Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,583
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    23Yankee
    Newest Member
    23Yankee
    Joined

Feb 13: The little storm that could (for some)


Ian

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Does it? I always thought it was the same channel same show just with 1080 instead of Apple 2e dot matrix. 

Yeah...I'm not sure.  The fundamental physics are the same.  Maybe someone can jump in with specific (and more accurate) details.  The initial conditions (in the form of RAOBs, surface obs, etc...) are generally at a coarser resolution than the model gridding.  Doubly so with the hi-res NAM.  So, those values are interpolated to a finer mesh and then the model is run forward.  IMO, the hi-res is good for terrain-related questions (CAD, LEF, etc...) but doesn't really buy us much here.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah...I'm not sure.  The fundamental physics are the same.  Maybe someone can jump in with specific (and more accurate) details.  The initial conditions (in the form of RAOBs, surface obs, etc...) are generally at a coarser resolution than the model gridding.  Doubly so with the hi-res NAM.  So, those values are interpolated to a finer mesh and then the model is run forward.  IMO, the hi-res is good for terrain-related questions (CAD, LEF, etc...) but doesn't really buy us much here.  

 

If dtk sees this he'll chime in. That guy brings new meaning to the term model analysis. Sharp fella. 

 

 

So, over or under on 500 radar hallucination posts tomorrow in the obs thread? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty sure the NAM is the best model for now. At least till it shifts 1000 miles south next run.

 

I'll probably get blasted for this, but I'd think a north trend would be more likely than south based upon current satellite and radar.  I don't know why so many are throwing off on the NAM solution right now.  It has been pretty consistent with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should let the punters back.

Every 0.2" counts.

 

yea, I've been an ass of sorts with punters. And that's not really my style. I just hope those (without a solid understanding of models) that did can recognize that this was never really a puntable setup with proper expectations. You can punt a clipper with a nw vort pass or a miller b dryslot, or even a cutter with front end disaster, but you should never punt a vort and 850 like this. This is a classic 3-6" MA snow setup. We just got hosed with temps but they weren't so far out of line that it "couldn't" still snow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah...I'm not sure. The fundamental physics are the same. Maybe someone can jump in with specific (and more accurate) details. The initial conditions (in the form of RAOBs, surface obs, etc...) are generally at a coarser resolution than the model gridding. Doubly so with the hi-res NAM. So, those values are interpolated to a finer mesh and then the model is run forward. IMO, the hi-res is good for terrain-related questions (CAD, LEF, etc...) but doesn't really buy us much here.

If dtk sees this he'll chime in. That guy brings new meaning to the term model analysis. Sharp fella.

So, over or under on 500 radar hallucination posts tomorrow in the obs thread?

Are you referring to "precip hole" hallucinations? If so, I'll take the over times two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...