A-L-E-X Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 agreed earthlight this is drastically different than the look of some of the other models at same time frame sans the EURO which I didn't actually see but heard you guys talking about the much better PV orientation. I hate to get pulled back in here, and it is the 84hr nam but it sure looks a lot better than the last couple runs. 84 hr is the start of the NAM's good range.... inside 48 hours its awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_AR_ Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 Looks like the potential is there for a good track, to me at least. Trough going negative, PV split. Yesterday's 12Z GFS for comparison: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weathergun Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 The NAM has jumped back tremendously in the right direction. The PV is in a much better position and the trough axis is 150-200 miles further west. Might not pull it off verbatim but at the least it's going to be right off the coast. I agree. I think extrapolated, the storm would be further north and stronger Also note there is good piece of the PV left behind that would severe as 50/50 low. And would help force the trough turn negative sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hazwoper Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 12z NAM at 84 and 06Z GFS at 90 trough further west and heights higher along east coast. The PV split is helping with the height rise. That and the eastern lobe is further east obviously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaner587 Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 2 things can be said... 1)its the 84 hr NAM and it is likely wrong, mostly because of the lack of other model support but also because it is at this range that it tends to be pretty awful. 2)first the EURO last night and now 12z NAM, the PV orientation is becoming better, albeit for now or until more models say otherwise, and unlike the euro it doesn't have a dead southern stream so it looks like it would be decent at LEAST for coastal areas. We'll see if we can get some good trends today but as many said last night it isn't time to throw in the towel just yet but the trends last night were very disconcerting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TKFJ Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 12z NAM at 84 and 06Z GFS at 90 trough further west and heights higher along east coast. The PV split is helping with the height rise The big difference between the two is the orientation of the PV (I think it is the PV), on the GFS it is horizontal, on the NAM more vertical. What affect does that have on the overall system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 2 things can be said... 1)its the 84 hr NAM and it is likely wrong, mostly because of the lack of other model support but also because it is at this range that it tends to be pretty awful. 2)first the EURO last night and now 12z NAM, the PV orientation is becoming better, albeit for now or until more models say otherwise, and unlike the euro it doesn't have a dead southern stream so it looks like it would be decent at LEAST for coastal areas. We'll see if we can get some good trends today but as many said last night it isn't time to throw in the towel just yet but the trends last night were very disconcerting. 1) no 84 hrs is the threshold of the NAM's range where you have to look at it seriously.... of course we need a trend lol. 48 hours is where it really excells. It has some suppport with the 6z GFS..... lets see where the 12z goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_AR_ Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 2 things can be said... 1)its the 84 hr NAM and it is likely wrong, mostly because of the lack of other model support but also because it is at this range that it tends to be pretty awful. 2)first the EURO last night and now 12z NAM, the PV orientation is becoming better, albeit for now or until more models say otherwise, and unlike the euro it doesn't have a dead southern stream so it looks like it would be decent at LEAST for coastal areas. We'll see if we can get some good trends today but as many said last night it isn't time to throw in the towel just yet but the trends last night were very disconcerting. I mostly agree. 84 hr NAM is to be taken with a grain of salt. I wouldn't say it doesn't have support though yet, as it is one of the first models of the 12Z suite to come out, so we dont have anything with fresh data to compare it to yet. I think the key here is getting that PV to split and be in a decent orientation to allow the trough to go negative soon enough and bring the storm up the coast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_AR_ Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 1) no 84 hrs is the threshold of the NAM's range where you have to look at it seriously.... of course we need a trend lol. 48 hours is where it really excells. It has some suppport with the 6z GFS..... lets see where the 12z goes. No, 84 hrs is the furthest out the NAM goes. It is to be considered at this range, but as you said much more so within about 48 hrs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 Not that it matter much, but the latest ETA is also more favorable then before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaner587 Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 1) no 84 hrs is the threshold of the NAM's range where you have to look at it seriously.... of course we need a trend lol. 48 hours is where it really excells. It has some suppport with the 6z GFS..... lets see where the 12z goes. 84hr NAM is just not good I'm sorry there is no denying that, I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me on that one. And 6z GFS did look better but the amount of variables is starting to make my head spin lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_AR_ Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 The big difference between the two is the orientation of the PV (I think it is the PV), on the GFS it is horizontal, on the NAM more vertical. What affect does that have on the overall system? If the PV is too strong and southeast, it can push the storm out to sea. If we get it to split and/or phase with our system, it can allow the storm to come up the coast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 84hr NAM is just not good I'm sorry there is no denying that, I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me on that one. And 6z GFS did look better but the amount of variables is starting to make my head spin lol Sorry for not being more clear-- I mean anything beyond 84 hrs on the NAM is fantasy range, starting at 84 hrs you start looking at it and trying to establish trends with future runs-- by 48 hours it becomes very good. I remember the NAM didnt catch onto the northward movement of the 12/19/09 storm until right at 48 hours. The earlier runs had it missing NYC. Of course, 2/6/10 took care of that lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weathergun Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 84hr NAM is just not good I'm sorry there is no denying that, I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me on that one. And 6z GFS did look better but the amount of variables is starting to make my head spin lol I don't usually trust the NAM or SREF too much beyond 48hrs. But it's a little interesting to me that they both shifted somewhat back in the right direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 84hr NAM is just not good I'm sorry there is no denying that, I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me on that one. And 6z GFS did look better but the amount of variables is starting to make my head spin lol The NAM at 84 tends to be over amplified most of the time with storm systems so its not a surprise to me right now to see it be more west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowanBrandon Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 84hr NAM is just not good I'm sorry there is no denying that, I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me on that one. And 6z GFS did look better but the amount of variables is starting to make my head spin lol Wait, do you mean it doesn't look good on this run, or that it's not good in general? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaner587 Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 The NAM at 84 tends to be over amplified most of the time with storm systems so its not a surprise to me right now to see it be more west. I agree... and alex, the nam only goes to 84 hrs...so I'm not sure what you mean by beyond 84 hrs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 The counterplay of all the variables on the models is like a 4 way chess game lol.... and everything needs to work out just right (small margin of error) for this to go our way. Sort of like a blind man trying to thread a needle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaner587 Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 Wait, do you mean it doesn't look good on this run, or that it's not good in general? sorry, should've been more clear. Looks good on this run, is likely wrong, may be on to something, and I just dont think the threat looks good overall but thats obvious at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkrangers Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 Sorry for not being more clear-- I mean anything beyond 84 hrs on the NAM is fantasy range, starting at 84 hrs you start looking at it and trying to establish trends with future runs-- by 48 hours it becomes very good. I remember the NAM didnt catch onto the northward movement of the 12/19/09 storm until right at 48 hours. The earlier runs had it missing NYC. Of course, 2/6/10 took care of that lol. Anything beyond 84 hours on the NAM is doesn't exist range, because it doesn't run beyond 84 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_AR_ Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 The NAM at 84 tends to be over amplified most of the time with storm systems so its not a surprise to me right now to see it be more west. Good point, but it is nice to see how it handles larger features such as the PV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 I agree... and alex, the nam only goes to 84 hrs...so I'm not sure what you mean by beyond 84 hrs? Ive seen people project NAM output beyond 84 hours though....not sure what tools they used to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weathergun Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 The NAM at 84 tends to be over amplified most of the time with storm systems so its not a surprise to me right now to see it be more west. I agree. Getting in it within 48hrs or having more model support is the key here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaner587 Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 Good point, but it is nice to see how it handles larger features such as the PV. right, and its amplification, at least in my limited met knowledge shouldn't influence the the PV as much as we saw from 00z and 6z to 12z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkrangers Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 Ive seen people project NAM output beyond 84 hours though....not sure what tools they used to do that. The DGEX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eduggs Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 84hr NAM is just not good I'm sorry there is no denying that, I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me on that one. And 6z GFS did look better but the amount of variables is starting to make my head spin lol This might be strictly true, but the 84hr chart sequentially follows the 81hr, which follows 78hr, and so on... and I think the 60hr NAM already looked pretty encouraging. So this has to have some value. Also, when I compare today's 12z 84hr NAM charts to yesterday's 12z GFS jackpot run, h5 is comparable enough (specifically the 102hr panel) to convince me that the NAM is in the same ballpark. Interestingly, the NAM clearly has more northern stream cooperation than yesterday's GFS. That could hinder development initially (compared to yesterday's prog), but should ultimately help if it's right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 Good point, but it is nice to see how it handles larger features such as the PV. It did correctly get the evolution of the PV to an extent last year in December on some of its runs beyond 48 hours, not all o them, but some of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_AR_ Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 Ive seen people project NAM output beyond 84 hours though....not sure what tools they used to do that. DGEX is an extension of the NAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattinpa Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 sorry, should've been more clear. Looks good on this run, is likely wrong, may be on to something, and I just dont think the threat looks good overall but thats obvious at this point. If the Euro looks better today, wouldn't you feel better? There's still time for trending in the right direction, at least for a moderate event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaner587 Posted December 15, 2010 Share Posted December 15, 2010 Ive seen people project NAM output beyond 84 hours though....not sure what tools they used to do that. DGEX...its run on the 84hr NAM grid with some input or something from the GFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.