place the last 24 hrs....your statement supports the long-range NAM.

With that said, the GFS should be in it's golden range with the 0Z run, no?

I'm eager to see if it starts shifting more towards the Euro. Methinks it will. Sticking with the seasonal storm pattern for the winter seems like the safest route at this time and we've seen this act played out before this season with the models.

Yes I am talking about the NAM...

The GFS..36 hours and under....

Just reflecting on the modeling pattern this year ..it has been at this range where the above two models have finally understood what was happening...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that some of the "inland" models only bring it up to a certain point on land, then jump east out to sea before hitting our area good. Some may see that as an indication of them trending toward the NAM/GFS. There is still so much uncertainty, no one should be arguing for a single solution now. I mean, look at what the pros at HPC put out today... a swath of snow along the I-81 corridor with a discussion basically saying "we don't have a damn clue".

Besides the GFS/NAM which model is OTS?

UKMET no?

ECM? No

GGEM? No..

JMA? No

By the way in reference to the GGEM its showing a track that the NOGAPS once showed as its most western extreme...

UKMET @ 84 hrs was snug to hatteras and then moved ENE from there..it was certainly not out to sea but then that is to be expected with that model because of its progressive bias beyond 72 hrs...Hence the reason i keep using the nogaps as a guide because that model has an even more progressive bias and look at where it was at 18 Z...and if HPC looks at it and references it..it can not be ignored...

Basically the HPC did what they did because they went with the slower/western solutions... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...