Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

00z Model Discussion | January 2-3 Winter storm


WE GOT HIM

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 385
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Up in the NE thread, Tip is suggesting convective feedback again in the GFS. He likes the NAM better.

I dont know what to think except that sometimes convective feedback verifies.

 

I think that he's right, this is the same thing the GFS did on the 2/8 event last year, it was popping 2 low centers for days and did not really consolidate til maybe 48 hours or less before the storm, the fact the RGEM and the NAM agree gives more fuel to that argument, the GGEM and Euro have generally not been showing the crazy 2 low idea either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anytime a model doesn't show what certain people want they claim convective feedback issues

His reasoning was sound. He may be right. The gfs and nam are both pretty big hits for eastern sne. It's not like he's tossing one for the biggest solution.

All things still on the table at this point, hopefully everyone cashes in to their liking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't quite jump to that conclusion. Tip is a pretty knowledgeable met and all things considered the explanation he provided in the NE forum is actually a very sensible post. It is very possible his points are true.

So as a met he liked a model that's standing all alone on a solution? Especial one that has an amped Qpf bias

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People get so upset on this board if u make an observation or state an opinion that has anything to do with hurting their chance for big snows lol I love how no one is even mentioning the fact that the GGEM shows almost a complete miss.. Could any mets weigh in?

 

GGEM is like GFS. Guess we have to just toss both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gfs 4 to 8. NAM 8 to 12. Wait for euro. Blend em and it's warning criteria w temps goin to 10. It will b a good storm regardless

Yeah it's exciting either way...but in this case I think it's more like gfs 4-6 and NAM 10-15. Id really think that given it's track record of always doing this at around this time frame before an event, it should be tossed unless supported by another reputable model like the GFS or Euro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People get so upset on this board if u make an observation or state an opinion that has anything to do with hurting their chance for big snows lol I love how no one is even mentioning the fact that the GGEM shows almost a complete miss.. Could any mets weigh in?

It no longer shows a complete miss. Post less. Read moar.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People get so upset on this board if u make an observation or state an opinion that has anything to do with hurting their chance for big snows lol I love how no one is even mentioning the fact that the GGEM shows almost a complete miss.. Could any mets weigh in?

Not anymore, it just came significantly west from what I can see with those crap graphics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the NAM scores the coup were all eating crap and lots of it with all the crap we give it haha

The only thing that I've found the NAM to be useful for is it's sim radar and/or banding setups....in the 15-25 hour timeframe or so. But as the event draws closer, the HRRR can be used for that as well and has performed very well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nam has the rgem and cras on its side. The Srefs also have some monster hits. I think people betting against the nam will lose on this one. The h5 trends on the gfs were undeniable.

 

NAM is known for amped solutions with higher QPF. Cras is know for being amped and west. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that he's right, this is the same thing the GFS did on the 2/8 event last year, it was popping 2 low centers for days and did not really consolidate til maybe 48 hours or less before the storm, the fact the RGEM and the NAM agree gives more fuel to that argument, the GGEM and Euro have generally not been showing the crazy 2 low idea either.

I would think to an extent the lead vort and low is right, but there should definitely be more of a reflection near the coast with that strong a vortmax and track, along with the contrasting airmasses. It won't be a super-detonator like Boxing Day 2010 was, but I have to think it will be more impressive than the GFS keeps showing. And it has a tendency to do this-note in this run the diamond shaped convective blobs over the Gulf Stream and the low developing. That always seems to be mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...