WE GOT HIM Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 The GFS is usually too weak and far east with southern stream systems. It took forever for it to pick up on the storm last February while the euro had it run after run. http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-us-weather-prediction-computer-gap.html Blue do you know if the gfs is really getting the big upgrade this summer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 The NAM sharpens the trough and looks great at H5. The GFS is sloppy and much less amplified. Given the Euro and it's ensembles it's easy to toss the GFS. This place is laughable sometimes. The NAM is at the very end of its range where it is notoriously inaccurate. The Euro has struggled all winter. Tossing solutions because you don't like them does not good analysis make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 The gfs is getting better, the difference in the kicker is significant, but it's such a pain sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTWeatherFreak Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Like the NAM, its got that double strung out low at the surface... wtf? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsPens87 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/Image.php?image=data%2Fgfs%2F18%2Fgfs_namer_081_500_vort_ht.gif&model=gfs&area=namer&storm=&cycle=18¶m=500_vort_ht&fhr=081&group=Model+Guidance&imageSize=M&scrollx=0&scrolly=17 http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/Image.php?image=data%2Fnam%2F18%2Fnam_namer_081_500_vort_ht.gif&model=nam&area=namer&storm=&cycle=18¶m=500_vort_ht&fhr=081&group=Model+Guidance&imageSize=M&scrollx=0&scrolly=19 Running them back and forth it's hard for me to find significant differences outside of the strength of the southern vort that would make that much of a difference. If anything the PV is a hair further south/east on the GFS which compresses the flow and doesn't allow for significant amplification of the trough. But that is really splitting hairs there trying to find differences most important in the end solution. Like I said the major difference is in and of itself the strength of the southern vort or lack thereof on the GFS. If the vort were stronger it would allow heights to pump more out ahead of it more like the NAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 The GFS is usually too weak and far east with southern stream systems. It took forever for it to pick up on the storm last February while the euro had it run after run. http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-us-weather-prediction-computer-gap.html The tendency is for the GFS to be here at this range .( That said it`s done a great job this winter ) But the more consistent guidance here has been the Euro Ensembles which has been 50 miles either side of OBX to the BM for 5 days . You expect the GFS to come W and evolve to just one SLP . I really like that the usually amped and west bias control run has now come east for the 3rd straight times and hangs the 0 line down into CNJ at its warmest . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 This place is laughable sometimes. The NAM is at the very end of its range where it is notoriously inaccurate. The Euro has struggled all winter. Tossing solutions because you don't like them does not good analysis make. It's easy to throw out the gfs because it's an outlier for one, but it's trending toward the other models, albeit slowly. The difference in the kicker strongly suggest a low closer to the coast. The Euro has been doing much better as of late because it's really good with southern stream systems, which is what this is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsPens87 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 This place is laughable sometimes. The NAM is at the very end of its range where it is notoriously inaccurate. The Euro has struggled all winter. Tossing solutions because you don't like them does not good analysis make. I wouldn't be so quick to call it laughable though. The EURO was struggling with the northern stream but lately when the southern stream has come into play its been doing much better for itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 The takeaway from the 18z run of the GFS is that the model has brought more qpf farther west than the 12z run. Although there was no phased storm and the changes were modest, one should watch future runs to see if the model is beginning to trend toward the ECMWF/ECMWF ensembles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 The tendency is for the GFS to be here at this range .( That said it`s done a great job this winter ) But the more consistent guidance here has been the Euro Ensembles which has been 50 miles either side of OBX to the BM for 5 days . You expect the GFS to come W and evolve to just one SLP . I really like that the usually amped and west bias control run has now come east for the 3rd straight times and hangs the 0 line down into CNJ at its warmest . Yeah, the euro ensembles are tough to beat when they lock in within 120 hrs on a storm. But the GFS will eventually come west when it sees the features better. AMPLIFYING SHORTWAVE MOVING INTO THE SOUTHEAST WED~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PREFERENCE: NON-GFS COMPROMISECONFIDENCE: AVERAGE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 What did the EPS control run have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/Image.php?image=data%2Fgfs%2F18%2Fgfs_namer_081_500_vort_ht.gif&model=gfs&area=namer&storm=&cycle=18¶m=500_vort_ht&fhr=081&group=Model+Guidance&imageSize=M&scrollx=0&scrolly=17 http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/Image.php?image=data%2Fnam%2F18%2Fnam_namer_081_500_vort_ht.gif&model=nam&area=namer&storm=&cycle=18¶m=500_vort_ht&fhr=081&group=Model+Guidance&imageSize=M&scrollx=0&scrolly=19 Running them back and forth it's hard for me to find significant differences outside of the strength of the southern vort that would make that much of a difference. If anything the PV is a hair further south/east on the GFS which compresses the flow and doesn't allow for significant amplification of the trough. But that is really splitting hairs there trying to find differences most important in the end solution. Like I said the major difference is in and of itself the strength of the southern vort or lack thereof on the GFS. If the vort were stronger it would allow heights to pump more out ahead of it more like the NAM. You mentioned the southern shortwave and that is really important. The NAM is so much more amplified and consolidated with that feature, similar to the CMC/ECMWF/NGP that it has much more impressive mid level height rises ahead of it when compared to the GFS. This allows for a much more favorable pattern in the Western Atlantic and allows the surface low to really develop along the baroclinic zone. It also has stronger and more broad ridging into Maine, and is farther south with the northern stream disturbance over the Great Lakes which is attempting to phase in and also helping in amplification. Also, if you look at the mid level winds..the GFS is much farther southeast and not well positioned with the trough over the Great Lakes...so mid level winds are pressing on the flow over all of the Northeast. A much less favorable setup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 What did the EPS control run have? Not a bad signal on the ensemble mean. Lets hope that it reasonably holds serve as we get under 72 hrs. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=645451385502123&set=pb.129478830432717.-2207520000.1391985261.&type=3&theater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsteff Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I can't get past the low over the lakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsPens87 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 You mentioned the southern shortwave and that is really important. The NAM is so much more amplified and consolidated with that feature, similar to the CMC/ECMWF/NGP that it has much more impressive mid level height rises ahead of it when compared to the GFS. This allows for a much more favorable pattern in the Western Atlantic and allows the surface low to really develop along the baroclinic zone. It also has stronger and more broad ridging into Maine, and is farther south with the northern stream disturbance over the Great Lakes which is attempting to phase in and also helping in amplification. Also, if you look at the mid level winds..the GFS is much farther southeast and not well positioned with the trough over the Great Lakes...so mid level winds are pressing on the flow over all of the Northeast. A much less favorable setup. Let's play a little what if, since this is such an intricate setup in so many varying ways. If the GFS were as strong with the southern vort as the NAM what do you think the downstream effects would be then? (Using the same position of the GL disturbance as the GFS currently has). Maybe a situation where you'd have a coastal bomb but the GL disturbance pushes back on the dynamics on the NWRN side of the precip shield similar to ggem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsPens87 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I can't get past the low over the lakes. It can be a bad thing or a good thing ( I know this sounds so cliché) But watch/read/participate in the discussion between Earthlight and myself and others about this feature as to how it may eventually affect the outcome of this system as this is currently what we are keying in on as a major player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Let's play a little what if, since this is such an intricate setup in so many varying ways. If the GFS were as strong with the southern vort as the NAM what do you think the downstream effects would be then? (Using the same position of the GL disturbance as the GFS currently has). Maybe a situation where you'd have a coastal bomb but the GL disturbance pushes back on the dynamics on the NWRN side of the precip shield similar to ggem? I think it gets u the Canadian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96blizz Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 It can be a bad thing or a good thing ( I know this sounds so cliché) But watch/read/participate in the discussion between Earthlight and myself and others about this feature as to how it may eventually affect the outcome of this system as this is currently what we are keying in on as a major player.Glad to have you posting!I has asked about the N/S component of the kicker. Thoughts on an ideal position to watch for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsPens87 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Glad to have you posting! I has asked about the N/S component of the kicker. Thoughts on an ideal position to watch for? It depends on so many things, I actually like the NAM position because it doesn't compress the mid levels like Earthlight said and it allows significant amplification of the southern vort. It's also not so far back that the coastal can cut inland or hug too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 18z GEFS ensembles mean like a track near the benchmark with at least 0.50" of QPF for all areas from Allentown, PA East and 0.75" + east of 95. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 It can be a bad thing or a good thing ( I know this sounds so cliché) But watch/read/participate in the discussion between Earthlight and myself and others about this feature as to how it may eventually affect the outcome of this system as this is currently what we are keying in on as a major player. Great to have you guys posting. Hopefully this turns out well and doesn't fall apart like the last threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 18z GEFS ensembles mean like a track near the benchmark with at least 0.50" of QPF for all areas from Allentown, PA East and 0.75" + east of 95. Great sign there-whenever the ensembles are that much more robust than the operational, you know it's almost certainly headed west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 18z DGEX is a mess with 4 low centers. The primary a sub 996mb low just south of Suffolk County. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsPens87 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 18z GEFS ensembles mean like a track near the benchmark with at least 0.50" of QPF for all areas from Allentown, PA East and 0.75" + east of 95. This sounds good to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 This sounds good to me. Yeah, I think at least a few of the individual members must be fairly amped up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsPens87 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Yeah, I think at least a few of the individual members must be fairly amped up. Thank you for your continued PBP. You do a good job/service to this community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 The southern vort should be onshore by the 12z runs tomorrow. Hopefully once the models are able to get a better handle on the strength of this vort we'll get closer to a consensus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 The southern vort should be onshore by the 12z runs tomorrow. Hopefully once the models are able to get a better handle on the strength of this vort we'll get closer to a consensus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WE GOT HIM Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 18z GEFS ensembles mean like a track near the benchmark with at least 0.50" of QPF for all areas from Allentown, PA East and 0.75" + east of 95. Yea thats a pretty nice shift Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Thank you for your continued PBP. You do a good job/service to this community. Much appreciated, especially coming from a red tagger. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.