buckeye Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 Everyone has their own thoughts and opinions--but the atmospheric motions all happen for a physical reasoning through the thermodynamic and dynamical equations of motion. I guess I don't catch on exactly to all the "zooming" and "heat" you keep referencing as well as disturbances filling holes and the models not catching on to two waves, etc. I can see where you are trying to go--but perhaps some images would help in your explanation since you have a lot of different things going on here. hmmm, i actually followed pretty closely what he was laying out. Maybe it's the laymen terms that are throwing you lol. actually kudos to him for putting forth a detailed forecast AND backing it with reasoning, (right or wrong), rather than weenie wishcasting. How many times does a weenie say something like, "no way it's cutting for the lakes", or "this one will get squashed"....with no explanation whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moneyman Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 NAM looks pretty good imo at 69. Any thoughts so far on the NAM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 hmmm, i actually followed pretty closely what he was laying out. Maybe it's the laymen terms that are throwing you lol. actually kudos to him for putting forth a detailed forecast AND backing it with reasoning, (right or wrong), rather than weenie wishcasting. How many times does a weenie say something like, "no way it's cutting for the lakes", or "this one will get squashed"....with no explanation whatsoever. Nah it was good. He is a good "layman" if he isn't a met (I thought someone said he was a met student)--he has so many points though it was hard to follow every point. Images may help in that regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Organizing Low Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 It's not going to be worse at least. perhaps the bleeding has stopped Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted January 28, 2011 Author Share Posted January 28, 2011 NAM looks pretty good imo at 69. Any thoughts so far on the NAM? This is definitely a bit better than this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhioValleyWx Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 Everyone has their own thoughts and opinions--but the atmospheric motions all happen for a physical reasoning through the thermodynamic and dynamical equations of motion. I guess I don't catch on exactly to all the "zooming" and "heat" you keep referencing as well as disturbances filling holes and the models not catching on to two waves, etc. I can see where you are trying to go--but perhaps some images would help in your explanation since you have a lot of different things going on here. Well heat is thermo but I used a layman's term for that so some of the people who might not understand the physics could understand. Zooming is just a different word then saying it is moving out. I do need images because that will help. I need software to draw and that can help me explain better. As for the model interpretation, this is an opinion based statement, I feel that the model physics will have a tough time agreeing with having 2 waves follow one another until we get into the short range. Right now I think it is too far out for the model to realize the theory I have. Right now it brings them all at once or it kicks one wave out and leaves the other wave behind. I like more of a two waves in tandem. One wave comes up and the second wave follows in sequence. I hope that clears it up a bit more. Thanks for the advice though because I am trying to be more discrete and not ramble and lose the point of what I am trying to say. Josh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick7032 Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 I think I see your point--and yeah I definitely agree. The way that cyclone develops is where much of the "spread" is amongst the ensembles--and how rapidly and exectly when that thing begins cyclogenesis will have massive implications on the overall forecast. I agree--the evolution is key and there will be continued spread up till that point. I posted this earlier too--and not to spam my weather blog--but I talk about how these non-linear processes in the Pacific can result in rapid changes. http://jasonahsenmac...rodynamic-flow/ If you loop the WV imagery of the circled vort and jet energy and look at the model 500 fields the energy is poorly shown at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 Well heat is thermo but I used a layman's term for that so some of the people who might not understand the physics could understand. Zooming is just a different word then saying it is moving out. I do need images because that will help. I need software to draw and that can help me explain better. As for the model interpretation, this is an opinion based statement, I feel that the model physics will have a tough time agreeing with having 2 waves follow one another until we get into the short range. Right now I think it is too far out for the model to realize the theory I have. Right now it brings them all at once or it kicks one wave out and leaves the other wave behind. I like more of a two waves in tandem. One wave comes up and the second wave follows in sequence. I hope that clears it up a bit more. Thanks for the advice though because I am trying to be more discrete and not ramble and lose the point of what I am trying to say. Josh Maybe we agree but explain it differently--I don't know. My thinking is the biggest disagreement is with this wave pushing into the coast now. Some guidance tries to "phase" it with the northern stream which triggers the weak cyclogenesis and the development of an active dynamic tropo and ensuing CAA into the plains. Heights fall aloft as a result and the trough builds S with a suppressed second wave. The other solution is no phase--and the trough stays in Canada until the second wave phases with the northern stream and one bombastic bomb develops into the plains and OV similar to the CMC. There is also middle ground--but that is one major interaction the models simply can not handle well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 If you loop the WV imagery of the circled vort and jet energy and look at the model 500 fields the energy is poorly shown at best. Yeah I believe we are highlighting the same thing. It does seem to be undergoing cyclogenesis as we speak based on the cloud top cooling and developing divergent jet shield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeye Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 This is definitely a bit better than this thru 72 the cold air press is a little more aggressive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 It's certainly different, still a ton of run to run variability. Ride the GFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhioValleyWx Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 Maybe we agree but explain it differently--I don't know. My thinking is the biggest disagreement is with this wave pushing into the coast now. Some guidance tries to "phase" it with the northern stream which triggers the weak cyclogenesis and the development of an active dynamic tropo and ensuing CAA into the plains. Heights fall aloft as a result and the trough builds S with a suppressed second wave. The other solution is no phase--and the trough stays in Canada until the second wave phases with the northern stream and one bombastic bomb develops into the plains and OV similar to the CMC. There is also middle ground--but that is one major interaction the models simply can not handle well. Sounds good; I think we agree on the threat potential but have a different way of getting there. I do see the potential of a bomb coming up out of the Plains into the OV. As you mentioned and I stated, a little clearer reasoning via pictures would help a lot. Josh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted January 28, 2011 Author Share Posted January 28, 2011 It's certainly different, still a ton of run to run variability. Ride the GFS. I'm gonna laugh if the GFS comes north. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 thru 72 the cold air press is a little more aggressive useless to disect too much, but the lee side return flow from the south is much more agressive on the 0z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted January 28, 2011 Author Share Posted January 28, 2011 useless to disect too much, but the lee side return flow from the south is much more agressive on the 0z. Yeah, it's colder farther east up to that point but I don't think it would last if it went out farther. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 I'm gonna laugh if the GFS comes north. talk about night and day GFS and NAM obv this NAM would be pretty far north comparitively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 Sounds good; I think we agree on the threat potential but have a different way of getting there. I do see the potential of a bomb coming up out of the Plains into the OV. As you mentioned and I stated, a little clearer reasoning via pictures would help a lot. Josh Are you an IPV guy? It sounds like some of your reasoning is grounded in isentropic potential vorticity with your thoughts on thermodynamics and large scale flows and thermal imbalances. I find IPV highly useful--but I use it a little differently. http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~ovens/loops/wxloop.cgi?ipv310_pres+/-168// Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 I'm gonna laugh if the GFS comes north. the variability with the handling of that pac energy is incredible and the NAM is now showing some big swings. I think riding the most consistent model makes sense. And yes, if the GFS comes north, it did it for the lulz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 thru 72 the cold air press is a little more aggressive i wouldn't call this cold air press aggressive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 The NAM would be inland runner, though the pv position will obviously make it go further south before the cut. The ultra phase UKMET even had the arctic jet roaring in by the end. inland all right, way inland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeye Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 i wouldn't call this cold air press aggressive high pressure is building in and pushing se from canada. Between that vort over eastern canada and the ridge building up thru western canada, you have the perfect high pressure factory. 1032 building towards chicago at 84. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhioValleyWx Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 Are you an IPV guy? It sounds like some of your reasoning is grounded in isentropic potential vorticity with your thoughts on thermodynamics and large scale flows and thermal imbalances. I find IPV highly useful--but I use it a little differently. http://www.atmos.was...10_pres+/-168// Yes I am. I try to not put too much weight on a particular element but I do tend to go towards imbalances and then draw up a theory from there and look for hot spots that vorticity can become established and then deepen. But like I said I try to be even on all elements. Josh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted January 28, 2011 Author Share Posted January 28, 2011 The entire trough axis looks farther west on the NAM. Compare the 00z NAM to the 12z runs...it would definitely be slower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundersnow12 Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 The NAM does look interesting at 84 hrs, something I saw looping the H5 vort map is a another little s/w coming down the backside of the northern stream wave and about to enter the pac NW from Canada. This could end up helping it dig further to the south resulting in a more phased system down the road if extrapolated. also some WAA type snow at 84hrs up in SD/MN area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 How far north could the nam go with that giant thing in Canada, gotta feeling it would end up suppressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted January 28, 2011 Author Share Posted January 28, 2011 How far north could the nam go with that giant thing in Canada, gotta feeling it would end up suppressed. It wouldn't cut to Duluth but I'd have to think it would run well inland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 The 0Z Pacific analysis is in with obs compared to the 18Z GFS forecast. The cyclone in question is undergoing cyclogenesis--and it does seem to be a tad bit under-modeled based on some of the surface buoy pressure values--perhaps 1-3 hpa in spots. Doesn't mean a ton yet--but if Patrick7032's thoughts are right--it may be too weak thus far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 It wouldn't cut to Duluth but I'd have to think it would run well inland. well if you mean well inland like from South Texas to Ohio or something sure. I still think it would be hard to get it to amplify enough, but that energy does look damn good out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeye Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 It wouldn't cut to Duluth but I'd have to think it would run well inland. I was just browsing the northeast storm thread......lots of jan '96 talk and how perfect this set up is for a major coastal....lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 I was just browsing the northeast storm thread......lots of jan '96 talk and how perfect this set up is for a major coastal....lol. the 0z NAM or general, former no, latter sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.