Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

3/23 - 3/24 Winter Storm


NEG NAO

Recommended Posts

The situation is eerily similar to 4/7/03. About this far out of the event or even a little closer, the gfs had the 3c 850 isotherm just over the metro area. While the nam kept the 0 850 line just south. The nam is better at CAD situations. Wd definitely lean towards the nam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Dude, are you serious?

look at the Bufkit output for KMMU for the NAM....12.7". Look at the clown maps as well, how is 7-14" a bad forecast at this point? My forecast is not for NYC, it's for MBY just as I pointed out in my post.

110323/1300Z 49 04004KT 34.0F 0:1| 0.0|| 0.0 0.000|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 0| 0| 0

110323/1400Z 50 05004KT 31.8F SNOW 20:1| 1.2|| 1.2 0.063|| 0.06 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/1500Z 51 06006KT 31.8F SNOW 11:1| 0.9|| 2.1 0.079|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/1600Z 52 04007KT 32.0F SNOW 8:1| 0.3|| 2.5 0.043|| 0.19 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/1700Z 53 05008KT 32.0F SNOW 15:1| 0.7|| 3.2 0.051|| 0.24 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/1800Z 54 06008KT 31.8F SNOW 12:1| 0.9|| 4.1 0.075|| 0.31 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+---

110323/1900Z 55 07008KT 32.0F SNOW 15:1| 0.9|| 5.0 0.059|| 0.37 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/2000Z 56 08008KT 31.8F SNOW 7:1| 0.6|| 5.6 0.083|| 0.45 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/2100Z 57 09009KT 31.6F SNOW 16:1| 0.6|| 6.2 0.039|| 0.49 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/2200Z 58 09009KT 30.9F FZDZ 0:1| 0.0|| 6.2 0.043|| 0.54 0.00|| 0.00 0.05|| 0.05 0| 0|100

110323/2300Z 59 08009KT 30.4F FZDZ 0:1| 0.0|| 6.2 0.028|| 0.56 0.00|| 0.00 0.03|| 0.07 0| 0|100

110324/0000Z 60 07010KT 30.0F SNOW 8:1| 0.3|| 6.5 0.035|| 0.60 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.07 100| 0| 0

----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+---

110324/0100Z 61 07011KT 29.8F SNOW 7:1| 0.2|| 6.8 0.035|| 0.63 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.07 100| 0| 0

110324/0200Z 62 07010KT 29.8F SNOW 7:1| 0.2|| 7.0 0.031|| 0.67 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.07 100| 0| 0

110324/0300Z 63 07011KT 30.0F SNOW 7:1| 0.5|| 7.5 0.075|| 0.74 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.07 100| 0| 0

110324/0400Z 64 08012KT 30.0F SNPL 3:1| 0.2|| 7.6 0.051|| 0.79 0.05|| 0.05 0.00|| 0.07 51| 49| 0

110324/0500Z 65 08013KT 30.0F FZRA 0:1| 0.0|| 7.6 0.055|| 0.85 0.00|| 0.05 0.06|| 0.13 0| 0|100

110324/0600Z 66 07014KT 29.8F FZRA 0:1| 0.0|| 7.6 0.020|| 0.87 0.00|| 0.05 0.02|| 0.15 0| 0|100

----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+---

110324/0700Z 67 07014KT 30.0F PL 0:1| 0.0|| 7.6 0.043|| 0.91 0.09|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 3| 97| 0

110324/0800Z 68 06014KT 30.4F SNOW 15:1| 1.7|| 9.4 0.114|| 1.02 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/0900Z 69 05010KT 30.7F SNOW 6:1| 0.9||10.2 0.154|| 1.18 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1000Z 70 04010KT 30.7F SNOW 9:1| 0.7||11.0 0.079|| 1.26 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1100Z 71 03012KT 30.6F SNOW 8:1| 0.4||11.3 0.047|| 1.30 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1200Z 72 04012KT 30.6F SNOW 10:1| 0.3||11.6 0.031|| 1.33 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date/hour FHr Wind SfcT Ptype SRat|Snow||TotSN QPF ||TotQPF Sleet||TotPL FZRA||TotZR S%| I%| L%

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

110324/1300Z 73 03012KT 30.9F SNOW 11:1| 0.2||11.9 0.024|| 1.36 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1400Z 74 03012KT 30.9F SNOW 14:1| 0.2||12.1 0.016|| 1.37 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1500Z 75 02012KT 30.9F SNOW 21:1| 0.3||12.4 0.016|| 1.39 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1600Z 76 01011KT 31.1F SNOW 25:1| 0.2||12.6 0.008|| 1.40 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1700Z 77 36011KT 31.5F SNOW 21:1| 0.1||12.7 0.004|| 1.40 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

look at the Bufkit output for KMMU for the NAM....12.7". Look at the clown maps as well, how is 7-14" a bad forecast at this point? My forecast is not for NYC, it's for MBY just as I pointed out in my post.

110323/1300Z 49 04004KT 34.0F 0:1| 0.0|| 0.0 0.000|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 0| 0| 0

110323/1400Z 50 05004KT 31.8F SNOW 20:1| 1.2|| 1.2 0.063|| 0.06 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/1500Z 51 06006KT 31.8F SNOW 11:1| 0.9|| 2.1 0.079|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/1600Z 52 04007KT 32.0F SNOW 8:1| 0.3|| 2.5 0.043|| 0.19 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/1700Z 53 05008KT 32.0F SNOW 15:1| 0.7|| 3.2 0.051|| 0.24 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/1800Z 54 06008KT 31.8F SNOW 12:1| 0.9|| 4.1 0.075|| 0.31 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+---

110323/1900Z 55 07008KT 32.0F SNOW 15:1| 0.9|| 5.0 0.059|| 0.37 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/2000Z 56 08008KT 31.8F SNOW 7:1| 0.6|| 5.6 0.083|| 0.45 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/2100Z 57 09009KT 31.6F SNOW 16:1| 0.6|| 6.2 0.039|| 0.49 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0

110323/2200Z 58 09009KT 30.9F FZDZ 0:1| 0.0|| 6.2 0.043|| 0.54 0.00|| 0.00 0.05|| 0.05 0| 0|100

110323/2300Z 59 08009KT 30.4F FZDZ 0:1| 0.0|| 6.2 0.028|| 0.56 0.00|| 0.00 0.03|| 0.07 0| 0|100

110324/0000Z 60 07010KT 30.0F SNOW 8:1| 0.3|| 6.5 0.035|| 0.60 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.07 100| 0| 0

----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+---

110324/0100Z 61 07011KT 29.8F SNOW 7:1| 0.2|| 6.8 0.035|| 0.63 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.07 100| 0| 0

110324/0200Z 62 07010KT 29.8F SNOW 7:1| 0.2|| 7.0 0.031|| 0.67 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.07 100| 0| 0

110324/0300Z 63 07011KT 30.0F SNOW 7:1| 0.5|| 7.5 0.075|| 0.74 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.07 100| 0| 0

110324/0400Z 64 08012KT 30.0F SNPL 3:1| 0.2|| 7.6 0.051|| 0.79 0.05|| 0.05 0.00|| 0.07 51| 49| 0

110324/0500Z 65 08013KT 30.0F FZRA 0:1| 0.0|| 7.6 0.055|| 0.85 0.00|| 0.05 0.06|| 0.13 0| 0|100

110324/0600Z 66 07014KT 29.8F FZRA 0:1| 0.0|| 7.6 0.020|| 0.87 0.00|| 0.05 0.02|| 0.15 0| 0|100

----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+---

110324/0700Z 67 07014KT 30.0F PL 0:1| 0.0|| 7.6 0.043|| 0.91 0.09|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 3| 97| 0

110324/0800Z 68 06014KT 30.4F SNOW 15:1| 1.7|| 9.4 0.114|| 1.02 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/0900Z 69 05010KT 30.7F SNOW 6:1| 0.9||10.2 0.154|| 1.18 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1000Z 70 04010KT 30.7F SNOW 9:1| 0.7||11.0 0.079|| 1.26 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1100Z 71 03012KT 30.6F SNOW 8:1| 0.4||11.3 0.047|| 1.30 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1200Z 72 04012KT 30.6F SNOW 10:1| 0.3||11.6 0.031|| 1.33 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date/hour FHr Wind SfcT Ptype SRat|Snow||TotSN QPF ||TotQPF Sleet||TotPL FZRA||TotZR S%| I%| L%

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

110324/1300Z 73 03012KT 30.9F SNOW 11:1| 0.2||11.9 0.024|| 1.36 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1400Z 74 03012KT 30.9F SNOW 14:1| 0.2||12.1 0.016|| 1.37 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1500Z 75 02012KT 30.9F SNOW 21:1| 0.3||12.4 0.016|| 1.39 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1600Z 76 01011KT 31.1F SNOW 25:1| 0.2||12.6 0.008|| 1.40 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

110324/1700Z 77 36011KT 31.5F SNOW 21:1| 0.1||12.7 0.004|| 1.40 0.00|| 0.14 0.00|| 0.15 100| 0| 0

If the NAM clown maps were remotely accurate from 60hrs out I'd have like 300" of snow this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because you are relying on one model for your forecast, the one that happens to produce the most snow. A more prudent forecast for your area combining all the data, would be 3-6 inches of snow.

look at the Bufkit output for KMMU for the NAM....12.7". Look at the clown maps as well, how is 7-14" a bad forecast at this point? My forecast is not for NYC, it's for MBY just as I pointed out in my post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

look at the Bufkit output for KMMU for the NAM....12.7". Look at the clown maps as well, how is 7-14" a bad forecast at this point? My forecast is not for NYC, it's for MBY just as I pointed out in my post.

Do u honestly think this will verify in this set up? I'm not trying to argue, just wondering if ur wishing or if u really see this happening?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

look at the Bufkit output for KMMU for the NAM....12.7". Look at the clown maps as well, how is 7-14" a bad forecast at this point? My forecast is not for NYC, it's for MBY just as I pointed out in my post.

Okay, so your method of forecasting is to take the 66 hour NAM, rip and read the bufkit and clown maps, and type up the amounts? Good luck

iStock_000003827645XSmall1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do u honestly think this will verify in this set up? I'm not trying to argue, just wondering if ur wishing or if u really see this happening?

If I took the 12z NAM as is, I would be calling for a foot plus. 7-14" seems reasonable and gives a large amount of room for error. My guess is that when the text output comes out for the 12z GFS, it won't be much different than the NAM for the site in question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I took the 12z NAM as is, I would be calling for a foot plus.

And you would also be fired from whatever job you would be working at in that fantasy world

7-14" seems reasonable and gives a large amount of room for error

Cool, I will call for 1-15" then.

My guess is that when the text output comes out for the 12z GFS, it won't be much different than the NAM for the site in question.

My guess is that it is, want to bet your next week of posting on it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I took the 12z NAM as is, I would be calling for a foot plus. 7-14" seems reasonable and gives a large amount of room for error. My guess is that when the text output comes out for the 12z GFS, it won't be much different than the NAM for the site in question.

The text output will NOT be similar. The depth of the warmth is much more significant as a result of the WAA ahead of the primary low that cuts to our west on the GFS which it seems to keep emphasizing. The NAM is more progressive and transfers the energy quicker allowing for the column to stay cooler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The temperatures would be warmer than the NAM is showing here at the coast if that strong of an ENE flow develops.

As long as winds remain north of due east i say we are fine. Water temps are probably right around their coldest all year right now. Upper 30s east/northeast of montauk,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see where this is going, oh well I'll just sit back and laugh next week if the higher amounts verify, and if not, thats fine too :popcorn:

I honestly want to know where u come up with the 12z gfs looking anything like the 12z NAM...NAm looks much colder, and gfs doesn't have much snow for our area at all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly want to know where u come up with the 12z gfs looking anything like the 12z NAM...NAm looks much colder, and gfs doesn't have much snow for our area at all

Just because sometimes the maps can be decieving. I know alot of times it will look like ~1.25" of QPF but when you look at the text outputs it will say something like 2.0" of QPF because of very small bullseyes and such that are hard to see without looking at a very zoomed in map.

I'm obviously not a met and not getting paid to make forecasts so I'm giving my amateur perspective. I don't want to here your wrong, I want to know why I'm wrong so I can learn from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because sometimes the maps can be decieving. I know alot of times it will look like ~1.25" of QPF but when you look at the text outputs it will say something like 2.0" of QPF because of very small bullseyes and such that are hard to see without looking at a very zoomed in map.

I'm obviously not a met and not getting paid to make forecasts so I'm giving my amateur perspective. I don't want to here your wrong, I want to know why I'm wrong so I can learn from it.

Do we get to correct your grammar as well as your forecasts?

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...