Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,581
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Sirianni
    Newest Member
    Sirianni
    Joined

February 8 Storm Obs/Discussion


NoVaWx

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 850
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Heh, the NAM giveth. It's not unreasonable relly. Vort is getting itself together now and looking decent. I have 2 questions for the mets:

1. Decent spread in DP/surface temps, will that eat into the qpf or does the nam account for it?

2. Looks like 2 areas of vorticity. One near RIC and another in central PA. Is this something to even pay attention irt a potential fly in the qpf ointment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh, the NAM giveth. It's not unreasonable relly. Vort is getting itself together now and looking decent. I have 2 questions for the mets:

1. Decent spread in DP/surface temps, will that eat into the qpf or does the nam account for it?

2. Looks like 2 areas of vorticity. One near RIC and another in central PA. Is this something to even pay attention irt a potential fly in the qpf ointment?

1. QPF is an estimate of precipitation which reaches the ground surface (taking all of what you expect into account), how accurate it simulates those processes is the problem

2. I would say the main vort moves through south VA and then through central VA. The best vertical velocities transect our area, thus the heaviest QPF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. QPF is an estimate of precipitation which reaches the ground surface (taking all of what you expect into account), how accurate it simulates those processes is the problem

2. I would say the main vort moves through south VA and then through central VA. The best vertical velocities transect our area, thus the heaviest QPF.

Thanks Chris. I was pretty sure about the qpf question but my memory isn't what it used to be. I typically go by the rule of thumb to envision an even more reduced qpf outcome when there's a big spread in surface and dews. NAM usually ends up being high on the qpf regardless most of the time so it's safe to knock it back a bit even with a moist surface.

I was thinking that since the southern area of vorticity was clearly dominent that it wasn't much to worry about but I'm paranoid this year that if anything can cause an event to underperform then it will do just that. IIRC- similar setups and vort passages like this in the past do make for some good window watching no matter what. I would expect that if the nam is right we will see a nice period of big flakes and nice rates. I'm counting every event with snow falling as an "event" this year. If I stick with tracking accum I start to cry. lol

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...