Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,584
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Big Snow threat, what will it do, part II


Typhoon Tip

Recommended Posts

No what the NAM does is allow for convection to run wild because it's what we call non-hydrostatic. It's not the same parameterization like the gfs has. It's trying to mimic real life, but the problem with that is in real life we have checks and balances as to why the atmosphere isn't turned upside down. Sometimes the NAM doesn't fully get that.

I would love to sit and listen to you explain this. Modeling is so much beyond my comprehension. It is amazing to me that it can be done with any accuracy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

So hard to keep daytime temps below zero these days. Last time I saw it personally was probably 1999 or 2000 up at Lyndon State. Would be interesting if I could pull it off. Getting frigid temps (day or night) through advection has been a tough task.

. Was it close in Jan 2004 in ORH? Prob like 2F-5F for a high that one day
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only recall the Jan '04 clipper being below zero...but it was a clipper. The larger SWFE in January 1999 started off as like 3F and snow I remember. And I also now recall around 5F and snow in January 1994 during one of those storms...but it didn't last long...usually on the front end.

I cannot recall near zero temps in the cold conveyor belt of a system around here. I'm sure its happened at some point, but it has to be extremely rare.

Dec 1980/Jan 1981? I know it was darn cold and I seem to recall snow events
Link to comment
Share on other sites

. Was it close in Jan 2004 in ORH? Prob like 2F-5F for a high that one day

 

 

ORH had a high of 2F and 3F on back to back days in Jan '04. They had a high of 1F in Jan 1994. January 1981 was the last time ORH had a high of 0F or colder. Its only happened a handful of times and def won't happen this time. None of the snow events in January 1981 occurred with temps below 5F.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ORH had a high of 2F and 3F on back to back days in Jan '04. They had a high of 1F in Jan 1994. January 1981 was the last time ORH had a high of 0F or colder. Its only happened a handful of times and def won't happen this time. None of the snow events in January 1981 occurred with temps below 5F.

thanks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait are you saying American models don't factor in Ocean temps?

I will let our resident expert explain that

From DTK

 

 

.....I think that we (the GFS) do have a legitimate issue when it comes to east coast cyclogenesis events.  We currently use a coarse resolution, infrequently updated Sea Surface Temperature product to provide boundary conditions to the model (as we are currently running an atmospheric only model, not dynamically coupled to an ocean model).  I do not think that the SST product we current use provides the necessary information that the model needs in space and time off in the regions of high baroclinicity, i.e. the gulf stream region.  It is also updated too infrequently, in my opinion, which can lead to discontinuities in forecasts from cycle to cycle.   We hope to get this addressed, finally, in the next GFS implementation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dumb question.

What is the diff between that and convective feedback??

Well now I'd have to think lol. So a model like the GFS isn't made to handle real life convection. It's given parameters to help it handle convection because convection is too small to handle on its grid scale. So it's given these complicated approximations to help it handle growth and decay of convection. Now these can go wrong And as a result the latent heat released messes up the MSLP fields, heights etc and can cause a weak spurious low to form when in reality it should not have formed.

What the NAM does is that it is allowed to try and handle convection like it thinks it would happen in real life. The problem here is that it starts to go nuts if it doesn't handle it properly and now it develops these intense lows that begin to take on a life of its own. There are braking terms to cyclogenesis in real life. Think about it. When you have warm air advection in general it rises and cools. That is an offsetting process. When you have cold advection in general it sinks and sinking air warms. Offsetting process. The NAM will sometimes ignore some of the processes going on to slow down cyclogenesis. But it has become much better than it used to

Be. I probably should research it more, but that's off the top of my head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will let our resident expert explain that

From DTK

 

 

.....I think that we (the GFS) do have a legitimate issue when it comes to east coast cyclogenesis events.  We currently use a coarse resolution, infrequently updated Sea Surface Temperature product to provide boundary conditions to the model (as we are currently running an atmospheric only model, not dynamically coupled to an ocean model).  I do not think that the SST product we current use provides the necessary information that the model needs in space and time off in the regions of high baroclinicity, i.e. the gulf stream region.  It is also updated too infrequently, in my opinion, which can lead to discontinuities in forecasts from cycle to cycle.   We hope to get this addressed, finally, in the next GFS implementation.

Nice Find.

 

Yea, not making the EURO

Night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well now I'd have to think lol. So a model like the GFS isn't made to handle real life convection. It's given parameters to help it handle convection because convection is too small to handle on its grid scale. So it's given these complicated approximations to help it handle growth and decay of convection. Now these can go wrong And as a result the latent heat released messes up the MSLP fields, heights etc and can cause a weak spurious low to form when in reality it should not have formed.

What the NAM does is that it is allowed to try and handle convection like it thinks it would happen in real life. The problem here is that it starts to go nuts if it doesn't handle it properly and now it develops these intense lows that begin to take on a life of its own. There are braking terms to cyclogenesis in real life. Think about it. When you have warm air advection in general it rises and cools. That is an offsetting process. When you have cold advection in general it sinks and sinking air warms. Offsetting process. The NAM will sometimes ignore some of the processes going on to slow down cyclogenesis. But it has become much better than it used to

Be. I probably should research it more, but that's off the top of my head.

Good stuff.

Thanks.

 

Will, rip me off a text if the EURO is any good.

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.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...