Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

Banter and BS December 2011


Alpha5

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The JMA is BETTER than GFS at that range, so it is worth something. People do not give the JMA enough credit. It's accuracy is BETTER than the GFS at 8, 6 and 5 days out. Yes, it's solution is interesting but it is difficult to tell how much of that would be snow, so, I would not go as far as to say that is a massive snowstorm. It is VERY warm at 120 hrs, then it is VERY cold at 144 hrs, so the conclusion would be that at least some of that massive precipitation fell as snow, but there is no way to say how much of it. The solution is in line though with the massive solutions that both the Canadian and UKMET show, so it is definitely something that raises red flags. There is no question that there is the potential for a significant storm to affect our area on Thursday morning, it is just difficult at this point to nail down the details. My main point is however that the JMA itself is a very worthy model in the 8, 7, and 6 day range, and is in fact more accurate than the GFS at 8, 6 & 5 days. People don't give the JMA the credit it deserves. It absolutely hammered the October snowstorm better than any other model. It did not even waver when the European model wavered with that storm. Here is the verification link on NCEP's site http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/gmb/STATS_vsdb/index12z.html

Well the JMA shows a massive snowstorm at 144 FWIW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Models can't even get a pattern right 5 days out.

This is a strawman argument I hear a lot for invalidating models past a few days when they show soluations people don't like...but its not even a true argument.

Models almost certainly get the pattern right 5 days out...they just might not get the details right. What we look for in the long range ensembles are not details about whether a shortwave is too amped up or a 50/50 low trended weaker, that is the type of analysis you do inside of 5 days. In the long range we are looking for generalities such as low heights over the EPO region or an overwhelming +AO....these type of features are generally forecast pretty decently at day 10-12 by some of the more skilled ensemble packages. It doesn't mean it can't snow when they show bad features, its just that in the mean, you would forecast above average temps and below average chances for snow.

Occasionally the pattern will be very volatile and the ensembles will change larger scale features inside of 10 days. However, in our current setup, some of these features are quite stable...esp the big +AO, so I wouldn't expect that to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a strawman argument I hear a lot for invalidating models past a few days when they show soluations people don't like...but its not even a true argument.

Models almost certainly get the pattern right 5 days out...they just might not get the details right. What we look for in the long range ensembles are not details about whether a shortwave is too amped up or a 50/50 low trended weaker, that is the type of analysis you do inside of 5 days. In the long range we are looking for generalities such as low heights over the EPO region or an overwhelming +AO....these type of features are generally forecast pretty decently at day 10-12 by some of the more skilled ensemble packages. It doesn't mean it can't snow when they show bad features, its just that in the mean, you would forecast above average temps and below average chances for snow.

Occasionally the pattern will be very volatile and the ensembles will change larger scale features inside of 10 days. However, in our current setup, some of these features are quite stable...esp the big +AO, so I wouldn't expect that to change.

The GEFS and the Euro ensembles are world apart. What's making them so different? On the ensembles, the AO and NAO are still positive. Is it the EPO?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a strawman argument I hear a lot for invalidating models past a few days when they show soluations people don't like...but its not even a true argument.

Models almost certainly get the pattern right 5 days out...they just might not get the details right. What we look for in the long range ensembles are not details about whether a shortwave is too amped up or a 50/50 low trended weaker, that is the type of analysis you do inside of 5 days. In the long range we are looking for generalities such as low heights over the EPO region or an overwhelming +AO....these type of features are generally forecast pretty decently at day 10-12 by some of the more skilled ensemble packages. It doesn't mean it can't snow when they show bad features, its just that in the mean, you would forecast above average temps and below average chances for snow.

Occasionally the pattern will be very volatile and the ensembles will change larger scale features inside of 10 days. However, in our current setup, some of these features are quite stable...esp the big +AO, so I wouldn't expect that to change.

The GEFS and the Euro ensembles are world apart. What's making them so different? On the ensembles, the AO and NAO are still positive. Is it the EPO?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 6z GFS hour 384 actually looks quite similar to the early February 2010 disaster:

post-1753-0-50857600-1322927455.png

The GFS is really cold for the long range when it has a bias of overdoing cold, yet the ECM quickly becomes warm, the opposite of the GFS. Especially after looking at that hour 192 GFS comparison and how awful it's been with the NAO forecasts, I'd rather side with the ECM for the 10-day range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GEFS and the Euro ensembles are world apart. What's making them so different? On the ensembles, the AO and NAO are still positive. Is it the EPO?

GEFS try and keep a more robust -EPO longer than the Euro ensembles. Most of their differences are after D9. I always tend to side with the Euro ensembles when the two are at odds unless there is a good reason not to. The GEFS have been way too cold several times already in their long range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just checked the verification stats on NCEP and the JMA is now running BETTER than the GFS at 5, 6, and 8 days, just behind the Euro and UKMET. Wow. Talk about not giving the model enough credit. Here is the link http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/gmb/STATS_vsdb/index12z.html. People really don't give this model anywhere near enough credit. It nailed the October storm better than any other model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 6z GFS hour 384 actually looks quite similar to the early February 2010 disaster:

post-1753-0-50857600-1322927455.png

The GFS is really cold for the long range when it has a bias of overdoing cold, yet the ECM quickly becomes warm, the opposite of the GFS. Especially after looking at that hour 192 GFS comparison and how awful it's been with the NAO forecasts, I'd rather side with the ECM for the 10-day range.

Not too sure if I'd compare it with that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not too sure if I'd compare it with that...

That storm couldn't move north because of the blocking. This time, there will be no blocking to make the storm stay to the south. If the storm forms, it will most likely either be a good track for us or we will most likely be on the wrong side. Still have time to figure this one out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It did exactly what the better UKMET and JMA models already did. The UKMET did this on its run 12 hours ago and the JMA did this on it's run 24 hours ago. Even the Canadian model did this 12 hours ago. Yes, the GFS is a terrible model but we already know this. If want old info turn to the GFS, it will always give you the information that the JMA and UKMET and ususally the EC gave you a day ago. Someone please fix the GFS it stinks.

What is the gfs doing now? God awful model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It did exactly what the better UKMET and JMA models already did. The UKMET did this on its run 12 hours ago and the JMA did this on it's run 24 hours ago. Even the Canadian model did this 12 hours ago. Yes, the GFS is a terrible model but we already know this. If want old info turn to the GFS, it will always give you the information that the JMA and UKMET and ususally the EC gave you a day ago. Someone please fix the GFS it stinks.

12z looks like a raging wind and rain storm for the 8th

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Produces a 984mb bomb over Binghamton, NY at 120 hrs. and 978mb over Maine at 126 hrs. Now, if we can just get that further east. Let's wait for the Canadian, UKMET, Euro, and JMA to come out to find what will really happen. The GFS always seems to give old info.

Still would give awesome winds lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That storm couldn't move north because of the blocking. This time, there will be no blocking to make the storm stay to the south. If the storm forms, it will most likely either be a good track for us or we will most likely be on the wrong side. Still have time to figure this one out.

There is no comparsion between February 6, 2010 blizzard with STJ-El Nino juiced compared to now. And, no, the blocking was not the issue with February 6, 2010, the issue was the Polar Vortex lobe that was north of Maine. The block helped us on February 10, of course.

February 6, 2010 was a beast that was just going to maul the entire coast with 24-36 inches of snow... The models had 3" to 3.5" QPF for DC and Balitmore, with Philly it was 2 to 2.5', clearly mesoscale banding helped PHL get over 28 inches of snow, with the 'burbs gettng 30+ For the PHL area, February 6 2010 was exactly like January 1996, only a bit less duration. No doubt in my mind, February 5-6, 2010 would have topped '96 total for PHL if it lasted a bit longer.

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...