WinterWxLuvr Posted March 2, 2013 Author Share Posted March 2, 2013 I also wonder if a much more north, much warmer system is possible. Someone else can comment on the OV low starting to show on the NAM and srefs. Is it possible for the blocking off shore to slide so far south combined with a slower vort that the low manages to find the slot between them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I-83 BLIZZARD Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 The storm is still in a data poor zone so hopefully we have some more clarity by 0z tonight. Nice disco by the NWS from State College: Due to these diffs...there is still too much uncertainty this far out to attempt to pin down specific impacts. The storm is still over the northern Pacific Ocean...where models do not initialize the atmosphere as well...thus likely contributing to a fair amount of run to run model inconsistencies. There are a growing number of operations models and gefs members that phase the low as it approaches the coast...which would allow the storm to take a more northward turn near the middle-Atlantic coast and slow down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAPE Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 I also wonder if a much more north, much warmer system is possible. Someone else can comment on the OV low starting to show on the NAM and srefs. Is it possible for the blocking off shore to slide so far south combined with a slower vort that the low manages to find the slot between them? I have not seen the NAM(and wouldn't even look at this time frame), but look at the 500 setup from this morning's GFS. I cant see how a low can do anything but track under that block and south of that 500 low. http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/Image.php?model=gfs&area=namer¶m=500_vort_ht&cycle=06ℑ=gfs%2F06%2Fgfs_namer_066_500_vort_ht.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoast NPZ Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 The storm is still ina data poor zone so hopefully we have some more clarity by 0z tonight. Nice disco by the NWS from State College:Due to these diffs...there is still too much uncertainty this far out to attempt to pin down specific impacts. The storm is still over the northern Pacific Ocean...where models do not initialize the atmosphere as well...thus likely contributing to a fair amount of run to run model inconsistencies. There are a growing number of operations models and gefs members that phase the low as it approaches the coast...which would allow the storm to take a more northward turn near the middle-Atlantic coast and slow down what operational models are phasing the low near the coast? sure ain't the GFS, and no longer looks like the euro does either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Do any Mets post on this board anymore? Zwyts and Ian are mets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Balti Zen Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 what operational models are phasing the low near the coast? sure ain't the GFS, and no longer looks like the euro does either. That is an old discussion pasted from back after the model suite that was showing a phase, not after the latest runs where the northern stream disappeared altogether making the notions of phase ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Nevermind the model temps, if that CCB can get Into the DC area and especially just west with a little elevation....it's a crusher. The most important thing to worry about is storm location and temps secondary. You'll need it to rip pretty good in order to get accumulations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usedtobe Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Nothing has changed from yesterday. still lots of solutions on the table. One of the reasons the GFS is so warm at the surface is the lack of any heavy precipitation. Increase the upward motion and the temps would be cooler. This is one of those time when you want the upper low to come north a tad to put us in the deformation zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Nothing has changed from yesterday. still lots of solutions on the table. One of the reasons the GFS is so warm at the surface is the lack of any heavy precipitation. Increase the upward motion and the temps would be cooler. This is one of those time when you want the upper low to come north a tad to put us in the deformation zone. Yep exactly. That's why I would focus on where this tracks and not model temps because track location will effect precip rates and therefore temps. Good luck down there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 No word on ec ensemble precip? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 I like this I know it's at the end of the new SREFs, but still http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/Image.php?model=sref&area=namer¶m=500_vort_ht&cycle=09ℑ=sref%2F09%2Fsref_namer_087_500_vort_ht.gif EDIT: and it's headed right for VA if you loop the hours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCAlexandria Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Do any Mets post on this board anymore? Zwyts and Ian are mets. Huh? Ian isn't. Nor Zwyts I think. I think you are mixing up the pro forecaster and met tags. Julianne Barbereri that use to do the NFL weather is technically a pro forecaster. Wes is a met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmlwx Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Huh? Ian isn't. Nor Zwyts I think. I think you are mixing up the pro forecaster and met tags. Julianne Barbereri that use to do the NFL weather is technically a pro forecaster. Wes is a met. Right over the head eh? That cutoff being shown on the models is pretty serious lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaltimoreWxGuy Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Ensemble looks good Does the Ensemble mean really look THAT much better? The surface low track is nearly identical to the OP, its just clearly there are members that are more wet. Personally, from Ensembles..I look at just the track of the low, not really QPF amounts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterWxLuvr Posted March 2, 2013 Author Share Posted March 2, 2013 Huh? Ian isn't. Nor Zwyts I think. I think you are mixing up the pro forecaster and met tags. Julianne Barbereri that use to do the NFL weather is technically a pro forecaster.Wes is a met. My God man. Give it a rest. Met or not, they both are good and could teach you plenty. Besides, this is a place to discuss the weather, not your opinion of Matt and Ian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clskinsfan Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Right over the head eh? That cutoff being shown on the models is pretty serious lol. It is. But the models do sometimes struggle with where the northern extent of the precip will be. I would think it would be slightly north of what is modeled. There is no doubt the cutoff is going to be sharp. But where exactly does that occur? By the way its snowing out here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 No word on ec ensemble precip? .5" to MD/PA border.. .75" to DC, 1" to RIC (nothing 1.5"+) West of 95 favored for heaviest accum. tho you may want to verify with yoda if you can trust me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Right over the head eh? That cutoff being shown on the models is pretty serious lol. LOL I didn't think it would be taken literally. They are as good or better than many mets down there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Does the Ensemble mean really look THAT much better? The surface low track is nearly identical to the OP, its just clearly there are members that are more wet. Personally, from Ensembles..I look at just the track of the low, not really QPF amounts Given the sharp cutoff potential I do wonder if the means are starting to play tricks on the northern edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaltimoreWxGuy Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Given the sharp cutoff potential I do wonder if the means are starting to play tricks on the northern edge. Yeah..Clearly, there are ALWAYS members that are more amped and wet..I think P001 is one, along with 2 others...I think looking at the QPF from the ensembles is not anymore useful than the QPF of the OP...if the storm exits off NC then we are probably screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clueless Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 This thing can OTS yeah, stay south and pound RIC. But once models have firmer data...then. we will be sure. So looking at QPF is kind of a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCAlexandria Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Agreed. QPF never verifies at this range, the only think to track now is the track of the lows and where we phase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 This is not going to take a huge jump north at the end because of the block, like hm said, but I do still think the final 72 hours these type things bleed north a bit. Last night all the guidance trended south. That has to stop now. I feel fine if the bullseye now is Richmond but we are in trouble if today guidance starts to show a Carolina hit again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaltimoreWxGuy Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 This is not going to take a huge jump north at the end because of the block, like hm said, but I do still think the final 72 hours these type things bleed north a bit. Last night all the guidance trended south. That has to stop now. I feel fine if the bullseye now is Richmond but we are in trouble if today guidance starts to show a Carolina hit again. I agree with that, the tight precipitation gradient is what is probably going to be tough...1 place is going to be ripping while 100 miles north is saying what storm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usedtobe Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Given the sharp cutoff potential I do wonder if the means are starting to play tricks on the northern edge. I think eventually that will be a concern, this far out it probably isn't since the exact track still is uncerrtain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 nope and where it had 0.75" at 18z it now has 4"...... Huh? 0z gfs was way south of 12z gfs. 0z ec was south of 12z. 0z ggem was south of 12z and uk held but was already furthest south. Navgem went south too. I'm not throwing in the towel at all but I'm also not looking for fake optimism either. The trend last night was bad. More so for me then dc ill admit remember I'm way north of u so maybe were looking at this from different perspectives but how u think the 0z gfs didn't trend south from 12z I'm not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huffwx Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Huh? Ian isn't. Nor Zwyts I think. I think you are mixing up the pro forecaster and met tags. Julianne Barbereri that use to do the NFL weather is technically a pro forecaster.Wes is a met. True..but outside a few all star mets like Wes, matt and ian are as good as any on forecasting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvantHiatus Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Well, after skimming through millions of good posts, there is not one that discusses potential p-type in great detail. Do the thermal profiles really support significant accumulating snow or will this coastal storm be a rain/snow mix fest? I suppose any frozen in March is a bonus. If you look at the GFS soundings for Richmond and places down south, there is not much snow to be found inside the heavier precip. It appears the GFS and Euro are still worlds apart in regards to the northern stream interaction that will make this a significant snow event. My earlier thinking was that precip rates alone may suffice but we may need some extra help in the atmosphere to get a more significant snow event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 No word on ec ensemble precip? .5" to MD/PA border.. .75" to DC, 1" to RIC (nothing 1.5"+) West of 95 favored for heaviest accum. tho you may want to verify with yoda if you can trust me I'm going with jebman on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Well, after skimming through millions of good posts, there is not one that discusses potential p-type in great detail. Do the thermal profiles really support significant accumulating snow or will this coastal storm be a rain/snow mix fest? I suppose any frozen in March is a bonus. If you look at the GFS soundings for Richmond and places down south, there is not much snow to be found inside the heavier precip. It appears the GFS and Euro are still worlds apart in regards to the northern stream interaction that will make this a significant snow event its been discussed in several posts with the basic theme that heavy precip will negate warm bl coastalwx had a great post regarding this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.