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 part 2


Hoosier

Recommended Posts

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

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

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

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

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/

post-999-0-33839100-1296182140.png

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

post-999-0-28355000-1296185178.gif

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...