MarkO Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Look at the RGEM that was just posted. I'd say so. The RPM model (I think) that all the met's have been using cornholes us. Personally, I'd rather see it come northwest for the mountains, but I'll take an easterly solution that pushes the subsidence east and jackpots the Merrimack Valley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 That's good for us, right? Yes. you're in the ORH band...I'm on the edge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowMan Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 No...it would put me in the ORH bandwell we should be good either way. But fed looks like convective feedback issues/initialization issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoarfrostHubb Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I think that central MA deform has legs. I have a shed out back if you want to use it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Paul Gordon Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Pretty insane over ORH for awhile on that Canadian. Feb 8-9 2013 gave us 28.7". Wonder if we'll beat that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 That is a great run up this way, Need to see the qpf map, But a couple nice bands Here's the rub and again - speaking from 2 experiences at the end of last season...the models never did quite catch the wiggle NE until the very end but by now the CMC/UK and by dumb luck the GFS had a very good idea while the Euro was still gunslinging. I do worry about a continued bobble of 25 miles ENE/NE on the stall each run because eventually it'd get even ahead of me here and I'd be watching spiral bands out over the water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weathafella Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Yeah I I would love to lock in the nam but goodness it's been 10 years since it had the same solution run to run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 the rgem keeps developing new low centers under convection on the east side of the storm. that's why it pulls east More or less I think it's just delayed consolidation. I know many will claim feedback and I may be entirely wrong, but I think it's more a case of the pieces taking an additional 6 or so hours to come together before the hook and capture takes place. This isn't a single run figment, I think the hints/or actual movements have been there on many models all day (aside of the Euro). If it is scoring a coup on this one and holds firm through 12z, I've been totally wrong and am biasing my opinion by getting boned by the Euro a couple of times at the end of last winter on the SW side of similar evolutions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weathafella Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 RGEM 36 to 48 nails the crap out of us. I still think euro is the highest weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Anyone have a NAM clownage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Yeah I I would love to lock in the nam but goodness it's been 10 years since it had the same solution run to run. U love the RGEM, I'm surprised you're not more amped on it's 18z and 0z runs. It's a good model, and if anything is prone to being too excitable on these big coastals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mostman Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I might trade in next winter to have the NAM verify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 More or less I think it's just delayed consolidation. I know many will claim feedback and I may be entirely wrong, but I think it's more a case of the pieces taking an additional 6 or so hours to come together before the hook and capture takes place. This isn't a single run figment, I think the hints/or actual movements have been there on many models all day (aside of the Euro). If it is scoring a coup on this one and holds firm through 12z, I've been totally wrong and am biasing my opinion by getting boned by the Euro a couple of times at the end of last winter on the SW side of similar evolutions. Problem is there wasn't a similar evolution last winter at all. Yea this may bump east a tad on the Euro but watching spiral bands, dude cmon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 congrats out east: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Anyone have a NAM clownage? I have Bufkit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ineedsnow Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 gfs has started Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professional Lurker Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 congrats out east: Something tells me I get more than 6" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N. OF PIKE Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Problem is there wasn't a similar evolution last winter at all. Yea this may bump east a tad on the Euro but watching spiral bands, dude cmon The post below is from NYC met , so remember he is referencing his area A double barrel low is certainly possible... keep in mind the solutions both the NAM and RGEM are projecting were within the realm of possibilities provided by the ECMWF EPS. This is more than a convective feedback issue... I've been looking at the initial conditions of the current clipper and it looks like its been moving a little faster than expected. For the best possible phase, we don't want to be moving as quickly so the next shortwave can capture it further west and hence allow for surface cyclogenesis to occur further west. The trends aren't good because it looks like the last 12-18 hour forecasts was a bit too slow with the primary shortwave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Lol Ray BED 34.8 IJD 34.8 ORH 37.1 yea no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I have Bufkit KBED, please And ORH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bboughton Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Lol Ray BED 34.8 IJD 34.8 ORH 37.1 yea no ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Lol Ray BED 34.8 IJD 34.8 ORH 37.1 yea no Quantitatively, no....qualitatively.....perhaps.. Apply my 1/3 rule, and it's 24.7" I buy that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I need to go roofie myself to calm down...not sure why I'm so amped up it's still 24 hours away ...maybe about to drop dead? I want to make one point to you John (Typhoon). I was a convective feedback junkie in the olds days before they largely stomped out those issues with model fixes. In the last few years it seems like it's tossed out there whenever we see things we cannot quite explain or have a model outlier that we really want to believe is correct because of common sense, overall model reliability (Euro) etc. But wouldn't convective feedback actually cause the lows to be artificially too far west in this case? The models that were initially the most west fired convection rapidly right on the coast and actually started to develop a closed low above it all the way up to phantom vorticies at 500mb. As a result progression was SLOWER...allowing for a further west capture, then the tuck and roll. Every time I heard the convective feedback stuff today the implication was it would mean the storm should be more west...I'd argue if convective feedback was involved it would have caused an earlier spinnup, faster drop of pressure, an earlier capture/close and subsequently have everything too far west. ^^ Beyond that like I said was down this road when we had similar splits in model camps late last year. That was my conclusion and I even think Will's after the fact, but I don't remember dates like he does. We're talking about 4-6 hours difference with that initial NNE to SSW band of showers/storms getting further ENE before the low develops under/near it. Earlier runs had that spinning up harder, earlier... Those couple of things and the RGEM running the other way when it's usually the model that has me ready to hit a bridge at this point... Again may be totally wrong and it doesn't matter to 90% of the people here, just wanted to point out why I'm so adamant...even if wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BostonWX Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Let's get rid of this BOS subsidence zone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I need to go roofie myself to calm down...not sure why I'm so amped up it's still 24 hours away ...maybe about to drop dead? I want to make one point to you John (Typhoon). I was a convective feedback junkie in the olds days before they largely stomped out those issues with model fixes. In the last few years it seems like it's tossed out there whenever we see things we cannot quite explain or have a model outlier that we really want to believe is correct because of common sense, overall model reliability (Euro) etc. But wouldn't convective feedback actually cause the lows to be artificially too far west in this case? The models that were initially the most west fired convection rapidly right on the coast and actually started to develop a closed low above it all the way up to phantom vorticies at 500mb. As a result progression was SLOWER...allowing for a further west capture, then the tuck and roll. Every time I heard the convective feedback stuff today the implication was it would mean the storm should be more west...I'd argue if convective feedback was involved it would have caused an earlier spinnup, faster drop of pressure, an earlier capture/close and subsequently have everything too far west. ^^ Beyond that like I said was down this road when we had similar splits in model camps late last year. That was my conclusion and I even think Will's after the fact, but I don't remember dates like he does. We're talking about 4-6 hours difference with that initial NNE to SSW band of showers/storms getting further ENE before the low develops under/near it. Earlier runs had that spinning up harder, earlier... Those couple of things and the RGEM running the other way when it's usually the model that has me ready to hit a bridge at this point... Again may be totally wrong and it doesn't matter to 90% of the people here, just wanted to point out why I'm so adamant...even if wrong! Well, for NYC's sake here's to hoping you're wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N. OF PIKE Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I have Bufkit What say you for Boston, Mr. Magoo Also Ginxy, how you think things will be lookin in Scituate around 4-5am Tues near the beach, MAN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 That, ladies and gentlemen, is the quintessential , weak el Nino-Miller B-East KU I referenced this in my winter outlook. Go check the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 The post below is from NYC met , so remember he is referencing his area Stay the course Clinch Phil882 is a huge asset, I see his stuff sometimes when I take a look at the other forums. Exactly - we're talking 4-6 hours faster net...but with the forward speed of system that pushes it almost east of the 70w line before it can get rammed north. Could all of this be error based like Forky is implying? Absolutely. Watch the GFS come in west and everyone will love it over the other two...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Messenger, the CFI was brought up by WPC repeatedly. I'm not sure I buy it, but that's why it is being honked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now