Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,586
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    23Yankee
    Newest Member
    23Yankee
    Joined

Weekend Storm Discussion 2/18-2/19


stormtracker

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 907
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'd actually prefer the members to be a little SE of the op at this juncture.... Never want to walk the screw line of a north trend up until the event

Don't you think any further NW will also amp up the 850s? Unless is bombs further to maybe 992...not sure the correlation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting a reasonably high QPF event is pretty important IMO given the air mass. We will waste some on rain/nonaccumulating snow. The modeled qpf will probably be too high and higher QPF implies more dynamics, heavier precip. I'd like to see us in the 0.5-1.0" range.

Looks like to me we're only accumulating about half the qpf given bl.... Definitely going to need 1" qpf to be modeled to get a moderate event unless the gfs is just busting on the low level warmth which it could be

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting a reasonably high QPF event is pretty important IMO given the air mass. We will waste some on rain/nonaccumulating snow. The modeled qpf will probably be too high and higher QPF implies more dynamics, heavier precip. I'd like to see us in the 0.5-1.0" range.

With this pattern, I think that will be very tough to get and don't see this as a storm likely to get much farther north than us. I also composited all the 4 inch or greater events since 1950 during la nina years and the composite does not look like this pattern. That doesn't mean we can't see snow but is sort of a flag about getting too excited about the potential for a big one. I know you know that but Rob G whoever he still has higher probabilities than I think is warranted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like to me we're only accumulating about half the qpf given bl.... Definitely going to need 1" qpf to be modeled to get a moderate event unless the gfs is just busting on the low level warmth which it could be

half is generous on the 18z GFS...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for a Major storm that beings on Saturday night or Sunday morning....You should know by Wednesday 00z that its coming. What big storm do you remember that was only modeled 2 days out where Thursday there was nothing...Friday showed a storm and then the storm started 48-60 hours later?

When do you remember such wildly varying solutions at 5 days. When has an event been properly modeled at 5 days this year, and have that solution be reasonably close to what happens? These solutions aren't varying by just a little bit either. Have you already forgotten two weeks ago? Remember when the GFS and the Euro were running a low up through the plains, and HPC said they thought it would end up being a low transfer to the NC coast? They said that 7 days in advance. Did we have a low in Iowa on that one?

Is the 18z gfs not evidence enough for you? It's just a bit different from the previous run, wouldn't you say? Would you feel good about it showing a major storm with you in the bullseye right now? You may be right. It may lock on tonight and never waver. But, no disrespect to you or ravensrule, I think I'll listen to the pros, and accept what to me would seem to be a very logical position to take given the model tendencies and performance lately, and wait until later in the week before I get too excited or depressed.

Edit: It also depends upon what you are calling major. If you're talking a 4-6 that's one thing. If anyone here is envisioning a PDIII, I think you're dreaming. If it's a 4-6, to answer your question, I take you back to 1-30-2010. The 6z runs on Friday gave us nothing. By 6PM saturday, we had a region wide 4-7 inch snow on the ground. And that was on a storm that had been reasonably constistently modeled for several days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With this pattern, I think that will be very tough to get and don't see this as a storm likely to get much farther north than us. I also composited all the 4 inch or greater events since 1950 during la nina years and the composite does not look like this pattern. That doesn't mean we can't see snow but is sort of a flag about getting too excited about the potential for a big one. I know you know that but Rob G whoever he still has higher probabilities than I think is warranted.

I don't disagree which is why a 1-3" event might be more likely if anything. If I saw .75" qpf modeled consistently up to the event it probably implies a 3-6" storm. I think if we did a composite for DCA 2"-5" events it would probably not look as pretty as the bigger event composite as there would be more spread. It might show similar anomaly placement but I suspect the anomaly means would be weaker. I think even if we are just looking for a 3-5" storm for metro DC we want to see at least 0.5" QPF modeled and maybe more. I'll stick with my my WAG 1st guess of 2-4" I made yesterday before the euro ran.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

108 GEFS 1008 L near TLH, or slightly north near AL/GA/FL border

Dual low at 120? 1007 L about 200 miles east or so of Norfolk, but a 1008 closed contour shows up 200 or so miles east of the SC/NC border.

Def S and E of the OP though, however

CoastalWx doesn't think too much of them. His post is over in the NE forum. I don't know how to link specific posts.

Edit: I don't really know why. A few of them look good, especially for NE. I think I counted 3 that make the full turn up the coast. The run to run changes are amazing, op and ens. These models seem to me to be very sophisticated so that would imply, I think, a very complex set of circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When do you remember such wildly varying solutions at 5 days. When has an event been properly modeled at 5 days this year, and have that solution be reasonably close to what happens? These solutions aren't varying by just a little bit either. Have you already forgotten two weeks ago? Remember when the GFS and the Euro were running a low up through the plains, and HPC said they thought it would end up being a low transfer to the NC coast? They said that 7 days in advance. Did we have a low in Iowa on that one?

Is the 18z gfs not evidence enough for you? It's just a bit different from the previous run, wouldn't you say? Would you feel good about it showing a major storm with you in the bullseye right now? You may be right. It may lock on tonight and never waver. But, no disrespect to you or ravensrule, I think I'll listen to the pros, and accept what to me would seem to be a very logical position to take given the model tendencies and performance lately, and wait until later in the week before I get too excited or depressed.

Edit: It also depends upon what you are calling major. If you're talking a 4-6 that's one thing. If anyone here is envisioning a PDIII, I think you're dreaming. If it's a 4-6, to answer your question, I take you back to 1-30-2010. The 6z runs on Friday gave us nothing. By 6PM saturday, we had a region wide 4-7 inch snow on the ground. And that was on a storm that had been reasonably constistently modeled for several days.

Given the pattern if people are looking (foolishly) for a 6-12" event we are going to have to see a real bombed out solution with voluminous QPF I would think. Probably in the 1.25"+ range. Getting fringed isn't a great solution with this air mass in late February for a significant event. You pretty much wanted to be pasted flush with a moisture laden bomb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the pattern if people are looking (foolishly) for a 6-12" event we are going to have to see a real bombed out solution with voluminous QPF I would think. Probably in the 1.25"+ range. Getting fringed isn't a great solution with this air mass in late February for a significant event. You pretty much wanted to be pasted flush with a moisture laden bomb.

I agree with you. I just want to see that solution starting Friday morning, getting better with each run until Saturday afternoon at which time I become to scared to turn on a computer or watch a radar on TV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you. I just want to see that solution starting Friday morning, getting better with each run until Saturday afternoon at which time I become to scared to turn on a computer or watch a radar on TV.

Ha. I just want to see a 2-4" event but will take Anything. There have been a number of decent late Feb events that were well less than 4" at DCA. 2/24/05, 2/28/05, 2/25/07, 2/22/01 are a few. I think anyone would lock in any of those storms in their backyard on the spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone is going to give cred to the 18z op, then, at still 114-126 hours out, I'd think you have to give some to the ensembles. 4 of those, not including the op, have a solution that is better than the op. But, then again, those things are doing a bit of flip-flopping as well. Hard to know what to think at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone is going to give cred to the 18z op, then, at still 114-126 hours out, I'd think you have to give some to the ensembles. 4 of those, not including the op, have a solution that is better than the op. But, then again, those things are doing a bit of flip-flopping as well. Hard to know what to think at this point.

remember, as someone posted, they changed the programming or something with the GEFS at 12Z

I'm not certain if we can trust them as they may be better or worse than before

Link to comment
Share on other sites

remember, as someone posted, they changed the programming or something with the GEFS at 12Z

I'm not certain if we can trust them as they may be better or worse than before

there is absolutely no reason to believe they will not be an improvement...what do you think EMC does...plans a random update and implements...in reality, these updates are tested and verified off-line for months before the public ever sees them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. You'd think they'd get better, but you wouldn't know that for a long time I suppose.

Not true at all. This particular upgrade has been run for a LONG evaluation period. The service centers (HPC, NHC, SPC, AWC, CPC, etc.) as well as NWS regions (who can then coordinate with WFOs if desired) are involved in the process, get to see experimental data leading up to the implementation, take part in an official evaluation, and have veto power if planned upgrades aren't good enough.

NCO used to distribute graphics from our pre-implementation evaluation runs on the old MAF, but that has since been lost with the transition to the MAG (unfortunately). Data is made readily available in near-real time, but not many in the private sector (some do though), take part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not true at all. This particular upgrade has been run for a LONG evaluation period. The service centers (HPC, NHC, SPC, AWC, CPC, etc.) as well as NWS regions (who can then coordinate with WFOs if desired) are involved in the process, get to see experimental data leading up to the implementation, take part in an official evaluation, and have veto power if planned upgrades aren't good enough.

NCO used to distribute graphics from our pre-implementation evaluation runs on the old MAF, but that has since been lost with the transition to the MAG (unfortunately). Data is made readily available in near-real time, but not many in the private sector (some do though), take part.

I didn't know that, dtk. I had posted my reply before seeing Chris' post. It makes sense though. Isn't that the same thing that was done with the GFS para runs before they switched them?

Thanks for the info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...