Geos Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 I don't know how to feel. GFS hasn't budged all too much, while the NAM is running Super Mario Bros. right now. Go for the middle ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Tough call. Probably neither as I think the globals could be a bit south and not strong enough with the frontogenesis band but it's hard to go all in with the NAM. Heck even toning down the NAM would still be a nice warning criteria event for Chicago proper. Yep. A blend is probably a solid call right now. Certainly looks like 6"+ amounts into Chicago are looking more likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone77 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Would sure love to know what the difference is between the NAM and GFS fundamentally. How could two NCEP models be this far from each other from a synoptic event that's only about 24hrs out? I'd say it's pretty asinine. One of them is gonna bust hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJSnowLover Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Go for the middle ground? 3-4" on the GFS, 14-16" on the NAM. Middle ground is 8-10". Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chitown Storm Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 I don't know how to feel. GFS hasn't budged all too much, while the NAM is running Super Mario Bros. right now. Go big or go home. Even if the big dog doesn't pan out we still had a hell of a winter. I say go all in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundersnow12 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Victor Gensini's thoughts, "GFS is having issues with the convection to the southeast of the surface low. This is revealed in the low-level PV fields. I am betting that later GFS runs will strengthen and slide further northwest." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 I called that when we started the original thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 The GFS remaining steady is better than it trending further away from the NAM's solution. I'd say it's a win all things considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCNYILWX Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Where's RC, our resident LOT member? I'd say he's literally flipping coins for this forecast.Honestly while it's fun to look at all this stuff don't envy the tough decisions that will have to be made. At least with the system being onshore observational trends will be a bigger part of the forecast process. I continue to think that the globals have been a bit too far south and meager with cold sector qpf. Being farther northwest fits the conceptual model of these types of systems. We'll see if the bump north on the GFS this run continues at 6z. On the other hand, the NAM is probably still overdoing it a bit. I said 3-6" earlier for the Chicago metro, think I'll bump that to 4-7" locally 8" and if the NAM continues to show the huge snows at 6z and 12z tomorrow it really could be onto something. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 I called that when we started the original thread You sure did. Your post was the first thing I thought about in fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone77 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Victor Gensini's thoughts, "GFS is having issues with the convection to the southeast of the surface low. This is revealed in the low-level PV fields. I am betting that later GFS runs will strengthen and slide further northwest." That's kind of what I was thinking with the Euro. Looked odd to have a compact blob of high qpf so close to the low, with very little up in the main cold sector precip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 You sure did. Your post was the first thing I thought about in fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone77 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Just for laughs, here's the 4km NAM 6hr snowfall at 11z Wed. Large areas of 6-8", with a few 9-10" lollies lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Victor Gensini's thoughts, "GFS is having issues with the convection to the southeast of the surface low. This is revealed in the low-level PV fields. I am betting that later GFS runs will strengthen and slide further northwest." Yeah, it's pretty obvious something fishy's going on with that spurious blob of QPF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Chad Evans going 1-3" in Lafayette with heavier amounts just north. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimillman Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 I feel like we see these bumps northwest in the mesoscale models quite often about 36 hours from an event. They tend to trend south and east as time grows closer to the event. I'm thinking a GFS solution is looking most likely right now. We'll see what Dr. No has in store for us though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanDe680 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Victor Gensini's thoughts, "GFS is having issues with the convection to the southeast of the surface low. This is revealed in the low-level PV fields. I am betting that later GFS runs will strengthen and slide further northwest." That Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Went back to the 21z SREF mean. Removed all ARW members (showing 20-30"), removed all NMM members (showing DAB-2") and we're left with a mean of 9.8". Think that's entirely reasonable at this point and I'll bump my call for YYZ to 7-11". Even if the stingier RGEM verified probably would still get into the low end of my range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Changeover timing remains the wild card, but I think I like 3-5" for LAF. Small potatoes, relative to what others may get, but still pretty decent for here. If nothing else, I like my chances of getting past 70" for the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone77 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Gonna ride my earlier call for 2-4" for QC/here for now, but definitely not discounting a more significant event. A dynamic, springtime event may be more in the high-res model's wheelhouse compared to the globals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppsRunner Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 6-10" for Route 6/North for NWOH. Go big or go home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Changeover timing remains the wild card, but I think I like 3-5" for LAF. Small potatoes, relative to what others may get, but still pretty decent for here. If nothing else, I like my chances of getting past 70" for the season. Ya think? lol I think I'll wait til tomorrow to update my call but would anticipate a bump upward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCNYILWX Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Victor Gensini's thoughts, "GFS is having issues with the convection to the southeast of the surface low. This is revealed in the low-level PV fields. I am betting that later GFS runs will strengthen and slide further northwest." Good to read his thoughts on this. Does he think the NAM is still overdoing it some? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago Storm Posted March 11, 2014 Author Share Posted March 11, 2014 Looking over things one of the differences between the NAM and the GFS is how they handle the northern stream. The GFS is farther east with the northern stream, thus a later phase. For example, at 36hrs the NAM is already negative tilt with the wave within the trough, while the GFS is still neutral tilt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone77 Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 The RGEM coming in less amped (compared to the NAM) is a bit surprising, and maybe a bit concerning when it comes to rooting for a more amped up system. It usually gets pretty amped up similar to the NAM with a dynamic system like this. The fact that it's pretty meager relative to the NAM is of some concern.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Ya think? lol I think I'll wait til tomorrow to update my call but would anticipate a bump upward. Hey, you never know...but yeah. Really need kind of an overachiever to get to my predicted 75". Let's hope... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 The RGEM coming in less amped (compared to the NAM) is a bit surprising, and maybe a bit concerning when it comes to rooting for a more amped up system. It usually gets pretty amped up similar to the NAM with a dynamic system like this. The fact that it's pretty meager relative to the NAM is of some concern.. Yeah I believe SSC mentioned this earlier. They are often holding hands in that regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radioman Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 GGEM HR 36 RGEM HR 36 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radioman Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Big shift NW from 12z GGEM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted March 11, 2014 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Apparently, GGEM gets to Cleveland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.