UlsterCountySnowZ Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 My favorite part of this page is when u call the NAM out for being awful and then rest of the page is dedicated to analyzing it . LOL I really don't think the NAMS terrible... It's always had pretty significant bias' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 My favorite part of this page is when u call the NAM out for being awful and then rest of the page is dedicated to analyzing it . LOL He was comparing the 12z to 18z run. Not the 00z run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mob1 Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 What would we be rooting for to allow the second shortwave to become the dominant oneThe lead wave is too strong to allow the second one to really do some damage. The second s/w has a lot of potential if we somehow get decent separation (not likely though) or we can hope the first one just remains flat. A lot of potential here but as it is it's a decent snow event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelocita Weather Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Looks like a solid .30 - .45 area wide.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 I really don't think the NAMS terrible... It's always had pretty significant bias' What bias? A wrong bias? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 My favorite part of this page is when u call the NAM out for being awful and then rest of the page is dedicated to analyzing it . LOL In all seriousness the actual model itself isn't that bad. It's just prone to wild swings and overdone solutions and for that reason I tend to take it with a grain of salt. It really becomes a problem when people start over-analyzing it and inexperienced forecasters don't understand how to use it and when to toss it. Models are for guidance and that's especially true with the NAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 In all seriousness the actual model itself isn't that bad. It's just prone to wild swings and overdone solutions and for that reason I tend to take it with a grain of salt. It really becomes a problem when people start over-analyzing it and inexperienced forecasters don't understand how to use it and when to toss it. Models are for guidance and that's especially true with the NAM. That's exactly what bias means.. It has a quantified Qpf bias where it spits out outrageous numbers and it changes run to run.. But what I meant by bias is that it's always done that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 I tend to take it with a grain of salt. It really becomes a problem when people start over-analyzing it and inexperienced forecasters don't understand how to use it and when to toss it. Models are for guidance and that's especially true with the NAM. Are there any particular rules of thumb regarding when to take the NAM seriously and when to not give it any credence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simpsonsbuff Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 FWIW, the warmest it gets in KNYC on the 0z NAM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absolute Humidity Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 It does give PB a .5 blue dot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WintersGrasp Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 So the nam gives the NYC area a couple inches from this...and....as NAM and it's hi res have shown consistently is a VERY heavy band of snow developing in the northern middle Atlantic for the second wave....3"/hour rates which could drop 3-5" VERY quickly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 The NAM is in line with the GFS and RGEM up to this point most are in the .35 to .50 range , The Euro is the drier . Doesn't look over It does give PB a .5 blue dot. I drew that ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 The NAM looks in line with the GFS and RGEM , If the NAM is over amped it has company . Looks ok from here . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WE GOT HIM Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 So the nam gives the NYC area a couple inches from this...and....as NAM and it's hi res have shown consistently is a VERY heavy band of snow developing in the northern middle Atlantic for the second wave....3"/hour rates which could drop 3-5" VERY quickly I think that will be more north like the GFS was showing. Its prob overdoing the initial wave. Lets see what the 0z will shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weathergun Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 JFK a little warmer at 18z Tues: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjay Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 In all seriousness the actual model itself isn't that bad. It's just prone to wild swings and overdone solutions and for that reason I tend to take it with a grain of salt. It really becomes a problem when people start over-analyzing it and inexperienced forecasters don't understand how to use it and when to toss it. Models are for guidance and that's especially true with the NAM. How do you even use the NAM as guidance when its always wrong with everything from temp profiles to s/w placement and so on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simpsonsbuff Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 NAM would be an illustration why there is a WWA in Manhattan and not Southern Queens... JFK a little warmer at 18z Tues: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 FWIW, the warmest it gets in KNYC on the 0z NAM Check 21z Does it cool ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchel Volk Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 NAM is an excellent model if used correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WE GOT HIM Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 How do you even use the NAM as guidance when its always wrong with everything from temp profiles to s/w placement and so on? Its still a model, so it can be used a piece of the puzzle. (such as picking out banding near the vorts) I usually like to use it for thunderstorm season as it can pick certain dynamics out that cant be seen well on the globals but it has been terrible with winter storms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 That's exactly what bias means.. It has a quantified Qpf bias where it spits out outrageous numbers and it changes run to run.. But what I meant by bias is that it's always done that That's not what a bias is at all...a bias is when a model tends to do one thing or another. Having wildly varying precipitation solutions doesn't mean it's biased. It just means the model is inconsistent. If the NAM had any bias, it is to over-amplify systems and produce too much precipitation. But varying solutions is inconsistency, not a bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 The Second piece of energy is not that far away as seen on the Sim radar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 NAM is an excellent model if used correctly. When it comes to the question of printing out raw data...temperature, precip, wind speed, etc...I'm not sure where *our* role comes into play, in other words, if we are to characterize a model as excellent, I would infer that the data it spits out is pretty reflective of what will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Latest HRRR and to an extent RAP suggest the NAM could be out to lunch, they both sort of indicate an initial round of snow followed by a break after 13-14Z with another area awaiting out west, what becomes of that who knows but I'm sure interested to see the other models in the next hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weathergun Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 In all seriousness the actual model itself isn't that bad. It's just prone to wild swings and overdone solutions and for that reason I tend to take it with a grain of salt. It really becomes a problem when people start over-analyzing it and inexperienced forecasters don't understand how to use it and when to toss it. Models are for guidance and that's especially true with the NAM. I think the wind and temp products are still useful. But qpf and slp are unreliable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 The NAM 4k seems to see the same break , but it catches it on the back side at 16z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Latest HRRR and to an extent RAP suggest the NAM could be out to lunch, they both sort of indicate an initial round of snow followed by a break after 13-14Z with another area awaiting out west, what becomes of that who knows but I'm sure interested to see the other models in the next hour. Having the HRRR not on board is a little disconcerting considering how solid it has been of late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WintersGrasp Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 That band of snow with the second wave is going to be like a thunderstorm line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 That's not what a bias is at all...a bias is when a model tends to do one thing or another. Having wildly varying precipitation solutions doesn't mean it's biased. It just means the model is inconsistent. If the NAM had any bias, it is to over-amplify systems and produce too much precipitation. But varying solutions is inconsistency, not a bias. Ur right thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snywx Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 0z RGEM hits gives the northern burbs a solid snowstorm.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.