ctsnowstorm628 Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 actually did the NAM not have the 2 piece event we just had first? yeah, at like 24hrs out. and it had it going way south of NE with the first piece while s ct got 5" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 good fook the ice, but the Nam is all snow for me The NAM is just so extreme i really can't take it seriously right now. If the GFS and 00z models start trending toward it then Ill start changing my forecast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MainePhotog Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Sorry Ryan, misunderstanding. Removed my last post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leesun Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 LOL. WAIT! Ed McMahon just rang my doorbell. The 18z NAM is going to verify IMHO, taking the 18Z NAM verbatim is likened too expecting to win the Publishers Clearinghouse sweepstakes because you mailed the form in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 And it's amazing the amount of weather weenies who will bash you if you say the 18z NAM and it's silly solution looks overdone. you quote the 12z and then say this, , not saying it verifies but does make sense. What synoptic detail would you say is a glaring error on the 18Z Nams part? Calling people weenies because they disagree with you is not right either. I told you my reasoning, what say you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTWeatherFreak Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 It's not a storm phasing issue. The model will sometimes "phase shift" west. Compare these 2 images side my side and you can see the difference in the 500mb heights. The 18z NAM's are shifted westward compared to the 12z. http://raleighwx.ame...mbHGHTNA048.gif http://raleighwx.ame...mbHGHTNA054.gif interesting.. thanks for the explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTWeatherFreak Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Does the nam ever id a trend a few runs before any of the other models catch on? Or is is usually bogus when it shows something the others dont in this time frame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 The NAM starts blowing this synoptically early. We need some RUC trends. I literally looked at two panels and just now compared 48 to 54 from the two runs. Don't see anything glaring, aside of the obvious multi vms aloft out of the south which IMO would lead to a more surpressed solution. It's early but everyone dismisses the nam for 6-12 hours when it does this and most times it's right in the general idea. When I looked at the 12z gfs vs 0z I thought it had Many of the same signs but who knows. The nam provides a piece of the puzzle each time probably doing the same now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 you quote the 12z and then say this, , not saying it verifies but does make sense. What synoptic detail would you say is a glaring error on the 18Z Nams part? Calling people weenies because they disagree with you is not right either. I told you my reasoning, what say you. Wait what's your reasoning I didn't see it posted? All I'm saying is there no reason to reasonably expect an all snow event in HFD or HVN for that matter. Every other piece of guidance is substantially warmer with a primary cutting well west in a typical SWFE. I just don't really see any support for keeping mid levels cold enough to prevent PL/ZR to making it north of our area. Will we see mid levels trend much colder in the coming runs? possibly but I wouldn't jump on that bandwagon yet with only the 18z NAM in my corner. The NAM also frequently does this once or twice before a SWFE when mid levels jump too cold because the model is trying to close something off underneath us and backs the mid level flow some. It rarely verifies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 you quote the 12z and then say this, , not saying it verifies but does make sense. What synoptic detail would you say is a glaring error on the 18Z Nams part? Calling people weenies because they disagree with you is not right either. I told you my reasoning, what say you. The 12z NAM, Euro, GGEM, UKMet, SREFs, and Euro/GFS ensembles all show a classic ice setup for CT. Why leave that consensus for the 18z NAM that has dropped 850mb temps by like 10c. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leesun Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 I think that piece of the puzzle may be the slower 2nd s/w out west. The solution may be off its rocker, but perhaps it's on to something. We need to distance the 1st and 2nd wave I literally looked at two panels and just now compared 48 to 54 from the two runs. Don't see anything glaring, aside of the obvious multi vms aloft out of the south which IMO would lead to a more surpressed solution. It's early but everyone dismisses the nam for 6-12 hours when it does this and most times it's right in the general idea. When I looked at the 12z gfs vs 0z I thought it had Many of the same signs but who knows. The nam provides a piece of the puzzle each time probably doing the same now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Organizing Low Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 on the other hand it does snow where it wants to snow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaineJayhawk Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 We'll see very soon if the GFS capitulates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dendrite Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 I literally looked at two panels and just now compared 48 to 54 from the two runs. Don't see anything glaring, aside of the obvious multi vms aloft out of the south which IMO would lead to a more surpressed solution. It's early but everyone dismisses the nam for 6-12 hours when it does this and most times it's right in the general idea. When I looked at the 12z gfs vs 0z I thought it had Many of the same signs but who knows. The nam provides a piece of the puzzle each time probably doing the same now It is glaring. The 18z NAM is way slower with the southern s/w this run versus 12z. It was already slower than the other models. So we're getting more suppressed heights in the NE before the SE ridging can increase. At 54hr the NAM has the s/w trough axis from OK-W TX. The 12z GFS, 12z EC, and 12z EC ens mean at 60hr have it into MO/AR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Wait what's your reasoning I didn't see it posted? All I'm saying is there no reason to reasonably expect an all snow event in HFD or HVN for that matter. Every other piece of guidance is substantially warmer with a primary cutting well west in a typical SWFE. I just don't really see any support for keeping mid levels cold enough to prevent PL/ZR to making it north of our area. Will we see mid levels trend much colder in the coming runs? possibly but I wouldn't jump on that bandwagon yet with only the 18z NAM in my corner. The NAM also frequently does this once or twice before a SWFE when mid levels jump too cold because the model is trying to close something off underneath us and backs the mid level flow some. It rarely verifies. Thanks, my reasoning confluence is stronger than progged, models like to slam too far into Arctic air, similar situations(analogs) yielded a colder result. Seasonal trend, hope it verifies at least give me sleet instead of ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 actually did the NAM not have the 2 piece event we just had first? Absolutely was first and was right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Thanks, my reasoning confluence is stronger than progged, models like to slam too far into Arctic air, similar situations(analogs) yielded a colder result. Seasonal trend, hope it verifies at least give me sleet instead of ice. Well I think all of the above reasons are why I'm concerned about major icing. I don't think that makes a huge difference in terms of how far west the 850mb low tracks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moneypitmike Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 BOX is even introducing zr into the nether regions of GC. WESTERN FRANKLIN MA- INCLUDING THE CITIES OF...ASHFIELD...CHARLEMONT...COLRAIN... SHELBURNE 414 PM EST SUN JAN 30 2011 .MONDAY NIGHT...MOSTLY CLOUDY. COLD WITH LOWS AROUND 4 ABOVE. NORTHWEST WINDS AROUND 5 MPH IN THE EVENING...BECOMING LIGHT AND VARIABLE. .TUESDAY...SNOW. COLD WITH HIGHS AROUND 20. NORTHEAST WINDS AROUND 5 MPH. CHANCE OF SNOW 80 PERCENT. .TUESDAY NIGHT...SNOW AND SLEET. NOT AS COOL. NEAR STEADY TEMPERATURE AROUND 18. NORTHEAST WINDS AROUND 5 MPH. CHANCE OF PRECIPITATION 90 PERCENT. .WEDNESDAY...SNOW...SLEET AND FREEZING RAIN. COLD WITH HIGHS IN THE LOWER 20S. CHANCE OF PRECIPITATION 90 PERCENT. .WEDNESDAY NIGHT...SNOW LIKELY. LOWS AROUND 10 ABOVE. CHANCE OF SNOW 70 PERCENT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mica Vim Toot Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Vim toot would not like this run These runs got the runs. Vim Toot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 LOL, well that was interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Absolutely was first and was right Lots of pros got burned discounting that and expressed amazement it was snowing Tuesday morning, like no model had it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 It is glaring. The 18z NAM is way slower with the southern s/w this run versus 12z. It was already slower than the other models. So we're getting more suppressed heights in the NE before the SE ridging can increase. At 54hr the NAM has the s/w trough axis from OK-W TX. The 12z GFS, 12z EC, and 12z EC ens mean at 60hr have it into MO/AR. If you compare the 850mb heights/temps from the 18z NAM and 12z GFS at 78 and 84 hours, respectively you can see what happens in the end. The NAM is substantially further west with the main 850 low and develops a really strong 850mb warm front right along the south coast than the GFS. Something to watch for but I really think the NAM looks on the overdone side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bostonseminole Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 yeah, at like 24hrs out. and it had it going way south of NE with the first piece while s ct got 5" I think it was more than 24hrs out, but whatever, I'm not believing the NAM yet, i dont really buy most info on 18z runs this far out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 The 12z NAM, Euro, GGEM, UKMet, SREFs, and Euro/GFS ensembles all show a classic ice setup for CT. Why leave that consensus for the 18z NAM that has dropped 850mb temps by like 10c. I am definitely concerned about the icing potential here, there are some pretty strong dynamics associated with this system, the GFS has an insane MLJ working into the region within the SW flow...will the GFS verify with the strength? Maybe not exactly but when dealing with winds aloft this potent from the SW we'd be sure to advect in some warmer air aloft to eventually change things over to sleet/freezing rain...I think we keep the low-levels pretty darn cold. There is still plenty of time to work things out and not really going to stick to any one solution just yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 It is glaring. The 18z NAM is way slower with the southern s/w this run versus 12z. It was already slower than the other models. So we're getting more suppressed heights in the NE before the SE ridging can increase. At 54hr the NAM has the s/w trough axis from OK-W TX. The 12z GFS, 12z EC, and 12z EC ens mean at 60hr have it into MO/AR. Ok got it that's a flag. At the same time it does shift a lot aloft and does still manage to get it close to right at the surf despite itself at times. I think it was a year maybe two ago when it was slow with the energy everyone smoked it including ncep for other models and inside of 60 they all flopped Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Well I think all of the above reasons are why I'm concerned about major icing. I don't think that makes a huge difference in terms of how far west the 850mb low tracks. I heed your words Ryan, hopefully your forecast changes, good luck going to be a nailbiter. I do however belive the frontrunner is all snow and prolific, this has the chance to be a major infrastructure trouble week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Absolutely was first and was right I think you people are forgetting that the Wednesday 12z NAM had 0.10"-0.25" QPF for MBY, and we ended up with 8.5" snow with approx a 10:1 ratio. In fact, the Wednesday 00z NAM didn't have snow flying until 06z Thursday, and the first flakes flew around 18z Wednesday. Unreal!!! I swear if this thing was showing all rain up to the Canadian border you all would throw it out the window, why not do the same now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 I heed your words Ryan, hopefully your forecast changes, good luck going to be a nailbiter. I do however belive the frontrunner is all snow and prolific, this has the chance to be a major infrastructure trouble week. I should have mentioned this in my post above...I think the front end is definitely snow and we could see moderate accumulations of snow before possibly dealing with icing issues...going to be very ugly mid-week no matter how you slice this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bostonseminole Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 I think you people are forgetting that the Wednesday 12z NAM had 0.10"-0.25" QPF for MBY, and we ended up with 8.5" snow with approx a 10:1 ratio. In fact, the Wednesday 00z NAM didn't have snow flying until 06z Thursday, and the first flakes flew around 18z Wednesday. Unreal!!! I swear if this thing was showing all rain up to the Canadian border you all would throw it out the window, why not do the same now well was any other model correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dendrite Posted January 30, 2011 Share Posted January 30, 2011 Ok got it that's a flag. At the same time it does shift a lot aloft and does still manage to get it close to right at the surf despite itself at times. I think it was a year maybe two ago when it was slow with the energy everyone smoked it including ncep for other models and inside of 60 they all flopped I'm not saying it's wrong, but there is strong consensus against it right now. Maybe it's seeing something the others aren't. It'll be interesting to see it play out...we're still a few days away from the main course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.