GD0815 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Why on earth would you think that the CMC or the GFS has a better grasp on ANY aspect of the situation? you mean aside from the convective feedback issue being mentioned? The Euro isn't perfect, sometimes other Models verify better for certain storms and in certain patterns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hazwoper Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 I, like others want to hear what the ensembles say. IF they have shifted greatly to this solution, the 18Z and 0Z runs of the the GFS/NAM will be highly anticipated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxman Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Yes. March 2001 That's what scares me, but didn't all the models miss that one (for our area, Eastern NE got crushed)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxman Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 you mean aside from the convective feedback issue being mentioned? The Euro isn't perfect, sometimes other Models verify better for certain storms and in certain patterns. Dude, NO model comes close to the euro for big EC storms. I've been at this a long time too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birds~69 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Yes. March 2001 Nice comeback.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GD0815 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 I'm not a big fan of "convective feedback" explanations, even when accepting that would lead to a snowy outcome. why not? Do you have the level of knowledge that the mets who do believe this to be a concern? While I like to consider myself a smart person and enjoy this as a hobby, I do not have the chops to question mets who tell me that convective feedback is an issue, especially when their concern is buoyed by such an extreme run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delijoe Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 I, like others want to hear what the ensembles say. IF they have shifted greatly to this solution, the 18Z and 0Z runs of the the GFS/NAM will be highly anticipated The NYC board seems to like the ensembles... has anyone seen what they show for this region? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Wiggum Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Yes. March 2001You did not just go there. Ugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiburon Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 I remember March '01 distinctly. On Friday morning local outlets were forecasting a snow event for the Sunday-Tuesday timeframe. Glenn, correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the 12Z suite on Friday printed out a HECS from DC-BOS with an exploding Miller B. Watch/Warnings were raised, the "B" word was tossed around, and with each forecast from that point to the end of the event, the forecasted snow totals got lower and lower. We ended up with a slushy inch out of a 48-hour forecast of 18-24" +. So yes, my flags are raised too, a Miller B requires a great deal of timing to be a big storm in this area. Fun to track something potentially large though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 The NYC board seems to like the ensembles... has anyone seen what they show for this region? Apparently the ensembles are pretty good. Still wouldn't get really excited til I saw agreement in the 0Z runs. Model fluctuations this year from run to run have been appalling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hurricanenbc10 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 That's what scares me, but didn't all the models miss that one (for our area, Eastern NE got crushed)? Who cares if New England gets crushed? Long Island got a foot in March 2001. We didn't miss it by much geographically. But do you think anyone around here cared? These Miller "B"s are obviously the most difficult, especially since the EURO doesn't have as much of an advantage as it does when the southern branch is involved. A "B" that misses by only 50 miles can lead to a giant bust if you're on the south end of the precip...which we may be. That said, the EURO ensembles are fairly similar to the OP, but not as extreme (which figures, since they're averaging 51 solutions-could any be more extreme than the OP?) Glenn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiburon Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 The NYC board seems to like the ensembles... has anyone seen what they show for this region? Ensembles support the operational's idea of closing off the H5 low around ORF with a capture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 I'm not a fan of any explanation that relies on a met discounting a model based on the model output itself. Well, the model output can be spurious. Convective feedback errors definitely happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiehardFF Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 ECM Ensembles support the OP, marked increase of indiv members supporting heavy snowfall. Almost 90% show 6"+ for NYC. The mean is east of the OP, however. But one should not a make forecast off the EPS. This just says lets take the euro solution more seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxman Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Who cares if New England gets crushed? Long Island got a foot in March 2001. We didn't miss it by much geographically. But do you think anyone around here cared? These Miller "B"s are obviously the most difficult, especially since the EURO doesn't have as much of an advantage as it does when the southern branch is involved. A "B" that misses by only 50 miles can lead to a giant bust if you're on the south end of the precip...which we may be. That said, the EURO ensembles are fairly similar to the OP, but not as extreme (which figures, since they're averaging 51 solutions-could any be more extreme than the OP?) Glenn Who cares if New England gets crushed? Long Island got a foot in March 2001. We didn't miss it by much geographically. But do you think anyone around here cared? These Miller "B"s are obviously the most difficult, especially since the EURO doesn't have as much of an advantage as it does when the southern branch is involved. A "B" that misses by only 50 miles can lead to a giant bust if you're on the south end of the precip...which we may be. That said, the EURO ensembles are fairly similar to the OP, but not as extreme (which figures, since they're averaging 51 solutions-could any be more extreme than the OP?) Glenn Ahh, the memories! URGENT - WINTER WEATHER MESSAGE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE MOUNT HOLLY NJ 330 PM EST SAT MAR 3 2001 DEZ001>004-MDZ008-012-015-019-020-NJZ001-007>010-012>026-PAZ054-055- 060>062-067>071-040400- ATLANTIC NJ-ATLANTIC COASTAL CAPE MAY NJ-BERKS PA-BUCKS PA-BURLINGTON NJ-CAMDEN NJ-CAPE MAY NJ-CARBON PA-CAROLINE MD-CECIL MD-CHESTER PA-COASTAL ATLANTIC NJ-COASTAL OCEAN NJ-CUMBERLAND NJ-DELAWARE PA-DELAWARE BEACHES DE-EASTERN MONMOUTH NJ-GLOUCESTER NJ-HUNTERDON NJ-INLAND SUSSEX DE-KENT DE-KENT MD-LEHIGH PA-MERCER NJ-MIDDLESEX NJ-MONROE PA-MONTGOMERY PA-MORRIS NJ-NEW CASTLE DE-NORTHAMPTON PA-OCEAN NJ-PHILADELPHIA PA-QUEEN ANNE'S MD-SALEM NJ-SOMERSET NJ-SUSSEX NJ-TALBOT MD-WARREN NJ-WESTERN MONMOUTH NJ- ...WINTER STORM WATCH FOR THE PERIOD BEGINNING SUNDAY AFTERNOON AND CONTINUING THROUGH AT LEAST MONDAY EVENING... THE APPROACHING STORM HAS THE POTENTIAL TO DEVELOP BLIZZARD CONDITIONS WITH VERY HEAVY SNOWFALL AND STRONG WINDS. PREPARATIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN IMMEDIATELY. TRAVEL WILL BECOME VERY DIFFICULT AND DANGEROUS...IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE...BEGINNING LATE SUNDAY AND CONTINUING INTO THE EARLY PART OF THE NEW WEEK. IF YOU MUST TRAVEL...DO IT BEFORE SUNDAY AFTERNOON OR EXPECT TO WAIT UNTIL MID WEEK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hurricanenbc10 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 I'm not a fan of any explanation that relies on a met discounting a model based on the model output itself. Only WISHCASTERS think like this..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hurricanenbc10 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 I remember March '01 distinctly. On Friday morning local outlets were forecasting a snow event for the Sunday-Tuesday timeframe. Glenn, correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the 12Z suite on Friday printed out a HECS from DC-BOS with an exploding Miller B. Watch/Warnings were raised, the "B" word was tossed around, and with each forecast from that point to the end of the event, the forecasted snow totals got lower and lower. We ended up with a slushy inch out of a 48-hour forecast of 18-24" +. So yes, my flags are raised too, a Miller B requires a great deal of timing to be a big storm in this area. Fun to track something potentially large though. You have succeeded in giving me chills with that reminder. Yes, you are absolutely right. At this point, I would say there was more model agreement in March 2001 than there is now. Glenn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Only WISHCASTERS think like this..... In fairness, that includes most members of this board But, you are right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GD0815 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 I'm not a fan of any explanation that relies on a met discounting a model based on the model output itself. but do you even understand why the feedback issues could cause a distortion in the model output? Why would you want to be willfully ignorant of this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GD0815 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 You have succeeded in giving me chills with that reminder. Yes, you are absolutely right. At this point, I would say there was more model agreement in March 2001 than there is now. Glenn one thing i remember for sure is that march 2001 did not sneak up on us like this. Of course this close to the storm itself there were already signs of a problem.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 The run-to-run changes in the modeling, and not just the ops but even the ensembles, is a little sickening. And I don't mean that in a good way. Once upon a time, weren't the ensembles touted as a guide through the confusion of run-to-run changes in the ops? Now it seems like they are just as succeptible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiburon Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 You have succeeded in giving me chills with that reminder. Yes, you are absolutely right. At this point, I would say there was more model agreement in March 2001 than there is now. Glenn I remember that as well--ETA/EURO/GFS/UKMET all agreed with the extreme solution. The watches went out which to the public was the same as a warning and by the time everyone realized it wasn't going to make it (still blew up but too far north--the prime screwzone for a Miller , it was too late and the masses had the pitchforks out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harbourton Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 One difference between this storm and March 2001 is that it is taking place with fresh arctic air in late January and will not wind up as a drizzly rainstorm what ever the outcome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 one thing i remember for sure is that march 2001 did not sneak up on us like this. Of course this close to the storm itself there were already signs of a problem.... If there's anything this could remind me of... its, maybe, February 10 2010. The big one after the big one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxman Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Only WISHCASTERS think like this..... I'm no wishcaster. Many a famous and infamous mets think they can know the model better than the model. That has not been my experience in general. I have no idea whether it will be the case this time or if the euro solution will verify. Odds say it will not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harbourton Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 The operational 12Z euro has the primary low sinking all the way to South Carolina. Do the ensembles agree with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxLover Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Yes. March 2001 Lol. what a disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiburon Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 I'm no wishcaster. Many a famous and infamous mets think they can know the model better than the model. That has not been my experience in general. I have no idea whether it will be the case this time or if the euro solution will verify. Odds say it will not. Here's the difference--it's METEORology, not MODELology. The solution suggested by the EURO is an extreme outlier, both by climatology and common sense. It's not outside the realm of possibility, thus the excitement. Basically, what you have is a single model printing out a solution that has failed to materialize many times in the past (Miller B closing off/phasing too late, leading to a MECS for SNE and 1-2" here), and a solution that requires timing. The fact that it's the EURO is actually giving more credence to what it's showing. Also, people here have long memories about 3/5/01. Ask Glenn's former colleague how that worked out for him. So it's not unusual when professionals in the field make attempts to poo-poo an extreme outlier's forecast. I'm on wait-and-see mode right now. If the 0Z shows the same solution and other models continue to cave as they are now, I'm honking. Think of it this way. If this were the 12Z GFS or the 12Z NAM alone with this, would we even be having this conversation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hurricanenbc10 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 One difference between this storm and March 2001 is that it is taking place with fresh arctic air in late January and will not wind up as a drizzly rainstorm what ever the outcome I am not comparing the specific situation to 2001. It is a classic example of extreme solutions for a Miller "B" busting badly within 72 hours, even with other model support. It had nothing to do with what month it was. The UKMET and Canadian have both had their moments this winter. So, even if one throws out the GFS, there is other support for a more moderate solution for us (but a BIG storm for New England regardless). Glenn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxman Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Here's the difference--it's METEORology, not MODELology. The solution suggested by the EURO is an extreme outlier, both by climatology and common sense. It's not outside the realm of possibility, thus the excitement. Basically, what you have is a single model printing out a solution that has failed to materialize many times in the past (Miller B closing off/phasing too late, leading to a MECS for SNE and 1-2" here), and a solution that requires timing. The fact that it's the EURO is actually giving more credence to what it's showing. Also, people here have long memories about 3/5/01. Ask Glenn's former colleague how that worked out for him. So it's not unusual when professionals in the field make attempts to poo-poo an extreme outlier's forecast. I'm on wait-and-see mode right now. If the 0Z shows the same solution and other models continue to cave as they are now, I'm honking. Think of it this way. If this were the 12Z GFS or the 12Z NAM alone with this, would we even be having this conversation? No, but I agree with the the other 90% of what you wrote. If you don't know why the NAM and GFS are not the euro...well.... The euro at this range is pretty deadly, but that must be balanced by the odds being against such an extreme solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.