LocoAko Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 what I'm saying is, the 500mb eveolution supports a more organized system then its showing. I'm almost wondering if it would be better to have it slow down so much that the third piece of energy has a chance of phasing in with it. Because the 500hPa is clearly what the model "meant" to show and somehow the physics got messed up in how it calculates its perceived surface reflection, right? I hate when that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorEaster27 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Because the 500hPa is clearly what the model "meant" to show and somehow the physics got messed up in how it calculates its perceived surface reflection, right? I hate when that happens. yea it messed up the calculations, it will get it better next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 yea it messed up the calculations, it will get it better next time. It forgot to carry the 1, stupid model... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Because the 500hPa is clearly what the model "meant" to show and somehow the physics got messed up in how it calculates its perceived surface reflection, right? I hate when that happens. Not exactly....but I don't think I was alone in thinking that at hr 27 we were on our way to a big coastal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 From Mt. Holly AFD, states why they haven't gone with watches over the north. I bet many thought it was more of a confidence issue. AN ACCUMULATING SNOW IS LOOKING MORE LIKELY WITH THE EXACT TOTALS STILL SOMEWHAT UNCERTAIN. WE WILL HOLD ON A WATCH ATTM, GIVEN THAT THE TOTALS MAY NOT GO OVER CRITERIA UNTIL THE 5TH PERIOD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocoAko Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Not exactly....but I don't think I was alone in thinking that at hr 27 we were on our way to a big coastal That's fine... I guess a lesson in why it is silly to extrapolate a model outwards from its current frame. But you made it sound as if the surface reflection was "wrong" based on the 500hPa map, which is said a lot around here for reasons beyond me. As the poster/meteorologist 'dtk' has said: I shouldn't even need to address this silliness regarding surface reflection and 500 hPa evolution ....QPF is one thing, especially in a multi-day/medium range forecast...NWP models are going to produce fields that they evolve in a dynamically consistent manner (there could be issues related to sub-grid scale processes and parameterizations)....but this notion that "the surface looks off" is rubbish. 500 hPa is NOT the only level to look (the atmosphere is in fact a three dimensional fluid) at nor is it the "driver" for everything that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 That's fine... I guess a lesson in why it is silly to extrapolate a model outwards from its current frame. But you made it sound as if the surface reflection was "wrong" based on the 500hPa map, which is said a lot around here for reasons beyond me. As the poster/meteorologist 'dtk' has said: Point taken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 It forgot to carry the 1, stupid model... did noreaster27 predict that 1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzucker Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 That's fine... I guess a lesson in why it is silly to extrapolate a model outwards from its current frame. But you made it sound as if the surface reflection was "wrong" based on the 500hPa map, which is said a lot around here for reasons beyond me. As the poster/meteorologist 'dtk' has said: But if you think the 500mb set-up at 30 hours supports an independently formed coastal with the strong s/w crashing into the trough, and the model refuses to show this because it puts too much emphasis into the first surface low, couldn't this be a case where H5 trumps what is being displayed verbatim at the surface? If the NAM is trending towards the other globals at H5 but refuses to project the same progression of the two systems, then I think it's correct to say H5 doesn't support the surface, or at least what the other models believe the surface should look like given the pattern in the upper atmosphere. Also, one can certainly question QPF based on H5; with the last storm, everyone said the NAM might be heavy on QPF since we didn't have a closed H5 or H7 low, but rather a disorganized look in the mid-levels. So, I don't think it's totally rubbish to make projections off the model's H5 pattern while disregarding the surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 But if you think the 500mb set-up at 30 hours supports an independently formed coastal with the strong s/w crashing into the trough, and the model refuses to show this because it puts too much emphasis into the first surface low, couldn't this be a case where H5 trumps what is being displayed verbatim at the surface? If the NAM is trending towards the other globals at H5 but refuses to project the same progression of the two systems, then I think it's correct to say H5 doesn't support the surface, or at least what the other models believe the surface should look like given the pattern in the upper atmosphere. Also, one can certainly question QPF based on H5; with the last storm, everyone said the NAM might be heavy on QPF since we didn't have a closed H5 or H7 low, but rather a disorganized look in the mid-levels. So, I don't think it's totally rubbish to make projections off the model's H5 pattern while disregarding the surface. Yeah-- obviously this won't be the case 100% of the time, but we've had many cases (including some this year).... where a pro met said the model was wrong based on H5 and the met ended up correct. That's why a met is a person with an actual brain and a model is, well, a computer simulation lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 RGEM has a 986 low just east of LI. It shows a lot of rain for the area. http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/data/model_forecast/600_100.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 12z RGEM.. Looks like a lot of rain: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 12z RGEM precip at 48: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 RGEM has a 986 low just east of LI. It shows a lot of rain for the area. http://www.weatherof...ast/600_100.gif Is that very much in line with what the Euro showed last night? It appears we have a building consensus 48 hrs before the event-- par for the course lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 The overwhelming consensus seems to be towards a more wrapped up noreaster istead of what the NAM is showing. It makes you wonder how much longer the NAM can go before joining the party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonli18t Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 What are QPF amounts? We could use one big rainstorm to clean up remaining sand and salt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 The overwhelming consensus seems to be towards a more wrapped up noreaster istead of what the NAM is showing. It makes you wonder how much longer the NAM can go before joining the party. It's slowly coming around-- my guess is by 12z tomorrow at the latest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Is that very much in line with what the Euro showed last night? It appears we have a building consensus 48 hrs before the event-- par for the course lol. RGEM has about 35mm-40mm of rain, so about 1.40" of rain. It appears to be east of euro and way east of GFS but temps are still warm. Some areas of SNE, especially near the cape are over 50mm of precip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzucker Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Is that very much in line with what the Euro showed last night? It appears we have a building consensus 48 hrs before the event-- par for the course lol. The RGEM is a close call for the northern suburbs; a storm bombing south of Montauk is a great signal for a snowfall here. Even the 0z ECM ended with 2-4" of snow for the suburbs and probably 1-3" on grassy surfaces in the City. It is April but I would take my chances with any track SE of LI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 What are QPF amounts? We could use one big rainstorm to clean up remaining sand and salt. Last I looked at it, it was just under 2" Dont forget the 60 mph winds either lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 The RGEM is a close call for the northern suburbs; a storm bombing south of Montauk is a great signal for a snowfall here. Even the 0z ECM ended with 2-4" of snow for the suburbs and probably 1-3" on grassy surfaces in the City. It is April but I would take my chances with any track SE of LI. The funny thing that is the ideal track for here also. But the airmass just isnt cold enough anymore. Most of the time we can stay all snow here even with a track over eastern LI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 I could go for a sick wind/rain storm followed by 50s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzucker Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 RGEM has about 35mm-40mm of rain, so about 1.40" of rain. It appears to be east of euro and way east of GFS but temps are still warm. Some areas of SNE, especially near the cape are over 50mm of precip. Temps always run a bit warm on the RGEM...remember, the Canadians aren't concerned with temps since 99% of their winter precip is snow anyway. I don't understand how it could be east of the 0z ECM with such heavy QPF, and show nothing but rain here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonli18t Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Last I looked at it, it was just under 2" Dont forget the 60 mph winds either lol. I didn't realize this event had that wind potential, haven't been paying much attention. I love a good noreaster, even when it's rain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadojay Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 we better have some insane snowfall rates to get any accumulations going... i think even grass surfaces are gonna be tough to accumulate.. that snow event from last week.. I had some pretty heavy snowfall rates and it was still not even accumulating on grassy surfaces.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 I could go for a sick wind/rain storm followed by 50s. Be honest, you would have loved 10" of snow followed by 70s the following week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Be honest, you would have loved 10" of snow followed by 70s the following week yep, so long as it stayed 70s (or at least 60s+). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 yea seriously...a nice wrapped up storm with rain would be nice but i dont want folks up north and close to the rivers being flooded out again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Temps always run a bit warm on the RGEM...remember, the Canadians aren't concerned with temps since 99% of their winter precip is snow anyway. I don't understand how it could be east of the 0z ECM with such heavy QPF, and show nothing but rain here. I suspect it's because there just isn't much cold air around. Note that temps the last couple of days have run well above guidance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 If any of you guys remember what it was like in the late 80s, early 90s, late 90s, etc-- we had quite a few storms with the "ideal" track for snow and it rained all the way up into New England-- even in the middle of winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.