tombo82685 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 ace is done, drop the whole argument and talk about the snow threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 21, 2013 Author Share Posted January 21, 2013 Hr 108 euro identical to 00z gfs. Snowing from dca to st college Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 21, 2013 Author Share Posted January 21, 2013 Hr 114 mod snow for area. Low exit south of Delmarva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 21, 2013 Author Share Posted January 21, 2013 1008 off the coast of nj. Really nice run. 3-6/4-8 type deal on 00z euro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GD0815 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Hr 114 mod snow for area. Low exit south of Delmarva not a bad look all things considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 21, 2013 Author Share Posted January 21, 2013 00z euro is .5+ for the area Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CooL Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Gorgeous look on the euro. Easily a 4-6" event for the entire area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Gorgeous look on the euro. Easily a 4-6" event for the entire area. Accounting for ratios, especially in the NW sections of the area, it could definitely be higher than that. The warmest temperature SMQ gets to on the ECMWF while it's precipitating for this system is 19 degrees farenheit. That will give you ratios in the 15:1 to 20:1 range. Generally 0.5"-0.6" of liquid from the city west on the ECMWF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 That must have been quite the controversial post I made regarding NOAA definitions of snowfall intensity and visibility...though they could argue it was in the wrong thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CooL Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Accounting for ratios, especially in the NW sections of the area, it could definitely be higher than that. The warmest temperature SMQ gets to on the ECMWF while it's precipitating for this system is 19 degrees farenheit. That will give you ratios in the 15:1 to 20:1 range. Generally 0.5"-0.6" of liquid from the city west on the ECMWF. Wow..Jeez that is cold. Of course we will need this track and cold to hold for another 100hrs..I'd wait until we get closer until we start banking on ratios. This could easily bump north Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Accounting for ratios, especially in the NW sections of the area, it could definitely be higher than that. The warmest temperature SMQ gets to on the ECMWF while it's precipitating for this system is 19 degrees farenheit. That will give you ratios in the 15:1 to 20:1 range. Generally 0.5"-0.6" of liquid from the city west on the ECMWF. As mentioned by others, surface temperature is only a *minor* determinant of snow ratio. Snow growth region temperatures, lift and moisture are much more important. The low levels are very close to isothermal, so even though temperatures at the surface are 19, at 850 its only 4 degrees colder at 15 (-9.7C) and at 700 its 14 (-10C). Ideal snow growth is -12C to -18C. So you won't get ideal snow ratios. 12:1 perhaps. 15:1 and higher look unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ericjcrash Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Way suppressed on the 6z GFS. Can't win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Way suppressed on the 6z GFS. Can't win. I wouldn't worry about it yet, it may have something to do with it blowing up that clipper off the coast at 84 hours which no other model really even shows the 06Z GFS seems to have major suppression biases all the time and its entire pattern from Day 5-8 on this run was way colder than most models. There was a notable trend south tonight though, even the 06Z DGEX went south from where it had been for days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Yeah the gfs is very odd, tiny features screwing up the run. If the next run shows this, then I'll be more concerned. I am concerned from the perspective that we've gotten screwed all winter so far and it might happen yet again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Way suppressed on the 6z GFS. Can't win. Lol. Relax at 100 hrs out on the GFS. Would u rather see a track slightly south ? Or a perfect one ?Don't hang on every run u will drive ur self nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 The less amplified 0z solutions with a weaker wave would lock in the colder track. We just don't want the models to trend any weaker in coming days so the low doesn't slip too far south. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Here is the DGEX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Those that have been really pushing for a de-amplified solution have to watch out for something like what the 06z GFS is showing. I think our best shot is a more amped up front end dump that stays snow for inland areas and changes over at the coast. Something similar to the 00z GGEM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Here is the DGEX It looks like it never pops a secondary, just tracks the primary pretty far south and then off the coast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowanBrandon Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Those that have been really pushing for a de-amplified solution have to watch out for something like what the 06z GFS is showing. I think our best shot is a more amped up front end dump that stays snow for inland areas and changes over at the coast. Something similar to the 00z GGEM. Why would somebody at the coast be rooting for something that causes a changeover? So they can get an inch or two of snow that gets washed away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Why would somebody at the coast be rooting for something that causes a changeover? So they can get an inch or two of snow that gets washed away? The changeover would be at the very end, so everyone would still get a good amount of snow before that happened as most of the precip would be ending by then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 The changeover would be at the very end, so everyone would still get a good amount of snow before that happened as most of the precip would be ending by then. With the neutral nao you walk a fine line between too amplified and not amplified enough. A stronger solution like yesterdays Euro would end up trending warmer in the short term. But a weaker 0z solution would open the risk to a more suppressed solution. That's why storms like 2-22-08 are on the rare side and these situations usually deliver more modest snows of they end up cutting and turning to rain. So I would always want to take my chances with a weaker system and hope it comes close enough for at least a 2-4 or 3-5 event for most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 As mentioned by others, surface temperature is only a *minor* determinant of snow ratio. Snow growth region temperatures, lift and moisture are much more important. The low levels are very close to isothermal, so even though temperatures at the surface are 19, at 850 its only 4 degrees colder at 15 (-9.7C) and at 700 its 14 (-10C). Ideal snow growth is -12C to -18C. So you won't get ideal snow ratios. 12:1 perhaps. 15:1 and higher look unlikely. I based my ratios comment from this chart from the NWS. Snow growth isn't the best, but I think we can agree that what falls on the ECMWF does not have a 10:1 snow ratio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 With the neutral nao you walk a fine line between too amplified and not amplified enough. A stronger solution like yesterdays Euro would end up trending warmer in the short term. But a weaker 0z solution would open the risk to a more suppressed solution. That's why storms like 2-22-08 are on the rare side and these situations usually deliver more modest snows of they end up cutting and turning to rain. So I would always want to take my chances with a weaker system and hope it comes close enough for at least a 2-4 or 3-5 event for most. Maybe I'm selfish but I can't worry about what happens at the coast. I'm well inland and if the coast changes over it doesn't effect my life. I'm not rooting for anything, that's called being a . The point of my post was simply to say be careful what you wish for in terms of how weak or de-amplified this ends up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Maybe I'm selfish but I can't worry about what happens at the coast. I'm well inland and if the coast changes over it doesn't effect my life. I'm not rooting for anything, that's called being a . The point of my post was simply to say be careful what you wish for in terms of how weak or de-amplified this ends up. You are allowed to root for any solution that you want. But we'll see what the models are showing in a few days once the energy gets better sampled near the West Coast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 I based my ratios comment from this chart from the NWS. Snow growth isn't the best, but I think we can agree that what falls on the ECMWF does not have a 10:1 snow ratio. The 00z GFS bufkit data shows 10:1 ratios as far inland as KMMU 130125/2100Z 117 09007KT 20.6F SNOW 16:1| 1.2|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.077 16:1| 1.2|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.08 100| 0| 0 130126/0000Z 120 06010KT 21.8F SNOW 11:1| 2.2|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.195 13:1| 3.4|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.27 100| 0| 0 ----------------------------------------------+----++-----+-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+--- 130126/0300Z 123 04014KT 24.2F SNOW 7:1| 1.1|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.156 11:1| 4.5|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.43 100| 0| 0 130126/0600Z 126 02014KT 20.2F SNOW 6:1| 0.4|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.062 10:1| 4.9|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.49 100| 0| 0 130126/0900Z 129 02011KT 18.8F SNOW 10:1| 0.3|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.026 10:1| 5.2|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.52 100| 0| 0 130126/1200Z 132 01010KT 18.9F SNOW 12:1| 0.3|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.023 10:1| 5.4|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.54 100| 0| 0 Slightly lower at KLGA 130125/1800Z 114 20005KT 25.8F 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.000 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.00 0| 0| 0 130125/2100Z 117 10007KT 22.2F SNOW 15:1| 0.7|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.048 15:1| 0.7|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.05 100| 0| 0 130126/0000Z 120 08012KT 24.7F SNOW 8:1| 1.1|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.152 9:1| 1.9|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.20 100| 0| 0 ----------------------------------------------+----++-----+-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+--- 130126/0300Z 123 06016KT 27.4F SNOW 8:1| 1.1|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.140 9:1| 2.9|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.34 100| 0| 0 130126/0600Z 126 04019KT 24.3F SNOW 7:1| 0.5|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.073 8:1| 3.5|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.41 100| 0| 0 130126/0900Z 129 02016KT 21.5F SNOW 10:1| 0.2|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.024 8:1| 3.7|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.44 100| 0| 0 130126/1200Z 132 01015KT 20.4F SNOW 15:1| 0.3|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.020 9:1| 4.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.46 100| 0| 0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 The 00z GFS bufkit data shows 10:1 ratios as far inland as KMMU 130125/2100Z 117 09007KT 20.6F SNOW 16:1| 1.2|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.077 16:1| 1.2|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.08 100| 0| 0 130126/0000Z 120 06010KT 21.8F SNOW 11:1| 2.2|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.195 13:1| 3.4|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.27 100| 0| 0 ----------------------------------------------+----++-----+-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+--- 130126/0300Z 123 04014KT 24.2F SNOW 7:1| 1.1|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.156 11:1| 4.5|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.43 100| 0| 0 130126/0600Z 126 02014KT 20.2F SNOW 6:1| 0.4|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.062 10:1| 4.9|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.49 100| 0| 0 130126/0900Z 129 02011KT 18.8F SNOW 10:1| 0.3|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.026 10:1| 5.2|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.52 100| 0| 0 130126/1200Z 132 01010KT 18.9F SNOW 12:1| 0.3|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.023 10:1| 5.4|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.54 100| 0| 0 Slightly lower at KLGA 130125/1800Z 114 20005KT 25.8F 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.000 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.00 0| 0| 0 130125/2100Z 117 10007KT 22.2F SNOW 15:1| 0.7|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.048 15:1| 0.7|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.05 100| 0| 0 130126/0000Z 120 08012KT 24.7F SNOW 8:1| 1.1|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.152 9:1| 1.9|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.20 100| 0| 0 ----------------------------------------------+----++-----+-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+--- 130126/0300Z 123 06016KT 27.4F SNOW 8:1| 1.1|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.140 9:1| 2.9|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.34 100| 0| 0 130126/0600Z 126 04019KT 24.3F SNOW 7:1| 0.5|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.073 8:1| 3.5|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.41 100| 0| 0 130126/0900Z 129 02016KT 21.5F SNOW 10:1| 0.2|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.024 8:1| 3.7|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.44 100| 0| 0 130126/1200Z 132 01015KT 20.4F SNOW 15:1| 0.3|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.020 9:1| 4.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.46 100| 0| 0 I was refering to the ECMWF, which is considerably cooler than the GFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 I was refering to the ECMWF, which is considerably cooler than the GFS. Right, I was just pointing out the comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampson Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 I think the deamplified solution would lend itself to a N/W trend like we've seen with several other events this winter. I feel much more comfortable having a suppressed look at this juncture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 William is a good poster and a nice guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.