Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,793
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    manaja
    Newest Member
    manaja
    Joined

Election week coastal storm threat


Midlo Snow Maker

Recommended Posts

I almost feel the opposite can be true with the GEFS. I've seen them many times be too far east with a coastal low. However, I suppose it is possible for different members to be perturbed in a way where some are phase happy and it skews the mean in certain instances.

Except that the GEFS isn't perturbed in the same was as say something like the SREF (where you get clustering because of model diversity). There is a stochastic tendency scheme that is used in the GEFS (basically the tendencies are perturbed), but it is random (i.e. it shouldn't systematically skew the model toward being more/less phase happy in a mean/statistical sense). Issues with the GEFS individual solutions would have way more to do with the physics are behaving (which are not re-tuned down for the lower resolution).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Except that the GEFS isn't perturbed in the same was as say something like the SREF (where you get clustering because of model diversity). There is a stochastic tendency scheme that is used in the GEFS (basically the tendencies are perturbed), but it is random (i.e. it shouldn't systematically skew the model toward being more/less phase happy in a mean/statistical sense). Issues with the GEFS individual solutions would have way more to do with the physics are behaving (which are not re-tuned down for the lower resolution).

What I meant was that whatever the reason a few members may be amped up vs the majority, it may cause the mean to shift more to the left or closer to the coast. My wording may have been off. While not always the case, I treat the ensembles as a red flag that the op run might be too far east if the op run really deviates east from the mean. More often than not, the ensembles can be east of the op run at day 4 or 5....but at this stage, it's probably wise to move towards deterministic models, although SREFs can be useful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NAM is a bit west and wrapping up quicker but, Baltimore/DC get fringed pretty bad still, the NWS made a comparison of this storm to December 2010 with the tight precipitation gradient like I did on here yesterday.

It shifted almost 150 miles from the 6z run. Just another shift of 70 more miles would be nice...unless it's east.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NAM is a bit west and wrapping up quicker but, Baltimore/DC get fringed pretty bad still, the NWS made a comparison of this storm to December 2010 with the tight precipitation gradient like I did on here yesterday.

That's a pretty good move around the 36 hr time, IMO. Couple more like that and DC and BALT might get some snow out of it. Seems to slow it down a touch as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a pretty good move around the 36 hr time, IMO. Couple more like that and DC and BALT might get some snow out of it. Seems to slow it down a touch as well.

Im not relying on a model with this, Im gonna go with my gut and say its like Dec 2010...west of the Bay get fringed, with the eastern shore getting heavier precipitation....problem for them, is they probably wont be cold enough to get a sig accumulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It feels like if the moisture is to get pulled in further West then so does the warmer air. Double edged sword now I think....

and to BT....i stopped keeping track because it was an awful winter...I think the total out here was about 3-4" Remember on those types of posts to try and get those in the banter threads in the future... :)

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...