February 12-13 Storm, Part III: Trilogy ends and then Obs thread soon!

[TowsonWeather]

I really just don't GET the GFS...the track looks great, upper levels look solid...but the precip is sparse and it looks horribly warm.

[PhineasC]

Closer to consensus.

I don't really see how.

[EasternUSWX]

24-30hrs till this thing is supposed to begin and we have no idea what might happen. 

[stormtracker]

the gfs would rock if the precip was like the NAM....the track is pretty good tbh

[StudentOfClimatology]

Does anyone know what the GFS is seeing that other models aren't? Maybe something to due with the Great Lakes low or convection on the right quadrant of the coastal?

[Ji]

Gfs is too low resolution to use right now. I mean it goes to 384 hours

[m045400]

How can the GFS have a similar track to the NAM, a stronger low, but warmer?  Is it because it closes off earlier?

[mdhokie]

sfc low track is perfect but all the precip is OTS.

[Subtropics]

Gfs is too low resolution to use right now. I mean it goes to 384 hours

This. Not sure why we even pay attention to the globals right now.

[winterymix]

Wondering if something is flat out incorrect with the GFS at the surface.

It clearly has the 850 mb low moving south of our area and

then north once we are on the west side of the low.   This

should be a great 850 mb track for substantial snow.

[vinylfreak89]

GFS has glaring convective feedback issue. When you see those bullseye and not smooth precip (east of VA and NC) its not parameterizing the convection well. Ignore GFS other than for h5/sfc low track. Thermals and QPF are almost certainly wrong with the convection modeled like that

 

[wxmeddler]

I don't really see how.

 

At H5 at least, Sfc low placement is getting closer to CMC/UKMET/Euro consenus. The GFS precip rates are goofy.

[mattmfm]

Track wise great for DC, even RH fields look good--just no uvv to speak of, that'd be the reason for the slight higher <850 temps. Really just doesn't make a lot of meteorological sense. 

[clskinsfan]

How can it be so dry. The gulf tap is open.

[EasternUSWX]

I just don't get it. Track good, H5 good, precip crap. 

 

[vinylfreak89]

At H5 at least, Sfc low placement is getting closer to CMC/UKMET/Euro consenus. The GFS precip rates are goofy.

 

GFS at h5 is pretty much carbon copy of 00Z ECMWF from last night... relax guys... this run is just fine

[tcutter]

Can we take any comfort in the track of the GFS at least, gotta have the track before you can get the snow right?

[MillvilleWx]

The GFS is still the furthest east so far in the early 0z runs. The 500mb on this run was actually pretty good and the low strengthened considerably down to 986 off the Delmarva. I personally don't even pay attention to the precip output. The GFS is notoriously bad with the southern stream. It's a real kick in the groin though that we are 24 hrs from the event and really no legit model consensus. It was great to see RGEM bounce back east, albeit very strangely. I thought it was going to veer to Buffalo at 18z

[ohleary]

Hmmm....second image is Jan 25, 2000

 

[StudentOfClimatology]

sfc low track is perfect but all the precip is OTS.

There's like no legitimate ll lift or precip to speak of despite the cyclogenesis.

[vinylfreak89]

I just don't get it. Track good, H5 good, precip crap. 

 

 

look at the precip bullseyes way east in the ocean. Classic convective feedback. QPF is crap... throw it out

[Ian]

It does seem to be convection issues. Just move those pink blobs over my house as snow and it's resolved.

[Ian]

Hmmm....second image is Jan 25, 2000

 

 

 

 

most of our good snowstorms look something like that

[stormtracker]

the convective feedback is usually the stuff out of weenie handbook, but it may have some merit here.   That track is actually pretty good here (not sure it's in some "consensus" as mentioned earlier...it's nothing like the Euro/CMC).

[EasternUSWX]

Hmmm....second image is Jan 25, 2000

 

 

Models failed horribly with that storm. That looks dang close too. 

[BTRWx]

Hmmm....second image is Jan 25, 2000

 

How much did D.C. mix with the 2000 storm?

[ThePhotoGuy]

JB2's Map

 

Kind of odd map. A 4+ next to a 8+?

[ohleary]

Models failed horribly with that storm. That looks dang close too. 

 

Yes they did, until the day of the storm.  LWX didn't even have a WSW out that evening when snow was starting overnight.

[yoda]

Well folks!  Lets head over to our new correspondent, the UKIE.  UKIE, what do you have for us at 36 and 48 hrs at the 850 level on your 00z run tonight?

 

 

 

 

 

[dtk]

look at the precip bullseyes way east in the ocean. Classic convective feedback. QPF is crap... throw it out

Just because convective precipitation is triggered in the model does not automatically mean the QPF is crap and to throw it out.  You have to dig a little deeper, look at heating rates, impact on mass field, etc.  I've only taken a cursory glance but I don't see anything too egregious.  It is plausible that strong, deep convection in the eastern quadrant of the storm can rob some of the fetch and mess with things.