Kaner587 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Reflectivity maps say otherwise. But I agree, looks a bit dry. this comes up everytime but SV gets both reflectivity and precip. And for precip it has nothing north of central jersey. I agree its odd though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny747pilot Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Everyone please, its one run. Take the pattern. Then take what your models are showing. Then look at the bias / strengths of the model while also making sure that synoptically correct. We cant live and die with every model of every run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 The RGEM looks about the same, the low may be a bit more NW at 48 hours but the precip shield and 500mb look similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I'm not concerned at all, we will get a moderate hit, maybe a bit more further south. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaner587 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 The RGEM looks about the same, the low may be a bit more NW at 48 hours but the precip shield and 500mb look similar. good to see. If RGEM was south I'd be nervous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfsheepsheadbay Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 good to see. If RGEM was south I'd be nervous It's well out of its range regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikolai Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 It's well out of its range regardless. so is the NAM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfsheepsheadbay Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 so is the NAM Disagree. Not that the NAM has any range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 It's well out of its range regardless. I've never really noticed the RGEM being notably worse at 48 than it is at 24, it may not be as good but its better than the NAM at 48 probably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winterwarlock Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 the numbers posted in the Philly forum were not promising...... .22 at SMQ which is my area and only .36 at Trenton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfsheepsheadbay Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 I've never really noticed the RGEM being notably worse at 48 than it is at 24, it may not be as good but its better than the NAM at 48 probably. rgem is deadly from 12-24 hours. Outside of then, really not consistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 The nam gave us like 5" of QPF last storm and had the low barely offshore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Do you guys know what the hardest thing for any one model to numerically equate is ? Precip So relax with its equation of the precip field tonite . Take a look at the position of the southern stream SW , if you have a 996 LOW east of AC headed ENE , chances are you are goin to drop more than .20 qpf across the area . Now can the NAM be trending south towards the Euro . sure its very possible .But one run of the NAM isnt goin to tell you that The GFS and tonites Euro will make things a little clearer . Be careful yelling fire everytime one model run is good or bad , you lose credibility . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 look on the list...I think there were two locations one was Monroe and I forget the other one. Is Monroe in northern middlesex county? Your post on accumulations are completely useless to this discussion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 the numbers posted in the Philly forum were not promising...... .22 at SMQ which is my area and only .36 at Trenton. This run is way colder. You have no mixing issues Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersWx92 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 the numbers posted in the Philly forum were not promising...... .22 at SMQ which is my area and only .36 at Trenton. RGEM held its ground and the NAM has been pretty unreliable for precip at any range let alone past 48 hours out. Even the night before the last storm it was printing out absurd amounts of QPF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RU848789 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Exactly - posting reports from areas, such as Somerset/Hunterdon/Mercer, is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, which is whether a 6.4" report from "northern Middlesex County" surrounded by 8-10" reports, is credible or not. It's certainly possible, but highly unlikely. Would be helpful to know the location. And I'm not doubting that 6.4" was measured, but I'm calling into question whether the 6.4" was representative for a number of possible reasons (missing the initial 0.5", measuring a few hours after the sun was up and missing the compaction, measuring in a spot that was under a tree or some other interference, etc.). look on the list...I think there were two locations one was Monroe and I forget the other one. Warlock/bac (for those of you who don't know, we're both hard core regulars on the Rutgersfan.com sports message board, where we kind of have a side job of posting weather info for storms/games) - you might need a remedial geography or reading comprehension class. Neither Monroe nor Kingston are anywhere near northern Middlesex County, so they're irrelevant to our discussion about a 6" report somewhere in northern Middlesex County probably being erroneous, given only 8-10" reports in that area. It's so simple, maybe you need a refresher course, hey, it's all ball bearings nowadays... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny747pilot Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 RGEM held its ground and this is a little past the NAM's best range. It's been pretty unreliable for precip at any range let alone past 48 hours out. Even the night before the last storm it was printing out absurd amounts of QPF.Not for nothing, the ETA was a much better forecasting tool imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Warlock/bac (for those of you who don't know, we're both hard core regulars on the Rutgersfan.com sports message board, where we kind of have a side job of posting weather info for storms/games) - you might need a remedial geography or reading comprehension class. Neither Monroe nor Kingston are anywhere near northern Middlesex County, so they're irrelevant to our discussion about a 6" report somewhere in northern Middlesex County probably being erroneous, given only 8-10" reports in that area. It's so simple, maybe you need a refresher course, hey, it's all ball bearings nowadays... Lmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Hr 48 gfs has light preciep up to Ttn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Hr 54 is a little further south and east this run. Light to mod snow central nj at hr 54 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaner587 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 End result looks basically exactly like the nam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Hr light to mod snow along I-95. Extended some enhancement back into Monmouth county Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WintersGrasp Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 00z pretty much turns it into a minor event Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWCCraig Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 0z GFS has the heaviest precip just south of here. 2-4" verbatim, less north, more south. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Looks like an area wide 2 -4 with 4- 6 possible in Monmouth county so far tonite . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 .25+ from NYC south. These new model runs pretty much fit dt map Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutgersWx92 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 00z GFS has only 0.25-0.5'' QPF from the city into central NJ (even less to the north) whereas the 18z run had us all comfortably in 0.5-0.75''. Will have to wait for future runs to see if this is just a blip or a solid trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FPizz Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 Id take that in a heartbeat. Thanks for the pbp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 The GFS and Nam went towards the Euro which showed a 1-3/ 2-4 inch snowfall. We still have a lot of model runs to go before this forecast is set in stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.