WinterWxLuvr Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 too bad the nam snow map thinks everything that falls is accumulating snow at 10:1 just about. nam_namer_036_precip_p24.gif 00znamsnow_NE036.gif Wonder why there is such a discrepecy wrt snow maps from site to site? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 you do gotta wonder what the forecasts would be if mar 6 didnt happen. I would think 3-5" with the 5" in the usually favored areas here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterWxLuvr Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 you do gotta wonder what the forecasts would be if mar 6 didnt happen. Probably find out come tomorrow morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderman Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 If GFS shows similar, this board will explode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Questsnow Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Just for fun, the 21z SREF shows a minimum of 5 inches of snow in total for DCA, with the mean up near 10". There's a trend upwards, just like we saw before March 6th. I have a bad feeling about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDweatherman Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 If GFS shows similar, this board will explode. If the GFS hints that it could be trending that way, I'd even venture to say the board could explode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 8-12 inches of snow to fall but who knows how much will accumulate. 3-6? 1-3? T? People shouldnt be having to forecast mid Atlantic snow in late march Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 If the GFS hints that it could be trending that way, I'd even venture to say the board could explode. Why the Gfs has a better run than the nam on the night of the march 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDweatherman Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Just for fun, the 21z SREF shows a minimum of 5 inches of snow in total for DCA, with the mean up near 10". There's a trend upwards, just like we saw before March 6th. I have a bad feeling about this. I don't want to post too much, but I had to reply to this. You cannot allow that instance to alter your view on it completely. Not putting much into the SREF's because of their 3/6 performance would be a much better reason; discounting them because of an uptick close to the storm which we would usually love being similar to a previous experience, no science in that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Shouldn't we have a winter storm watch? Nws is getting tired of getting heckled I guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Wonder why there is such a discrepecy wrt snow maps from site to site? raleigh's page only shows a certain time period snapshot and not the whole event so you see melt (edit, err probably just the new snapshot) as it goes forward. the stuff i posted is a direct comparo for the same time period of liquid though. it basically completely matches the liquid output at 10:1 which we know is wrong on several levels but one glaring one is it assumes accumulation begins almost immediately when that seems pretty unlikely based on the temps we'd expect if you blend reliable guidance. plus, and the radar sim is kinda silly overall, you see lots of patchier looking precip fields particularly early. i think we are into a time of year where there is enough heat retention near the surface that you need continual rates even at night in marginal temps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huffwx Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 raleigh's page only shows a certain time period snapshot and not the whole event so you see melt as it goes forward. the stuff i posted is a direct comparo for the same time period of liquid though. it basically completely matches the liquid output at 10:1 which we know is wrong on several levels but one glaring one is it assumes accumulation begins almost immediately when that seems pretty unlikely based on the temps we'd expect if you blend reliable guidance. plus, and the radar sim is kinda silly overall, you see lots of patchier looking precip fields particularly early. i think we are into a time of year where there is enough heat retention near the surface that you need continual rates even at night in marginal temps. Summary, cut the NAM QPF in half, and use half of that to get your total. So, 1 inch on NAM means .5 falls and at best you get 2.5 inches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiscaster Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 I can't blame LWX for being bearish based on this year. But, based on models/timing, I kind of think over an inch might be likely areawide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Summary, cut the NAM QPF in half, and use half of that to get your total. So, 1 inch on NAM means .5 falls and at best you get 2.5 inches. would be interesting to see more ground temps. we need a mesonet. this guy has been getting into the low 40s at night in glen allen. http://www.glenallenweather.com/upload/gtemp1.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Summary, cut the NAM QPF in half, and use half of that to get your total. So, 1 inch on NAM means .5 falls and at best you get 2.5 inches. gfs is just as wet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 would be interesting to see more ground temps. we need a mesonet. this guy has been getting into the low 40s at night in glen allen. http://www.glenallenweather.com/upload/gtemp1.php stronger sun down south explains some of that too you could get a decent tan tomorrow outside Richmond Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinylfreak89 Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 gfs is just as wet i wasn't aware the GFS ran yet o.o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 raleigh's page only shows a certain time period snapshot and not the whole event so you see melt (edit, err probably just the new snapshot) as it goes forward. the stuff i posted is a direct comparo for the same time period of liquid though. it basically completely matches the liquid output at 10:1 which we know is wrong on several levels but one glaring one is it assumes accumulation begins almost immediately when that seems pretty unlikely based on the temps we'd expect if you blend reliable guidance. plus, and the radar sim is kinda silly overall, you see lots of patchier looking precip fields particularly early. i think we are into a time of year where there is enough heat retention near the surface that you need continual rates even at night in marginal temps. I usually end up using this -- http://wxcaster.com/gis-snow-overlays.php3?STATIONID=LWX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 All of this talk about the sun angle... I bet someone at sea level on the Delmarva gets 7 inches from this easily. What will be the explanation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDweatherman Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 i wasn't aware the GFS ran yet o.o I think you and I both know what he meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 stronger sun down south explains some of that too you could get a decent tan tomorrow outside Richmond i'd guess it's not far off up here.. know avg soil temp rises above 50 by late mo (saw it in a cwg post!). the sun is really strong ... a day in the 50s feels like 70 if you can find a spot sheltered from the wind and not in the shade. rates will win.. at least at the time they are coming.. just need the rates, which is always seemingly a tricky proposition of late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interstate Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 All of this talk about the sun angle... I bet someone at sea level on the Delmarva gets 7 inches from this easily. What will be the explanation? They would have gotten 15 inches in late Jan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 All of this talk about the sun angle... I bet someone at sea level on the Delmarva gets 7 inches from this easily. What will be the explanation? hours of mega rates probably Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 John Collins on channel 11 just showed the RPM and he showed 3-6" but he said that is hard to believe this late in the year. He did seem nervous and said expect adjustments tomorrow. Tough 2 days to be a forecasting met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 uh boy NAM (change the url station ID for your location) http://68.226.77.253/text/NAMSFC/NAM_Kbwi.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinylfreak89 Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 I think you and I both know what he meant. but its a pointless argument. comparing a model run with new data to an older model run is silly if except for consitency Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huffwx Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 gfs is just as wet 18z was-- 12z was not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 uh boy NAM (change the url station ID for your location) http://68.226.77.253/text/NAMSFC/NAM_Kbwi.txt Still the 12z run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 BWI bufkit (again, just change the url at the end with your station ID) http://www.meteor.iastate.edu/~ckarsten/bufkit/data/cobb_nam/nam_kbwi.dat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueapple Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 uh boy NAM (change the url station ID for your location) http://68.226.77.253/text/NAMSFC/NAM_Kbwi.txt shows DCA surface at 32 or below for all but .14 of the precip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.