Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,588
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Tulip Trouncer Threat - End of March/ Early April


Baroclinic Zone

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 957
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The 12z ensembles to me look like they had a lot more spread. But that's been off and on the last few runs. 06z did have decent agreement and much tighter look near the BM.

Yeah 12z does look a lot messier

Still, I like seeing pretty good agreement in the amplitude of the H5 trough. Looks like mainly disagreeing on where the vortmax is within the trough

gefs-spag_namer_132_500_540_582_ht.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing that shows up is the close spacing between the 0C 850 isotherm and the 10C 850 isotherm. It's a product of the time of year, but when utilized properly...could lead to a massive QPF bomb thanks to the isentropic lift.

It's ironic that in general, snowstorms are more difficult to get @ this time of season, but a higher percentage of the ones that we do get are biggies....at least that in my perception, anyway.

We are more prone to cutt-offs because of the shorter wavelengths, but I had never thought of the point you just made RE the larger thermal gradients further increasing qpf potential, via isentropic lift.

Not only do we have more frequent slower movers due to the shorter wavelengths, but we also have jucier systems due to the increased gradients and greater GOM involvement.

The rising sun ange giveth and taketh away. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's ironic that in general, snowstorms are more difficult to get @ this time of season, but a higher percentage of the ones that we do get are biggies....at least that in my perception, anyway.

We are more prone to cutt-offs because of the shorter wavelengths, but I had never thought of the point you just made RE the larger thermal gradients further increasing qpf potential, via isentropic lift.

Not only do we have more frequent slower movers due to the shorter wavelengths, but we also have juciers systems due to the increased gradients and greater GOM involvement.

That's why I said the late season events are the QPF biggies. You can keep it as simple as saying that warmer temperatures can hold more moisture. Large thermal gradients do exist, but remember you are entraining moisture from the subtropics which this time of year, have warmer SST's and therefore much more moisture as compared to January. That's the bottom line. 4/1/97 was a theta-e bomb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's ironic that in general, snowstorms are more difficult to get @ this time of season, but a higher percentage of the ones that we do get are biggies....at least that in my perception, anyway.

We are more prone to cutt-offs because of the shorter wavelengths, but I had never thought of the point you just made RE the larger thermal gradients further increasing qpf potential, via isentropic lift.

Not only do we have more frequent slower movers due to the shorter wavelengths, but we also have jucier systems due to the increased gradients and greater GOM involvement.

The rising sun ange giveth and taketh away. lol

thermal gradient thumpers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why I said the late season events are the QPF biggies. You can keep it as simple as saying that warmer temperatures can hold more moisture. Large thermal gradients do exist, but remember you are entraining moisture from the subtropics which this time of year, have warmer SST's and therefore much more moisture as compared to January. That's the bottom line. 4/1/97 was a theta-e bomb.

Higher stakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really do like the antecedent airmass before this storm as is modeled right now. There should be some pretty solid ML cold in place. You can even see it on those amped up GFS ensemble solutions...they show a massive front end thump even on the westward track. Hopefully that continues to get better looking as we get closer.

It will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely, but even earlier in the season like In February and more especially March, offers storms that probably have a little more moisture involved as compared to the same situation in mid January.

The first February storm from last year had one of the greatest moisture streams I've ever seen....that thing was tapping the ITCZ in the Pacific.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 48 hour 12z ECMWF paints out a Jovian intense wind max approaching British Columbia coast, so much so that the two leading S/W are all but damped out as the pass through the Rockies - these latter two were the original leaders for mid week that are losing the battle.

Anyway, should that wind max dump E of a bulging western N/A PNA ridge than there will be hell to pay -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely, but even earlier in the season like In February and more especially March, offers storms that probably have a little more moisture involved as compared to the same situation in mid January.

I know this point is somewhat compromised by the Jan that we just had, but that month is a bit of a "black hole" as far as KUs go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Different look on the Euro lol...trying to actually have the 2nd wave catch up to the first wave and produce the system about 24h earlier. But it never quite catches up enough to get the storm all the way up the coast and we get grazed at 102 hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a definite reverse Archambault event. We just hope it happens to be snow.

I'd say the NAO bias at face value would support more suppression. And then I'd say that based on the current intensity of the disturbance south of the Aleutians and general model support, we're more likely to see a deep coherent trough develop than see it squashed. Put the two together and we have a major late season snow storm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Different look on the Euro lol...trying to actually have the 2nd wave catch up to the first wave and produce the system about 24h earlier. But it never quite catches up enough to get the storm all the way up the coast and we get grazed at 102 hours.

The second wave forms at hr 108 but I don't think it will be enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The second wave forms at hr 108 but I don't think it will be enough.

Yeah its much weaker...its def in response to the whole system catching up to that first wave and trying to concentrate the baroclinic zone on that. Its an oddball looking solution and probably will change drastically next run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah its much weaker...its def in response to the whole system catching up to that first wave and trying to concentrate the baroclinic zone on that. Its an oddball looking solution and probably will change drastically next run.

It's a delicate balance because if that first wave is weak or non-existent...that second low could ride up into the Hudson Valley. However, like you said, we definitely don't want the first wave to be too strong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reality is that of the 100 possible soloutions, about 95 of them blow.

Delicate balance....

Another reality however is that each solution has a different probability of verifying, and of those 95 that blow, about 90 of them are highly unlikely ... IMO at least.

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...