Dsnowx53 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 The vortex is obviously not in a good position, but it's in a much better position than it was last year and is being moved around a lot, as opposed to being stagnant in the worst possible spot. Our cold air mass will be a bit stale, yes, but provided we get a northerly flow and precipitation from a storm to our south, then most locations should be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsnowx53 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Also looks like the ideas posted earlier of the 2nd storm having a hard time to cut are coming true on some of the latest guidance. The Euro ensembles are still relatively amped but it's definitely a different look from previous runs. Once again, a rolling, flat ridge upstream of our storm combined with strong positive height anomalies to our north means that a storm is going to have a very hard time cutting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edge Weather Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 DGEX just came in with a 976mb low near the Virginia Capes at 186 hrs that slides east and out to sea, with a precip shield further north that absolutely nails from Trenton east to Asbury Park and south with 1.00-2.5 inches of precip. 850's are below freezing but 850's are too warm, taken verbatim. Snowfall map shows from 4-10 inches from Trenton down to Southwest New Jersey and Philadelphia, and a foot down by Richmond, VA. JMA also has a 993mb low with lots of moisture in nearly the identical position at 192 hours. Control run of the Euro has a 976 mb near the southern DelMarva at 198 hrs that absolutely nails our area with around 1.5 inches of precip. And below is the 12z European Ensemble Mean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weathergun Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 It's not a dominant Alaskan vortex because its north of Alaska and that makes a huge difference. Plus it's not inducing a torch...and it's not in a similar position to last year nor is it similar to last year...so what's your point then? Your initial post means nothing? The PV also splits into NE Pacific trough, that pump up heights over West Coast somewhat, with the -NAO block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorEaster27 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 It's not a dominant Alaskan vortex because its north of Alaska and that makes a huge difference. Plus it's not inducing a torch...and it's not in a similar position to last year nor is it similar to last year...so what's your point then? Your initial post means nothing? Is not inducing a torch because of the west based NAO. If this is weaker than proged we torch plain and simple. While the core of the vortex is North of AK its sphere of low heights covers all of AK despite what you are claiming it's not worlds different than last year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsnowx53 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Is not inducing a torch because of the west based NAO. If this is weaker than proged we torch plain and simple. While the core of the vortex is North of AK its sphere of low heights covers all of AK despite what you are claiming it's not worlds different than last year You do realize it's actually helping the west based NAO, right? Part of the reason why the west based NAO is happening is because of the height rise downstream of that PV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Is not inducing a torch because of the west based NAO. If this is weaker than proged we torch plain and simple. While the core of the vortex is North of AK its sphere of low heights covers all of AK despite what you are claiming it's not worlds different than last year It is helping to pump up the West Based NAO ridge, man. Also, it is not there until the end of the run on every model despite what you might be hallucinating. I just don't understand why you would bump the post when your original post was wrong. You said that a dominant AK vortex was coming back similar to last year. That is 100% incorrect. It's not that complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Well, things just got interesting as quickly as 12/18 if today's models are to be believed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CooL Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 What a weenie 18z run. Tons of storm chances with a great looking pattern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsnowx53 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 ^ That looks a lot like 12/19/2009. Or at least how the models initially showed that storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 ^ That looks a lot like 12/19/2009. Or at least how the models initially showed that storm. You know I was thinking that earlier. 12/19/09 was less amplified with the vort that came through the MS Valley though...so if the models are to be believed things could get very interesting especially if that weird psuedo 50/50 starts retrograding in SE Canada like the GFS advertises. Here's 12/19/09 for comparison. A lot more northern stream energy sitting over Southeast Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I think it's prudent to remain very cautious though, especially given the wild changes we're seeing on the models especially with the northern stream stuff. The GFS has zero continuity in that regard from run to run and those are things that will change the outcome of the storm dramatically. The one good thing we can take away from this is that there's a fairly consistent signal for a vort coming out of the Pac NW and racing into the Central US and amplifying. Also worth noting that we need that first wave to get through like the guidance shows and usher in some cold air -- but if its too strong it could sweep the baroclinic zone east with it. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsnowx53 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I think it's prudent to remain very cautious though, especially given the wild changes we're seeing on the models especially with the northern stream stuff. The GFS has zero continuity in that regard from run to run and those are things that will change the outcome of the storm dramatically. The one good thing we can take away from this is that there's a fairly consistent signal for a vort coming out of the Pac NW and racing into the Central US and amplifying. Also worth noting that we need that first wave to get through like the guidance shows and usher in some cold air -- but if its too strong it could sweep the baroclinic zone east with it. We'll see. There are lots of small nuances and ebbs in the flow, but once that block truly becomes established, the margin for error in us getting a snowstorm increases. The PAC is a bit poor so it would be nice to see a trend for some height rises upstream of our storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snywx Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 ^ That looks a lot like 12/19/2009. Or at least how the models initially showed that storm. Oh please I hope not! lol.. Horrific precip gradient. One of many that winter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 You know I was thinking that earlier. 12/19/09 was less amplified with the vort that came through the MS Valley though...so if the models are to be believed things could get very interesting especially if that weird psuedo 50/50 starts retrograding in SE Canada like the GFS advertises. Here's 12/19/09 for comparison. A lot more northern stream energy sitting over Southeast Canada. In the immortal words of that famous freedom fighter mel gibson. Hold Hoooold Hoooooold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle W Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Oh please I hope not! lol.. Horrific precip gradient. One of many that winter the Feb. 5th 2010 storm gave me 3" of snow imby...A few miles north got a trace...20 miles to the south got over 10"...The snow hit a brick wall on radar that night and was pushed south... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edge Weather Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Well, now even the NOGAPS has joined the parade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 18z GEFS is closer to the coast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle W Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 December 19th-20th has seen it's share of significant snowfalls recently and in the past...Four times there were storms with over 8" of snow on the 19-20th... 1948 had 16.0" 1945 had 8.3" 1995 had 7.7" 2009 had 10.9" 2008 had 4.0" The date with the most major storms is December 26th-27th... 1872 had 18" 1933 had 11" 1947 had 26" 2010 had 20" 1890 had 7" December 5th-6th is the other dates with more than three major storms... 1886 had 8" 1926 had 8" 2002 had 6" 2003 had 14"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowanBrandon Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 The NOGAPS is a red flag model, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris L Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 ^ That looks a lot like 12/19/2009. Or at least how the models initially showed that storm. The moisture feed from '09 was quite awesome to watch. Of course, one would expect that in a strong El Nino. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Using the top 4 QBO analogs (only 4 good matches with enso state and conditions) here is the composite CONUS December temperature anomaly. And here is December 2012 to date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jefflaw77 Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 It would appear as though we may be in store for some ver interesting weather over the next month or so Jan. 2004 was very cold... Should be quite interesting to see how it all materializes.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeatherFox Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Wow, look at this double barrel storm depicted on the DGEX at 192 hours. It's like buying a lottery ticket. You may feel excited and think of the possibilities but it does not pan out. Anyway, way too far out at this time & cold air is needed. One can just note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edge Weather Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 The NOGAPS is a red flag model, right? Well, considering that the NOGAPS usually can't produce a storm anywhere, yes, I guess that having a 988mb low right off the coast would be considered a red flag, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowanBrandon Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 I can't believe how warm it is on that run with such a huge storm. There's practically no cold air available anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 This is all goin to depend on how fast sun mon system gets off the field. The models see the block they to some degree see the ridge. If the first system are too close u flatten the flow and ots u go. The signal is there. Lets get them seperated and we r in biz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsnowx53 Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 You know I was thinking that earlier. 12/19/09 was less amplified with the vort that came through the MS Valley though...so if the models are to be believed things could get very interesting especially if that weird psuedo 50/50 starts retrograding in SE Canada like the GFS advertises. Here's 12/19/09 for comparison. A lot more northern stream energy sitting over Southeast Canada. I feel like it's similar with regards to the heights being "relatively" high in the east coast considering there's a trough there, with relatively spaced out height contours, which allows for slow, gradual, but steady amplification. Also with the retrograded 50/50 low piece to the north of the trough. I remember initially with that storm, the models had that retrograded 50/50 piece just to the north of the trough, kinda like what the 18z GFS OP was showing. The degree of blocking is of course similar, too. That storm had a better PAC pattern, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 I can't believe how warm it is on that run with such a huge storm. There's practically no cold air available anywhere. Relax we'd be fine, if we could somehow manage to get late October and early November snowstorms, we would certainly get one with a strong coastal storm even with a marginal airmass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCSuburbs Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Run to run differences in the H5 setup on the GFS are almost laughable; it clearly doesn't have a good handle on the medium range, or even starting from about 60 hours out. Nice looking strong coastal storm this run with snow inland but I wouldn't take what it shows seriously until it starts to get a better handle on things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.