Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,609
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

April 1st-2nd Nor'Easter Potential


Snow_Miser

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Seems like the NAM might still have trouble with interaction between the multiple shortwaves. Closer though, but bombs out too late.

Yup. And it never redevelops a new SLP between the first and second shortwaves, which is very suspicious IMO. The first low center that forms in response to the 1st shortwave just meanders off the east coast for two days. It's much more likely this first surface system slides east and dissipates over the Atlantic before a new center forms in response to the sharpening 2nd wave somewhere in the SE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup. And it never redevelops a new SLP between the first and second shortwaves, which is very suspicious IMO. The first low center that forms in response to the 1st shortwave just meanders off the east coast for two days. It's much more likely this first surface system slides east and dissipates over the Atlantic before a new center forms in response to the sharpening 2nd wave somewhere in the SE.

Nice explanation

almost looks like the energy in the SE merges with the remnant low that stalls off our coast :rolleyes: . When meanwhile a new center should have been forming off the SE coast. The Nam certainly wont be leading the way for this storm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice explanation

almost looks like the energy in the SE merges with the remnant low that stalls off our coast :rolleyes: . When meanwhile a new center should have been forming off the SE coast. The Nam certainly wont be leading the way for this storm

I just think the NAM is totally missing the synoptic evolution of this storm; it is basically using a reinvigorated old low instead of forming an entirely new system much farther south along the boundary. That low just sits around on the NAM off the Northeast Coast and then suddenly blows up...this doesn't agree with any of the globals which seem to be showing more defined separation between the systems. In a sense, the NAM is showing a scenario much like the 1/12 storm, where we had a dying Gulf Low that came to life when a shortwave from the OH Valley moved in, but in this case it seems to be erroneous because none of the other guidance has a similar development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Discount all models that don't bury us.

This :thumbsup:

We need to create a new model-- let's call it the Tristate Model Suite-- TMS runs every hour on the hour and always gives us a foot plus of snow one day every week from December through April (preferably with lots of thunder and lightning) and on the days it's not snowing it's brutally cold. In the spring we get severe weather outbreaks every day between 4 PM and 9 PM. Then in the summer it's over 90 every day with 100 once a week and we get hit with a TS/Hurricane once a week from August through October. Such is the output of the TMS.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good seeing the entire crew here for the 00z drama...one of the last ones this year.

With that in mind, where is metfan when we need him with the South African model?

I need to get ready for when he posts the KMA by rotating my monitor upside down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was wearing a neck brace for two weeks after Dec 26 trying to interpret what the model was saying

:(

(3/29/2011 11:31:23 PM) Me: lol John is calling for you in the model thread

(3/29/2011 11:31:34 PM) Ant: Tell him I can't post tonight

(3/29/2011 11:31:38 PM) Ant: im still 5 posted

(3/29/2011 11:31:42 PM) Ant: and I have no more posts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd discount the entire 00Z NAM.

0Z RGEM has the surface low at Wilmington, NC.

I agree. I think the RGEM looks much more reasonable. Assuming the shortwave doesn't end up being much weaker with less vorticity, there really should be a second area of low pressure to the downstream side of the trof (upper divergence area).

But I'm not ready to discount the basic idea that the eventual coastal low might slide too far east due to wave interference and timing issues. That could be the viable NAM signal here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. I think the RGEM looks much more reasonable. Assuming the shortwave doesn't end up being much weaker with less vorticity, there really should be a second area of low pressure to the downstream side of the trof (upper divergence area).

But I'm not ready to discount the basic idea that the eventual coastal low might slide too far east due to wave interference and timing issues. That could be the viable NAM signal here.

Ukmet looks good too....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. I think the RGEM looks much more reasonable. Assuming the shortwave doesn't end up being much weaker with less vorticity, there really should be a second area of low pressure to the downstream side of the trof (upper divergence area).

But I'm not ready to discount the basic idea that the eventual coastal low might slide too far east due to wave interference and timing issues. That could be the viable NAM signal here.

I remain much more concerned about this going east than I am about it going west. The RGEM actually looks more similar to the 12z GFS height fields.

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...