WEATHER53 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Models already tried to do too much and finer grids and higher resoultion is not helping. We do not need specifics beyond 5 days and they cannot deliver them anyway. Models need to either be a telescope or normal eyes and stop trying to be a microscope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amped Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I thought NAVGEM was one of the more advanced models out there? Isn't some of the data classified actually? NAVGEM couldn't cutoff a low in the southwest to save it's life. Edit: 18Z NAVGEM has the storm. NAVGEM 72hrs shows an H5 vortex just east of cabo San lucas. 18z GFS has that same vortex at the AZ, MX, border, huge difference! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amped Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Anyway, I still don't like the setup very much even with the trend for the following reasons. High is too weak and too far south. 850s not that cold, even behind the storm and surface is marginal. Vortex still track too far southeast. Powerful NRN stream low in Quebec Overall I'm not woofing unless the Quebec low stays out of the way and there is a stronger high as the crapgem and the EURO "out of control" runs are suggesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterWxLuvr Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Well, the gfs ens members don't hate the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Well, the gfs ens members don't hate the idea. Going off RaleighWx's 18z GFS ensembles, and using 72 hr QPF individual as a baseline and using the 132 hr map, I count 8 out of 20 as having 0.25" QPF or more... 6 out of 20 as having 0.50" QPF or more for DCA 5 ensembles are over 1", and 3 are over 1.50" I think we would all like p004 and p014 to go please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeSuck Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Wow, that is quite impressive. Some wound up bombs in there Going off RaleighWx's 18z GFS ensembles, and using 72 hr QPF individual as a baseline, I count 8 out of 20 as having 0.25" QPF or more... 6 out of 20 as having 0.50" QPF or more for DCA 5 ensembles are over 1", and 3 are over 1.50" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterWxLuvr Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Going off RaleighWx's 18z GFS ensembles, and using 72 hr QPF individual as a baseline and using the 132 hr map, I count 8 out of 20 as having 0.25" QPF or more... 6 out of 20 as having 0.50" QPF or more for DCA 5 ensembles are over 1", and 3 are over 1.50" I think we would all like p004 and p014 to go please I don't get to see as many as you, but I did see a couple of droolers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlaskaETC Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 NAVGEM is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clueless Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Lol. NAVGEM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 That track spells I-95 rain, I-81 snowstorm 991 over OC is def rain for us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84 Hour NAM Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 That track spells I-95 rain, I-81 snowstorm 991 over OC is def rain for us It's been that way. Last was over Williamsburg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T. August Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 That track spells I-95 rain, I-81 snowstorm 991 over OC is def rain for us It would probably be snow at the end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Is that saying true though? If the NAVGEM is amped up that much, then the other models usually follow? Or something along that line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertgny Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Is that saying true though? If the NAVGEM is amped up that much, then the other models usually follow? Or something along that line? No not true...it was exaggerated claim. Come on .... models are not created to be flat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Just to use as a comparison to the global models later tonight, but it would appear that on hr 84, the NAM would suggest that all the energy is coming out of the SW and not being left there... which tells me that it lends some credence to the EURO/GGEM/UKIE camp... plus SLP is developing in W GOM... Yes, I know its the NAM at hr 84, but I am watching the h5 charts closely. Comparing the 18z NAM at 78 to the 00z NAM 84, the h5 energy is also more consolidated on the 00z compared to the 18z NAM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84 Hour NAM Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Just to use as a comparison to the global models later tonight, but it would appear that on hr 84, the NAM would suggest that all the energy is coming out of the SW and not being left there... which tells me that it lends some credence to the EURO/GGEM/UKIE camp... plus SLP is developing in W GOM... Yes, I know its the NAM at hr 84, but I am watching the h5 charts closely. Comparing the 18z NAM at 78 to the 00z NAM 84, the h5 energy is also more consolidated on the 00z compared to the 18z NAM 18z DGEX didn't cut it, but 0z NAM looks better. We're really sick to be parsing 4th string models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtstack Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 When trying to time the ejection of energy in the southwest, things can vary drastically from apps cutters to southern sliders. I've been interested in this one since the GFS and EURO went HECS on us a few days ago, but we really have to thread the needle with this setup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterWxLuvr Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Just to use as a comparison to the global models later tonight, but it would appear that on hr 84, the NAM would suggest that all the energy is coming out of the SW and not being left there... which tells me that it lends some credence to the EURO/GGEM/UKIE camp... plus SLP is developing in W GOM... Yes, I know its the NAM at hr 84, but I am watching the h5 charts closely. Comparing the 18z NAM at 78 to the 00z NAM 84, the h5 energy is also more consolidated on the 00z compared to the 18z NAM 18z at 78 corresponds to the 0z at 72, but I get what you're saying. Looks like we would need just to hold that 500 energy just a little longer out west.Edit: the differences are big...I agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Yoda, I doubt the debate is really gfs vs all the others. The real issue is do they shift even more nw. We still need another nw push even on ggem/euro camp. Of course some of us need more then others. As much as you seem to hate it I would take the navgem solution up here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 18z at 78 corresponds to the 0z at 72, but I get what you're saying. Looks like we would need just to hold that 500 energy just a little longer out west. Oops And def agree re h5 energy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Yoda, I doubt the debate is really gfs vs all the others. The real issue is do they shift even more nw. We still need another nw push even on ggem/euro camp. Of course some of us need more then others. As much as you seem to hate it I would take the navgem solution up here. Well yes, we all would like another NW shift from the models, it just seems that the EURO/GGEM are closer to making that jump than the GFS is... 00z GFS should be interesting to see what it does with the h5 energy in the SW To me, the NAVGEM being so wound up and inland raises a large red flag, as it MIGHT suggest that the other models will come NW more... hopefully not to that extreme... and its possible NAVGEM is on its own tracking the low inland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 This may be just weenie talk... but if you look at the NAVGEM on its 12z run, it brings the SLP through the Big Bend of FL... I am almost willing to bet that whether we get nothing or crushed will depend on where the SLP crosses/comes ashore in the SE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 I thought the NAM looked lousy as it had everything moving due east with little hope to change in time http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/Image.php?fhr=084ℑ=data%2Fnam%2F00%2Fnam_namer_084_200_wnd_ht.gif&model=nam&area=namer¶m=200_wnd_ht&group=Model+Guidance&preselected_formatted_cycle_date=20150120+00+UTC&imageSize=M&ps=model Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 00z GFS is going to be another miss, but it came NW a tad IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84 Hour NAM Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 1000mb low 25 miles east of ILM at 108, precip to RIC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlaskaETC Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 GFS takes OTS again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amped Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 GFS not much change from 18z. All this does is steal the moisture return from the "real storm" on the 26th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 GFS not much change from 18z. All this does is steal the moisture return from the "real storm" on the 26th. that is a real threat. Worst case scenario is each wave this week is too weak to give us much but just enough to squash the threat behind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Anyone have a 108 UKIE panel? Trying to draw a line between the 96 SLP position and the 120 SLP position... i get somewhere around OBX? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 that is a real threat. Worst case scenario is each wave this week is too weak to give us much but just enough to squash the threat behind it. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that scenario (which is sorta showing on the GFS tonight). That h5 map is potent but with little to show for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.