Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,587
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

March 6-8th Ocean Storm Discussion Part III

Baroclinic Zone

By Baroclinic Zone,
in New England

Recommended Posts

OceanStWx

OceanStWx

Posted
Posted

Yeah thanks.  I know what I'm looking at but wanted to make sure what I thought was happening was happening.  The NAM came steadily towards the Euro, if you overlay the 0z/6z/12z NAM runs and then look at the 12z NAM vs the 0z Euro...we can see it's coming back to the fold.   That will be the feature to watch with the rest of the models right now.  RGEM/GGEM last night were also slow in diving that feature down which probably explains their less intense solutions.

 

The 12z RGEM appears to have come more towards the NAM solution in a delayed phase.   It's possible the NAM is scoring a coup here, but we'll see.

 

 

Here is what I was talking about in picture format. A little easier to see what I mean for those having trouble following my explanation. The Euro is the top left, with the GFS top right, and NAM in the bottom left. GEM was left out because the resolution is poor on the trop, and thus you get a lot of no data (worse than the Euro). GFS90 also suffers from poorer resolution so the individual PV anomalies aren't as strong (GFS40 shows them much deeper into the troposphere). You can see how far the northern stream PV is displaced to the NW on the NAM. Well north of Lake Superior. The Euro is north of Lake Ontario, with the GFS already cutting through Lake Ontario at 00z Friday. And the GFS is nearly fully phased by this point too.

 

RGEM would be a pretty pedestrian solution, maybe low end warning at most in the hills...advisory snow elsewhere, perhaps a bit higher interior SE MA. Conservative wins if RGEM is correct.

 

GEM suffered from the northern PV anomaly being farther NW like the NAM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
TheSnowman

TheSnowman

Posted
Posted
Lol. It's pretty obvious I do since I responded to him and agreed.  

 

My thoughts right now are lots of rain inside 495 turning into maybe a little slop.  Outside 495 a few inches of crap. And then possibly a max of 10" in Worcester County.

 

I'm just worried that the precip rates necessary for snow never really make it. 

 

Well worried about a lot actually.

What are you also a TV met Chris?? LOLAll TV mets are loving rain and 1"-3" while those here are talking 12"-20" in the best spots hills or no hills. Such Amazing differences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
Posted

Will is there any historical precedent for such a thing?  1000-850mb thicknesses are frigid even here, yet the 8h 0c is out by Logan11.   Euro is cold, and a brutal, brutal snowstorm.

 

It's curious to me that the NAM has been right 1 time out of about 300.  The Euro been wrong maybe 2 times all winter at this range, and we're waiting on...presumably the NAM to come around?

 

Just looking at the Euro it's a devastating snowstorm.  I'm really puzzled by the group mind f8ck that is going on (not here, everywhere else)

 

 

 

Ha ha.  Haven't you learned?   These weather forums are less about science and learning about the weather (though there is some of that), and more to do with being a bastion of those with an emotive weather dependency, and needing others of the same ilk to din in their sorrows and frustrations whenever the weather doesn't fulfill those needs appropriately, thus the majority voice is of that same frame of mind.  

 

Once one really understands this, it becomes far less "puzzling" when they encounter "mind f$ck" episodes.  When one outright gives proxy over their mood, to the vagaries of the weather, they will by shear statistics be disappointed much if not the majority of time.  In failing to understand the futility of having allowed the weather to take control of their mood, they instead become defensive - this defense mechanism is the mind bang you are sensing.    

 

This particular collection of souls tends to be hyper focused in a snow obsession - they are less emotive about weather overall compared to how utterly lost they are in their dependency for snow in their choice of weather, in the on-going game of trying to fill their inner emotional voids with the uncertainty principle.   Take the former paragraph and mix it with this one, and what you wind up with is annoying, tedious post reads whenever there is anything other than an idealized mile high glacier event.   What may even eclipse that as far as abject frustration and rage is when there is a series of modeling cycles that do, but then start edging off.  That betrayal is akin to opening a door to the sight of the back of your beautiful gorgeous true love soul mate's head blithefully bobbing up and down over some stranger's jock.  Hell hath no fury like a snow lover spurned! And that isn't even the weather - that's models doing that.  

 

Anywho... I rant -

 

I think this is unsettling as far as what's going to happen.  The NAM has a wet bias that is fairly pronounced beyond 48 hours.  What you see on the FRH grid needs to be halved quite often as those later time intervals cross the 48 hour temporal boundary.  Right now, the grid has impressive totals of BOS, but halving those would not cut it in a marginal environment.    The 00z ECM was bit more impacting, sure ... but really only by a razor margin.  Bump that solution just so slight SE and it's back to the same old snizzle fest with bit of biting wind.   Combining these two facets - heh, could see the NAM bias corrected by the Euro, and it, going slightly SE as a verification.  That would bust the GFS a bit.  Did notice that the 06z GFS appeared to come back NW with the 500mb center out there between 60 and 72 hours - less incursion by that fragmented feature we discussed late last night (That was there in the Euro by the way, and it was in the 12z oper. Euro from yesterday, too).   

 

The other thing that I find interesting about the FRH data this morning is that we have been barking east wind contamination issues all along, but the grid has N wind at Logan for 18 straight hours during max QPF.   30 to 35 kts!     Interesting mix up of fact and fiction there.  That would all fend of the oceanic warm invasion if that verified.

 

This is also a giant circulation, so much so that the typology may not apply.  There could be QPF outside the main storm-centric dynamics purely by satellite processes.  37/23 type air moving long fetch (supposing a N wind on the coast is less than correct) head long into the coast might bring theta-e pooling and saturation in pour snow growth but growth nonetheless, over an extended period of time.    I mean there is so much to this thing - tough to sort it all out.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clinch Leatherwood

Clinch Leatherwood

Posted
Posted

attachicon.gifTrop_PV.jpg

 

Here is what I was talking about in picture format. A little easier to see what I mean for those having trouble following my explanation. The Euro is the top left, with the GFS top right, and NAM in the bottom left. GEM was left out because the resolution is poor on the trop, and thus you get a lot of no data (worse than the Euro). GFS90 also suffers from poorer resolution so the individual PV anomalies aren't as strong (GFS40 shows them much deeper into the troposphere). You can see how far the northern stream PV is displaced to the NW on the NAM. Well north of Lake Superior. The Euro is north of Lake Ontario, with the GFS already cutting through Lake Ontario at 00z Friday. And the GFS is nearly fully phased by this point too.

 

 

GEM suffered from the northern PV anomaly being farther NW like the NAM.

 

Three models run so far, three different solutions.  Thanks for laying those out, it really does explain the major differences.   This run of the GFS is on its own so far in where it digs the energy.  It's also faster down south which it sometimes does.  Frankly, I have no idea what to expect.

 

GFS looks like crap.

 

It's fine, more like the RGEM than the NAM in that they're both late hits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
moneypitmike

moneypitmike

Posted
Posted

After the game, the king and the pawn go into the same box.

 

Speaking of proverbs. Like a puzzle take all the pieces, mesh em together and there is the solution.

 

BIG INCOMING!

 

And if they don't fit, force'em.

 

Looks to me like we have some model convergence taking place with the US models and the ECM. You know who is in the screw zone (as expected), unless the inverted trough can do it's dirty work as the NAM shows. The ECM also had .5" here strictly from the inverted trough type feature. Any true banding with the offshore low seems to maybe skirt NYC and then get SNE a bit...then its essentially a norlun-esque situation.

 

 

GFS totally blows.  I'm out and going to visit the lawn thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OSUmetstud

OSUmetstud

Posted
Posted

So will this end up being 2/3rds Euro and 1/3rd GFS solution when all is said and done? Euro initially had nothing into NY/NE so it did trend some...but maybe now the others come back to it.

It depends which particular model runs you're using to compare.  Keep in mind the Euro has the upper level low going due east from the NC/VA border before...it's way north of that solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clinch Leatherwood

Clinch Leatherwood

Posted
Posted

GFS is cold, and snowy in eastern New England.  Doesn't look terrible different than the Euro but it is faster, and slightly more progressive.  GFS is often too fast with systems off the east coast, Euro too slow/sw.  So I fully expect a compromise somewhere in the middle.

 

Big thing is, the 0c line isn't in Buffalo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...