Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,588
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Feb 15 clipper/redeveloper


ORH_wxman

Recommended Posts

Yes but the scenario laid out was almost unanimous consensus at 988. Still could be a decent snow...didn't Will say 2005 was something like 995, but just rapid bombing from like 1010?

The actual lowest pressure is not as good an indicator as the overall regime....ie the pressure field of the ambient enviornment.

Its all about the gradient.

 

The blizzard of '78 was like 984 mb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The intensity of the frontal zone given the air mass contrast, rapid pressure falls, could produce astounding totals now in most of CT, nwRI and w/c MA. I would not be surprised if this goes to 35 or even 40 inches in some places with a widespread 25-30.

NAM has clearly indicated a very compressed thickness gradient that the GGEM failed to handle. That is structurally how this storm will avoid a widespread changeover during the rapid intensification stage later today and in fact the dynamics are so intense that rain may lose the battle along the front. No doubt this will lead to epic thunder-snow, and closer to the frontal zone thunder-sleet with large ice pellets possible.

Very strong NNE winds will develop with the heavy precip (ESE near the Cape). This could be a very similar storm in structural terms to the Blizzard of 1888.

The 30-40 inch snow potential will likely extend into NH and ME which will have fewer cases of coastal mixing as the cold air is already in place before the rapid deepening phase.

Then it looks like another 6-12 inches on Saturday, if there's any real break between storms, since this one will backbuild as it pulls away (it will be absorbing the Wisconsin blizzard remnant, yesterday this was dumping S+ in nw ND and se SK.

This is feedback from the anomalously cold winter further west, another similarity to 1888.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good stuff, agree and have posted similarly.

Out of my pay-grade, but I wonder if the GEFS are as sensitive as the GFS to this bit of convection shaping the midlevel centers?

Because the GEFS have been solidly consistent with the op.

Gefs would suffer the same fate.

I'm less certain of my proclamation after a few beers. Well several. I'm sure there is feedback in the gfs. Hpc is 100% right it's there and obvious.

Not confident it matters. But still tossing the gfs for a consensus of all others left 25 miles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gefs would suffer the same fate.

I'm less certain of my proclamation after a few beers. Well several. I'm sure there is feedback in the gfs. Hpc is 100% right it's there and obvious.

Not confident it matters. But still tossing the gfs for a consensus of all others left 25 miles

Right 25 miles?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The actual lowest pressure is not as good an indicator as the overall regime....ie the pressure field of the ambient enviornment.

Its all about the gradient.

 

The blizzard of '78 was like 984 mb.

 

Exactly... Jan 05 below... notable not for the SLP nadir but the tremendous 1032 HP:

post-3106-0-97839600-1392425936_thumb.pn

 

James we're all rooting for you... hope this storm approaches your signature description...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gefs would suffer the same fate.

I'm less certain of my proclamation after a few beers. Well several. I'm sure there is feedback in the gfs. Hpc is 100% right it's there and obvious.

Not confident it matters. But still tossing the gfs for a consensus of all others left 25 miles

except that HPC comment was based on 12z initial errors propagating through the run, what reason for 18z?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

except that HPC comment was based on 12z initial errors propagating through the run, what reason for 18z?

It's been more obvious in the 18z and they don't comment on off hour runs which theoretically would be much work because of the intake scheme.

It's glaring on the 18z Steve but as john often says sometimes it's a legitimate process. There is no accompanying qpf blob either.

It's there but it may not matter at all. I am betting it's responsible for extending qpf too far west but I may be totally wrong. I'd put it at 60/40

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE TAUNTON MA
438 PM EST FRI FEB 14 2014
 
-- Changed Discussion --

LOW PRESSURE AND UPPER SHORTWAVE OVER THE PLAINS RACE TO THE
NORTH CAROLINA COAST BY 12Z SATURDAY. ALL MODELS SHOW AN
INTENSIFYING COASTAL LOW MOVING NORTHEAST FROM THERE...PASSING
NEAR HE 40N/70W BENCHMARK EARLY SATURDAY NIGHT.

 

GFS HAD INITIALIZATION PROBLEMS...WE LEANED TOWARD THE 12Z ECMWF WITH QPF
FROM THE NE RIVER FORECAST CENTER. WE ALSO ADJUSTED
TEMPS/DEWPOINTS TO ALLOW FOR WET BULB COOLING ONCE THE
PRECIPITATION COMMENCES.

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...