Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,584
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Thanksgiving Week Storm (Wed/Wed night)


ORH_wxman

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 857
  • Created
  • Last Reply

What a tough forecast for Boston metro...

 

0z NAM more consistent with 12z NAM, though still warmer aloft

700mb temps > 0 through much of the event all the way to NH border in eastern MA

 

On this run depiction, Boston actually does better on the backend (between 03z-07z)

 

as for people following "Tourette's", the entire 18z suite (NAM, GFS, RGEM, 21z SREFs) jumped warmer... I still give most weight to RGEM, and 0z will be very telling.

Yes, but the NAM is and has been the most capricious model of all.

It always does that.

 

The NAM had this as a fish until yesterday.

 

RGEM and GFS have been much more consistent....though the RGEM did start pretty cold.

 

SREFS? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a tough forecast for Boston metro...

 

0z NAM more consistent with 12z NAM, though still warmer aloft

700mb temps > 0 through much of the event all the way to NH border in eastern MA

 

On this run depiction, Boston actually does better on the backend (between 03z-07z)

 

as for people following "Tourette's", the entire 18z suite (NAM, GFS, RGEM, 21z SREFs) jumped warmer... I still give most weight to RGEM, and 0z will be very telling.

front end or bust

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but the NAM is and has been the most capricious model of all.

It always does that.

 

The NAM had this as a fish until yesterday.

 

RGEM and GFS have been mud more consistent.

 

SREFS? :lol:

 

Totally agree that the NAM is not worth a mention outside of 36 hours, empirically based on its performance the past few years.

And at this time for this storm, I too absolutely favor an RGEM / EC blend.

 

But to ignore the NAM within 24 hours? I am totally aware of it's historic eggs (Feb 2013). But everyone, here and at NCEP and BOX, factors it in to some degree, and jumps when it jumps. We even had a discussion in this very thread about the statistical relevance of the 18z NAM. And all 18z guidance ticked significantly warmer, so it was totally reasonable to consider it.

 

That said, I think the Boston metro forecast in this case continues to be extremely difficult. There is guidance for anything from mostly rain with non-accumulating slush to as much as 3-4 inches. Posters here may be reacting to model runs all over the place, but fact is the pro mets, TV and otherwise, appear to be struggling with this high-impact forecast just as much.

 

Eager to see 0z RGEM... would be nice to see it tick back towards 12z. Also interested to see what EC and GFS have to say about the later backend, which on the 0z NAM is the most prolific snow period for Boston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Camping out for Black Friday deals on shawls

 

 

where is MPM, he should celebrating with a case of diet pepsi. He should see a solid foot 

 

LOL.

 

I'm here.  I was trying to figure out why the NAM was dropping that lower qpf into the NW corner at hours 18-21.  :)

 

Looking forward to a good snow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus, why is the NAM still so wet?

I have like 1.6" QPF...I figured that it would have slipped, fallen, and landed on a clue by now.

Cut that $hit by a 3rd.

Pretty close to all snow on that run too. If mid levels stay cold enough I think we see mostly snow here. Rarely does sleet last for long. I only notice sleet during the 20 minute transition from snow to rain and vice versa. I think that would be the case tomorrow in E MA north of BOS.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crappy ratios, ftl.  Make sure you get your regular measurements.  Compaction might be a problem.

 

Huh?  The snow growth zone is waaaaayyyyyy above that level.  If anything you could be getting huge aggregates due to the marginal low level temps, especially in moderate to heavy snow with the flake concentration so high.  Those things will stick together like cotton candy.  And compaction is more of an issue in long-duration fluff events anyway, not a heavy thumper that drops all its snow in like 9 hours.

 

C'mon man...you can't find any more negatives.  They're all played out ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree that the NAM is not worth a mention outside of 36 hours, empirically based on its performance the past few years.

And at this time for this storm, I too absolutely favor an RGEM / EC blend.

 

But to ignore the NAM within 24 hours? I am totally aware of it's historic eggs (Feb 2013). But everyone, here and at NCEP and BOX, factors it in to some degree, and jumps when it jumps. We even had a discussion in this very thread about the statistical relevance of the 18z NAM. And all 18z guidance ticked significantly warmer, so it was totally reasonable to consider it.

 

That said, I think the Boston metro forecast in this case continues to be extremely difficult. There is guidance for anything from mostly rain with non-accumulating slush to as much as 3-4 inches. Posters here may be reacting to model runs all over the place, but fact is the pro mets, TV and otherwise, appear to be struggling with this high-impact forecast just as much.

 

Eager to see 0z RGEM... would be nice to see it tick back towards 12z. Also interested to see what EC and GFS have to say about the later backend, which on the 0z NAM is the most prolific snow period for Boston.

Ignoring it, and holding off on any changes because you consider it suspect are two different ideologies.

 

I felt as though it was suspect, and would come back to Earth, and it has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ignoring it, and holding off on any changes because you consider it suspect are two different ideologies.

I felt as though it was suspect, and would come back to Earth, and it has.

Yet the 18z GFS was by far the warmest of the guidance earlier this evening. Waiting for that to cool the mid levels before spiking anything.

0z RGEM coming in warm again leads me to believe the 0z NAM was the run out of whack. Not the 18z. We shall see.

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...