chubbs Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 its definitely wetter, its warmer to start then prob is about the same to maybe a hair colder since their is a ton of lift and forcing going on with the ccb over us. Also maybe phasing a little earlier. Starts warmer particularly near the coast and ends up colder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isotherm Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 The NAO right now is slightly positive with no greenland blocking; I highly doubt a stall scenario. The NAM totals seem much too high to me as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Also maybe phasing a little earlier. Starts warmer particularly near the coast and ends up colder yea i mentioned that to ray earlier. It definitely phased in a little earlier. Regardless these qpf totals are way out of wack, nothing supports this model wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blizzardlover Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Didn't the SREF or RUC show a dry-slot heading up toward NY? Not saying the NAM is right, but I think I saw this on another model too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chubbs Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 yea i mentioned that to ray earlier. It definitely phased in a little earlier. Regardless these qpf totals are way out of wack, nothing supports this model wise. Agree. Main point is trends are good so far on SREF+NAM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rib Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Here in PHL County I just want 6 inches. Haven't had that in 2 winters. Maybe we can squeeze it out on the w side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 In other news I heard the much regaled RPM has backed down to 2-4 for PHL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeffsvilleWx Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllWeather Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Folks over in the NYC thread are going nuts over this new NAM run. It appears to be that a slightly quicker phase has brought the 00z NAM closer with the CCB. However, those amounts are ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Is that warm nose at 950mb a huge deal or just mean wet snow? Unless I've been reading a skew-t wrong all these years, that "nose" is below freezing. yea i mentioned that to ray earlier. It definitely phased in a little earlier. Regardless these qpf totals are way out of wack, nothing supports this model wise. Yeah it's hard to get even rain storms w/ 3-4" in <24 hrs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NaoPos Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Folks over in the NYC thread are going nuts over this new NAM run. It appears to be that a slightly quicker phase has brought the 00z NAM closer with the CCB. However, those amounts are ludicrous. the hi res nam is spitting out 10"+ for parts of coastal ocean& monmouth counties... BS aside, this storm is going to be SUPER dynamic. Lot of people will see Thundersnow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Folks over in the NYC thread are going nuts over this new NAM run. It appears to be that a slightly quicker phase has brought the 00z NAM closer with the CCB. However, those amounts are ludicrous. yea i don't see those amounts occuring.. they also need to look at soundings cause they waste about 2 inches of qpf on non snow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Folks over in the NYC thread are going nuts over this new NAM run. It appears to be that a slightly quicker phase has brought the 00z NAM closer with the CCB. However, those amounts are ludicrous. NAM snow map shows around 45 inches imby. Cut those total by 50%, I still get hammered. Overall the NAM run was a beast for NW NJ. I can only hope the GFS shows some love Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcutter Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 SREF model (MBN1) is saying 40" for PTW sorry for my ignorance but what "times" do the SREF's run? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChescoWx Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Latest Wxsim with 0z NAM and 18z GFS for the NW Philly burbs Shows a period of heavy snow in the AM with 1 to 3" before mixing for a while Then back to heavy snow by 4pm with another 10" or so before ending by 4am on Saturday - total snow 10" to 13" Of interest temps are running around 3 degrees colder than the Wxsim models Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JERSEYSNOWROB Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 the hi res nam is spitting out 10"+ for parts of coastal ocean& monmouth counties... BS aside, this storm is going to be SUPER dynamic. Lot of people will see Thundersnow. Can i assume half of that is snow for Monmouth??? Hahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 sorry for my ignorance but what "times" do the SREF's run? Every 6 hours 2:30,8:30 a.m and p.m. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwilson Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 I honestly think someone in the NE lollipops at nearly 4' of snow. It could be as close to PHL as northern NJ, but I think anyone in Western NY/RI/Mass/SNH would all have a chance at it. And I am insanely jealous. So tired of these lame duck winters out here! Good to see the home base is now in the 4-8" range when before it looked like a rain storm. I bet Montco on north sees 6"+ as the baseline. Good luck folks--tell the next one to come our way! =D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 OK this is just plain weird... you saw the sounding I posted before... now I check back and I get this... OK, we solved this mystery... the low res NAM data has no warm layer, the high res does. So I'll bet on the high res. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ago4snow Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Ray or Tom: With the transition to wet snow and the tremendous precipitation rates by evening, do you guys have any feeling whether we’re looking at a threat to trees and power lines in the Philly suburbs? I ‘m guessing snow will become more powdery after a few hours, but not really sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blizzardlover Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Can i assume half of that is snow for Monmouth??? Hahaha I presume you mean 10" of snowfall, not QPF... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Ray or Tom: With the transition to wet snow and the tremendous precipitation rates by evening, do you guys have any feeling whether we’re looking at a threat to trees and power lines in the Philly suburbs? I ‘m guessing snow will become more powdery after a few hours, but not really sure. It could be an issue. Depends on how fast temps drop once rain changes to snow. Also depends on wind; wind can actually reduce the snow load. Someone posted that they saw a bunch of utility trucks mobilizing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HM Posted February 8, 2013 Author Share Posted February 8, 2013 The profiles are ridiculous between 00z-09z across the area with unstable layer in SGZ. There are easy 2"/hr rates and thundersnow in this band tomorrow night on the NAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blizzardlover Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 So, one wonders what Mt. Holly will do with the next product issuance. Think they'll wait til the GFS run is in?? Wouldn't shock me at all to see the advisories upgraded to warnings, a tier of new advisories further S & W, and snowfall in the warned areas increased.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 So, one wonders what Mt. Holly will do with the next product issuance. Think they'll wait til the GFS run is in?? Wouldn't shock me at all to see the advisories upgraded to warnings, a tier of new advisories further S & W, and snowfall in the warned areas increased.... NAM QPF is almost certainly overdone. I don't know what they would do, but I would wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B Dawk 20 Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 NAM QPF is almost certainly overdone. I don't know what they would do, but I would wait. Overdone, definitely. But by how much? Wait and see is the right call, I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Wiggum Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Unless I've been reading a skew-t wrong all these years, that "nose" is below freezing. Yeah it's hard to get even rain storms w/ 3-4" in <24 hrs. Nope, I misread it,my bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickrd Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 NAM QPF is almost certainly overdone. I don't know what they would do, but I would wait. is there a factor when dealing with the NAM's overblown number? like 50% 60%? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 is there a factor when dealing with the NAM's overblown number? like 50% 60%? its called using the sref's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 is there a factor when dealing with the NAM's overblown number? like 50% 60%? It depends on the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.