Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

March 30 and April Fools Day Potential


stormtracker

Recommended Posts

18z NAM looks a tad slower...not really seeing your surface reflection, there was a slight reflection with a piece of energy ahead of the main impulse, if anything I would say the 18z NAM looks like it would go negative too soon with the main impulse.

not sure i agree tho it was sort of an educated guess based off how the euro looked and that the second 'storm' should be forming somewhere around then. it also did have a closed contour on the surface in previous panels but sorta gets washed out at the end.yeah the trough does look a little slower but it might not really effect the surface low which seems to form in the wake of the first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 744
  • Created
  • Last Reply

the surface reflection you see is a weak surface low associated with a weak mid level impulse juxtaposed with an upper level jet entrance region in earlier panels.

regardless the main pressure trough associated with the second wave is stronger, so i'm not seeing the relationship between the first weaker surface reflection and the second, stronger wave anyways, i'm sure you could try to make an argument of how antecedent low pressure along the SE coast may affect the evolution, but with a strong trough, the dynamic response, in my opinion, far outweighs the weak surface reflection off the SE coast.

remember pressure change is a dynamic response, it is fluid, a low pressure doesn't track, as much as it is constantly redeveloping in response to the atmospheric forcing.

just my two cents of analysis thumbsupsmileyanim.gif

not sure i agree tho it was sort of an educated guess based off how the euro looked and that the second 'storm' should be forming somewhere around then. it also did have a closed contour on the surface in previous panels but sorta gets washed out at the end.yeah the trough does look a little slower but it might not really effect the surface low which seems to form in the wake of the first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the surface reflection you see is a weak surface low associated with a weak mid level impulse juxtaposed with an upper level jet entrance region in earlier panels.

regardless the main pressure trough associated with the second wave is stronger, so i'm not seeing the relationship between the first weaker surface reflection and the second, stronger wave anyways, i'm sure you could try to make an argument of how antecedent low pressure along the SE coast may affect the evolution, but with a strong trough, the dynamic response, in my opinion, far outweighs the weak surface reflection off the SE coast.

remember pressure change is a dynamic response, it is fluid, a low pressure doesn't track, as much as it is constantly redeveloping in response to the atmospheric forcing.

just my two cents of analysis thumbsupsmileyanim.gif

the h5 trough differences between the nam and gfs are moderate but not amazing. every model that i know of (honestly i dont look at a lot of the crappy ones mentioned here all the time) seems to key in on that same moisture area at the surface. it is somewhat detached from the larger trough to the west compared to many, but im not sure that means it cant be the main deal.

i guess you are offering up that the NAM would give some solution that is otherwise not currently on the table. i guess that's possible. then again at this point i wonder how much analysis is needed post 84 hr 18z nam.

i dont believe we get two storms worth talking about (though honestly the odds of snow of any meaning are very low outside elevation unless we see more changes in the right direction).. one or the other is bound to be larger and diminish 'prospects' for the other.. unless the second one slows down a good bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i hear ya...wish i had time to respond with a more formal analysis...

this whole winter has seemed to be a convoluted mess.

the h5 trough differences between the nam and gfs are moderate but not amazing. every model that i know of (honestly i dont look at a lot of the crappy ones mentioned here all the time) seems to key in on that same moisture area at the surface. it is somewhat detached from the larger trough to the west compared to many, but im not sure that means it cant be the main deal.

i guess you are offering up that the NAM would give some solution that is otherwise not currently on the table. i guess that's possible. then again at this point i wonder how much analysis is needed post 84 hr 18z nam.

i dont believe we get two storms worth talking about (though honestly the odds of snow of any meaning are very low outside elevation unless we see more changes in the right direction).. one or the other is bound to be larger and diminish 'prospects' for the other.. unless the second one slows down a good bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

0z nam taking everything outta storm 2 and focusing on the main trough. i guess it is kicking out a different scenario than the gfs/euro.

http://www.nco.ncep....am_pcp_084m.gif'

storm 1 is lol. i bet the gfs will suck tonight. ;)

its got storm 2, and actually when the euro had the bomb for the weekend 3 runs ago it was delayed like the NAM is now. A few runs of other models have keyed on the main trough also. Its just one of several options, models are having major issues but in the end I do think things will consolidate and one system will bomb, just not sure how/when.

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...