tornadojay Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 White Plains BUFKIT FTW 110401/0300Z 69 08008KT 38.1F RAIN 0:1| 0.0|| 0.0 0.016|| 0.02 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 0| 0|100 110401/0600Z 72 03011KT 35.1F RASN 0:1| 0.0|| 0.0 0.024|| 0.04 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 41| 0| 59 ----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+--- 110401/0900Z 75 03015KT 30.7F SNOW 14:1| 4.8|| 4.8 0.343|| 0.38 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110401/1200Z 78 01018KT 30.2F SNOW 14:1| 3.9|| 8.7 0.268|| 0.65 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110401/1500Z 81 34016KT 28.8F SNOW 20:1| 9.8||18.5 0.492|| 1.14 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110401/1800Z 84 32015KT 32.2F SNOW 11:1| 1.4||19.9 0.130|| 1.27 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 ----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+--- 110401/2100Z 87 30010KT 32.9F RASN 0:1| 0.0||19.9 0.024|| 1.30 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 56| 0| 44 110402/0000Z 90 29008KT 32.2F RASN 0:1| 0.0||19.9 0.008|| 1.30 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 58| 0| 42 110402/0300Z 93 29010KT 29.7F 0:1| 0.0||19.9 0.000|| 1.30 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 0| 0| 0 110402/0600Z 96 29010KT 27.0F 0:1| 0.0||19.9 0.000|| 1.30 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 0| 0| 0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 This model would be really considered screwed up if it was 24 hours - obviously the model is wrong for whatever reason -might be right with the track ... BUT it should begin to get the right solution which will be rain for NYC metro and mix or snow west and or north of the metro NWS and Alan Kasper only mentioning rain - the only ones mentioning snow are the 2 ding - dongs over at weatherbell who are priming you guys to start paying into their pro site in the near future... why is this **** allowed in these threads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossi Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 why is this **** allowed in these threads Agree completely!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rossi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jconsor Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 What QPF increment does the light blue represent? an April Fools' repeat, per ECMWF and other trends? see attached for 00z ECMWF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 why is this **** allowed in these threads Agree completely!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rossi Just because it's anti-snow? He's entitled to his point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris L Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Well, one thing is for sure: we would break 1995-1996's snow records with this storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Just because it's anti-snow? He's entitled to his point of view. FAIL its how he is making his point not because its anti-snow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 What QPF increment does the light blue represent? Check your PM's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Just because it's anti-snow? He's entitled to his point of view. this isnt for baseless opinions....claiming a model must be wrong, but not saying why, is BS and doesnt belong in these threads. Plenty of threats get poo pooed by experienced members and mets here, and they dont get attacked; there is a reason for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadojay Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 it looks like the 12Z NAM is on it's way to focusing on a later event. If the 84 hour 6Z panel was extrapolated out, it was on it's way to producing a major bomb with that kind of 500 mb pattern. It'll be interesting to see how it consolidates that energy in this run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 it looks like the 12Z NAM is on it's way to focusing on a later event. If the 84 hour 6Z panel was extrapolated out, it was on it's way to producing a major bomb with that kind of 500 mb pattern. It'll be interesting to see how it consolidates that energy in this run. I know its not exact, but the nam extension, the 6z dgex, had no storm past 84 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 The whole situation is still a crap shoot. The GFS op looks pretty now but has almost no support from its ensemble members. A few nice hits are skewing the mean. The 00z CMC looked like the GFS but further off shore. We have decent agreement now between the EC and the GFS ops which I guess says alot. What worries me is that this has all or nothing with big bust potential written all over it. Then throw climo into the mix and you have a very difficult forecast. Confidence of warning criteria snowfall anywhere in the Mt. Holly or Upton CWA's has to be in the 30-40% range at the moment. Hopefully we start to see some convergence with the 12z suite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 I know its not exact, but the nam extension, the 6z dgex, had no storm past 84 hours. Right, after showing a massive snow bomb for many consecutive runs before that. The totals from 18z were 20"+ in some spots. I think its handeling of the first system is really taking its toll on the second one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadojay Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 I know its not exact, but the nam extension, the 6z dgex, had no storm past 84 hours. interesting... we'll see what happens this run... I have no doubt in my mind that the NAM definitely would have developed that into a powerful system.. this run is differing a bit from 6Z.. still lots of energy but placed differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 this isnt for baseless opinions....claiming a model must be wrong, but not saying why, is BS and doesnt belong in these threads. Plenty of threats get poo pooed by experienced members and mets here, and they dont get attacked; there is a reason for it. Ok, but now you explained you're reasoning behind it. I don't think you can deny that some of the members are biased against posters who make negative snow comments, no matter how rationale their basis is in supporting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hudsonvalley21 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 White Plains BUFKIT FTW 110401/0300Z 69 08008KT 38.1F RAIN 0:1| 0.0|| 0.0 0.016|| 0.02 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 0| 0|100 110401/0600Z 72 03011KT 35.1F RASN 0:1| 0.0|| 0.0 0.024|| 0.04 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 41| 0| 59 ----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+--- 110401/0900Z 75 03015KT 30.7F SNOW 14:1| 4.8|| 4.8 0.343|| 0.38 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110401/1200Z 78 01018KT 30.2F SNOW 14:1| 3.9|| 8.7 0.268|| 0.65 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110401/1500Z 81 34016KT 28.8F SNOW 20:1| 9.8||18.5 0.492|| 1.14 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110401/1800Z 84 32015KT 32.2F SNOW 11:1| 1.4||19.9 0.130|| 1.27 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 ----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+--- 110401/2100Z 87 30010KT 32.9F RASN 0:1| 0.0||19.9 0.024|| 1.30 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 56| 0| 44 110402/0000Z 90 29008KT 32.2F RASN 0:1| 0.0||19.9 0.008|| 1.30 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 58| 0| 42 110402/0300Z 93 29010KT 29.7F 0:1| 0.0||19.9 0.000|| 1.30 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 0| 0| 0 110402/0600Z 96 29010KT 27.0F 0:1| 0.0||19.9 0.000|| 1.30 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 0| 0| 0 That would be a Crocus crusher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadojay Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 at 72, definitely much further north and east and not the amplification of 6Z, but a ton of energy sitting there... almost looks capable of producing a miller B bomb at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 NAM still doesnt want anything to do with the energy that GFS/Euro develop. Even the old ETA caught on to developing that now: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 Ok, but now you explained you're reasoning behind it. I don't think you can deny that some of the members are biased against posters who make negative snow comments, no matter how rationale their basis is in supporting it. comments such as "That model is wrong, my local met says it will be all rain" or any other comments which don't add anything to the convo and have no scientific backing behind them belong in the banter thread. Nobody will give you a hard time if you say "I don't think it will snow because the model consensus says that surface temps will be too warm....ect" but if all your going to do is come on and say I don't want snow and cry that it might, that's called trolling and doesn't belong here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadojay Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 NAM got too sheared out and looks like it's going to slide the energy south and offshore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 NAM got too sheared out and looks like it's going to slide the energy south and offshore. The evolution between the new NAM and the 6z GFS look very similar at 500mb through the first 48hrs. It seems like the main difference is that the energy is much more phased on the GFS showing two distinct systems. The NAM is loaded with energy but the trough is way too broad and north. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CooL Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 gfs has an 84 hr monster, nam has nothing but certainly enough energy and lighter fluid..we are only 3 days out now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadojay Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 The evolution between the new NAM and the 6z GFS look very similar at 500mb through the first 48hrs. It seems like the main difference is that the energy is much more phased on the GFS showing two distinct systems. The NAM is loaded with energy but the trough is way too broad and north. yea... the pattern screams potential... no doubt.. it's going to come down to the subtleties with how the pieces of energy come in from the Pacific... how strong they are.. the timing, any phasing, and whatnot.. it's clearly obvious that there is no agreement just by means of the drastic difference in timings that it wants to develop things and which pieces of energy are being focused on.... we all know this winter has had changes right up until game time, so plenty of time to watch things unfold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 When will all the pieces be on US soil? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 yea. nam looks different then its own guidance the previous few runs. instead of precip in the south sort of waiting for energy to dive from the northern plains into it, its more of just nothing in the south and everything is based upon the multiple pieces of energy diving down. the amplificaiton of the trough is delayed and just never gets its act together in time. gfs and esp EC midday runs should be fun... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadojay Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 When will all the pieces be on US soil? well, looking at the NAM, in about 24 - 36 hours or so... there is a ton of energy that looks to crash into British Columbia at that time, but the energy is very spread out and starts separating into several different pieces.. what we would want is for a consolidated vorticity maxima to dive more southward than eastward into the base of the trof to start driving height falls and produce more upper divergence on the lee side of the trof.. that'll get surface pressures to start falling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manny Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 The SREFS and NAM both came in kind of de-amplified and had trouble with the wave, but we'll see if the Euro or GFS hold serve from their previous runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha5 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 When will all the pieces be on US soil? In about a day or so, the energy that eventually shoots down from the plains is coming ashore soon. Being only 70 hours away, that should really be the last test with this storm. If we can get a snowy solution even after all pieces of energy are properly sampled, we'll be good to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadojay Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 in the case of the 6Z GFS, the energy which ultimately forms it's big storm actually is progged to come onshore on the Oregon coastline in about 12 hours or so. That energy looks to phase with another piece of energy a few hundred miles north which eventually comes together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 well, looking at the NAM, in about 24 - 36 hours or so... there is a ton of energy that looks to crash into British Columbia at that time, but the energy is very spread out and starts separating into several different pieces.. what we would want is for a consolidated vorticity maxima to dive more southward than eastward into the base of the trof to start driving height falls and produce more upper divergence on the lee side of the trof.. that'll get surface pressures to start falling. good point. the spread of where the northern energy dives down is very wide at the moment. some of the stronger guidance had/has it diving into OK/MO while weaker guidance like the NAM just now has it east of that. hence your points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.