Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,586
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

February 5-6 Storm Threat I


Baroclinic Zone

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Vortmax is really dragging its heels at 45h...18z had a solid ball of vorticity in WV...00z is strung out from WV trailing back to KY and TN...the more elongated vortmax will prevent better formation of mid-level centers and less chance at snow in this system outside of the higher terrain. We need a dynamic bomb to get good accumulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vortmax is really dragging its heels at 45h...18z had a solid ball of vorticity in WV...00z is strung out from WV trailing back to KY and TN...the more elongated vortmax will prevent better formation of mid-level centers and less chance at snow in this system outside of the higher terrain. We need a dynamic bomb to get good accumulations.

I think the NAM is struggling still Will. It seems a bit disjointed, my guess is it's not quite at the final solution yet. It's probably too slow with that remaining energy (again) and we'll see the GFS deliver the goods one way or the other. GFS should slow up a bit from it's fast pace but the NAM....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At 12z the NAM had the low over eastern PA, at 18z SE of NYC, this run SE or near ACK. Give it another 6-12 hours...it'll get it right.

Out to have a few drinks...I think the GFS will give a much better idea...probably went too far at 18z...I think we're going to see a nice comma head form.

NAM's on the good coke again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This low goes from just east of ocean city maryland to 50 miles east of acy, then ene just east of ack and just east of the cape.

Future runs of the Nam will have 500 more consolidated and east, surface will reflect with a potent ccb over sne, dynamics for the win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol..it's like sprinkles ending as flurries.

It somehow drops nearly 0.50" of qpf here but its so disorganized and light that it would probably be like 3" of slop, lol. And as you said, in lower areas it might just be sprinkles to non-accumulating flakes or an inch of slush. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It somehow drops nearly 0.50" of qpf here but its so disorganized and light that it would probably be like 3" of slop, lol. And as you said, in lower areas it might just be sprinkles to non-accumulating flakes or an inch of slush. :lol:

Yeah. We'll see how thing go but in my mind I'd still just expect a light to moderate event from your area up to CNE.

The nam was really the only piece of guidance suggesting the VM would stay tight and/or strengthen. Ec had a decent look but even that wasn't tooooo impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this was 5-10 years ago we'd be talking the EE rule with the ETA and 12z EC being big hits for the interior. :lol:

Yeah no kidding....and the Euro wouldn't run again until tomorrow, lol.

All this model guidance now. I still like a track near ACK....and am weary of it running even closer, but I could see it falling apart too....but we have a few things working in favor of a hugger...

-synoptic longwave pattern with trough in midwest and bit of a SE ridge

-lack of block

-gulf origin systems with convection have seemed to track NW of guidance at the last second

Speed of system is really the only thing working against it from running inland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting observation from the usually routine GYX discussion (8:58pm update):

18Z GFS SHOWS AN INTENSIFYING LOW CROSSING THROUGH THE GULF OF

MAINE (42 MB DEEPENING IN 12 HRS!). IT CRASHES DOWN TO 931 MB IN

THE CANADIAN MARITIMES. DOUBT THAT WILL VERIFY...SINCE WE ARE SO

FAR OUT IN TIME...BUT IT`S JUST AMUSING TO LOOK AT IN ANY CASE.

NEVER SEEN THAT KINDA OF DEEPING FROM A NUMERICAL MODEL IN THE

NORTHEAST OVER THE LAST 25 YEARS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a good thing the NAM backed off - but I wouldn't be surprised if that came back. The difference there appears to be the orientation of the vorticity relative to the flow, in that DPVA is actually very weak on this run, where the last couple -3 cycles showed much more vorticity impinging on the flow. That kind of abrupt change (discontinuity) across a single run where previous runs were more consistent should be taken with a grain of salt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...