Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

End of January/early February storm potential?


Hoosier

Recommended Posts

Yeah GFS is clueless when it doesn't give you what you want? Too bad it may very well be right through the medium range at least.

Whatever models thats doesn't give anyone what they want is always clueless. You know how that works. :P

But seriously.. You saw no problem with how the GFS progresses things? Come on now. A clipper out of nowhere that brings in the Artic dump suppressing things. A pacific system arriving in the PAC NW just fading?

Again i am not arguing the pattern it shows but more of a matter of how we get there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I smacked the GFS, I will smack the GGEM. Not logical, but that is from a model that had little northern stream interaction at 12z, though it has the truncation excuse after 120hrs.

GFS i'll give you but the GGEM i could see playing out. A decent clipper i could see pulling in the Artic air and suppressing like that.

Not saying it happens either but if it were to happen that would be one of the better ways to make it happen. Why as said a few dys back that i would rather this big clipper do it's deed where that euro run had it over MI and then heading off nne/ne in a weakening state and not for the Atlantic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GGEM was great for the clipper; the better and further south the clipper, the more worse the set-up following it seems.

Pretty much because it allows more artic air to dump in and gives it more time to redevelop in the Atlantic which in turn tends to block things up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree...at least the GGEM runs a storm up the coast lol

It sucks badly for us but makes better sense atleast vs how the GFS tries to do it. And yeah i'll take losing the clipper if it means getting a more favorable pattern. I am done and over with the suppressed crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if the gfs was a subscription model like the euro, i'd swear you were a gfs salesman :lol:

i guess we'll know if the gfs had a clue by early next week if we are under a crushing arctic high that was ushered in with no fanfare.

No I just wish the silly GFS accusations would stop and we could get some semi-decent weather discussion going on here. If Angrysummons wants to toss out why the GFS is so awful or provide more details--I am all ears. I would love for the GFS not to verify since it would mean an end to the blah weather--but even my pessimism is tinged with a bit of realism.

As for me and the GFS--it has plenty of bad days as well and even awful patterns for long periods of time. I also think it gets bashed more than it perhaps deserves as a global model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever models thats doesn't give anyone what they want is always clueless. You know how that works. :P

But seriously.. You saw no problem with how the GFS progresses things? Come on now. A clipper out of nowhere that brings in the Artic dump suppressing things. A pacific system arriving in the PAC NW just fading?

Again i am not arguing the pattern it shows but more of a matter of how we get there.

Well regarding the weakening of the Pacific occlusions--that doesn't surprise me as that has been a verifiable trend as these baroclinic waves bomb out off the coast south of Alaska and occlude then ride over the Pacific ridge in general shambles. The GFS has dealt with that better than the CMC/ECM which has wanted to drive waves right through it. In that regard--I think the GFS is doing well. I am not riding the GFS or anything, but it is hard to ignore that it has performed better with the strength of the Pacific Ridge and a general weakening of waves that try to pass over it/through it.

It seems the CMC has caved and shows a weaker western wave passing into the CONUS. An eventual phase is therefore weak--and it will potentially trend weaker unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I just wish the silly GFS accusations would stop and we could get some semi-decent weather discussion going on here. If Angrysummons wants to toss out why the GFS is so awful or provide more details--I am all ears. I would love for the GFS not to verify since it would mean an end to the blah weather--but even my pessimism is tinged with a bit of realism.

As for me and the GFS--it has plenty of bad days as well and even awful patterns for long periods of time. I also think it gets bashed more than it perhaps deserves as a global model.

I will say I understand where he is coming from. I say "that sucks" or "this run stinks" all the time--but the disdain is generally against the weather gods not smiling down on us (yes, a joke)--not the model itself. That said--Angrysummons can say whatever he likes--it would just be nice if there was some reasoning for claiming the model is unrealistic so others know where he is coming from. There certainly are times the guidance looks "out-to-lunch", but typically I try and provide details as to why. If we do this, not only do we liven up the discussion, but we provide verifiable evidence should a model verify and/or not verify so such details may possibly be applied for future reference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing I dont understand is the second clipper isn't that impressive and the deepest any model has had it it 996 up into canada and its 1004-1001 as it tracks east towards the east coast. It doesn't really strengthen on the Gfs at all and the GGEM strenghtens it well NE up into canada, and yet the GGEM has more of a storm than the GFS. I find it hard to believe that this will suppress a larger storm that could come next week.

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...