Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

Severe wx potential Wednesday


free_man

Recommended Posts

Flipping through the BUFKIT soundings on Wednesday on the GFS is pretty wild. Looks like the EML will help lid convection until we start getting the synoptic scale lift in here from that 500 mb shortwave.

Fairly strong winds aloft with a backed boundary layer flow look good. I'm worried about either overnight convection that covers us with a lot of cloud cover during the day and/or that convection driving steep mid level lapse rates to crap.

Also if we get a pre frontal trough to swing through too early and winds wind up veering we could dry out the boundary layer too fast. Something to watch for.

Ryan, where are the favorable spots for SVR weather in this setup... pretty much all of new england.. or like W CT, MA, etc...? As of now at least.

Also, is this more of a late afternoon deal or night time(8-10). Looking at the GFS, it looks like the storms swing through around 00z

EDIT: in response below, what would cause them to die out for eastern areas? diurnal cooling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Just remember that diffluence doesn't necessarily mean there is net divergence. You actually have speed convergence there coming out of the base of the trough as the winds weaken and the air "piles up". You can plot the div/conv on the Plym Vortex site I believe though.

Yeah I think I was assuming there was net divergence I just went back and looked at the image and I see what you mean.

I actually think you can plot that on there...should have done that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NAM still really insists on drying things out in the mid levels with the passage of the mid level front and then dry air mixing into the lower levels and the sfc which would vastly reduce instability. The shear still looks pretty great though. As long as we don't see the dry air crap this could be pretty good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul, couldn't the dry air also increase severity of a storm with higher winds?

Well the dry air in the mid levels would help but you don't want the air to become too dry or otherwise updrafts are really going to struggle...unless you had some pretty insane lift. They would get choked off.

However, in this case with the dry air mixing to the lower levels and the sfc it's going to lower the dewpoints and that is going to vastly decrease instability...this is why the NAM struggles to generate much more than 1500 J/KG of SBcape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still like the like of the GFS better...

NAM has been slower than the GFS on both the 18z and 00z runs compared to 18z gfs...shear looks less impressive too and mid-level gradient is located further northwest.

Overall the GFS is certainly better.

The NAM and GFS still have some major differences...the NAM has been somewhat all over the place with this and the past few days the NAM has not done well. The GFS has remained rather consistent, and if anything has been getting more impressive, especially with the shear.

SPC SREF probs have also been getting better as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overall the GFS is certainly better.

The NAM and GFS still have some major differences...the NAM has been somewhat all over the place with this and the past few days the NAM has not done well. The GFS has remained rather consistent, and if anything has been getting more impressive, especially with the shear.

SPC SREF probs have also been getting better as well.

Can u post the link to the spc sref probs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are lapse rates so meager if we have this EML? Here is the sounding at 48 for my area, White Plains, doesn't look impressive to me:

The NAM is not really bringing much of an EML into here...the GFS has been more impressive in that regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol nice hodograph. Wish lapse rates were steeper... instability is pretty meager.

Yeah I was just looking at the lapse rates...not the best.

The instability is meager but it isn't all too bad.

Just awaiting to see what the GFS shows...if the gFS continues the EML look and with more instability I'm not sure what way to lean...maybe in the middle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NAM is not really bringing much of an EML into here...the GFS has been more impressive in that regard.

At the current moment I would be inclined to side with the GFS considering it has some good support from the SREF means...which have increased 700-500mb lapse rates over the region the past 3 model cycles.

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...