Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,588
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

2-1-15 to 2-2-15 Snow and Mix to Snow Storm


Clinch Leatherwood

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

4-7" here accounting for colder euro. Then a mess. Nice system

Ya I think 4-7" is a good call for anyone within 25 miles of the coast. Once you get north of that I think 7-14" is about the maximum. Hope I'm wrong but I definitely don't see any way we don't taknt for a while on the coast. Prob a 4" front end thump, followed by some taint or maybe even a bit of plain rain along the immediate (10 miles) south coast, then a couple inches of snow on the back end. Congrats again to those who are gonna cash in (imo BDL,ORH,BOS)! Getting really sick of living right on the coast real quick lmao.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At 850, there is about a 5C degree difference in temps for this area GFS vs. Euro at hour 54 (about 2 vs -3). Pre Juno I would have ignored the GFS. So much for an easy forecast.

You know I mentioned this after the Euro failed in Juno...its greatest asset is its consistency. But that also means it's much slower to pick up on trends. With Juno the slight ticks east in the final 24-36 hours should've been a clue in NYC when the Euro was already on the west side of guidance. This time it's on the southern side of guidance with slight ticks north each run, leading me to believe it's still not done coming north and the GFS/GGEM will be closer to reality.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone remember how ridiculously warm the GFS was for the 1/24 system. The Euro was significantly cooler (on the coolest side of the guidance) along with the GGEM.

 

No matter how good or bad GFS did with JUNO (hate using wx channel names) GFS still has a warm bias and it is likely way too warm. The end result is likely a compromise but a 75/25 split in favor of the Euro seems more likely than the Euro caving to the GFS...in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone remember how ridiculously warm the GFS was for the 1/24 system. The Euro was significantly cooler (on the coolest side of the guidance) along with the GGEM.

 

No matter how good or bad GFS did with JUNO (hate using wx channel names) GFS still has a warm bias and it is likely way too warm. The end result is likely a compromise but a 75/25 split in favor of the Euro seems more likely than the Euro caving to the GFS...in my opinion.

I agree with your assessment. BOX tends to agree as well in this mornings discussion - they seem to be looking at the pattern overall in relation to the cold air staying locked in place for most of the area:

"VIGOROUS H5 SHORT WAVE AND ASSOCIATED SURFACE LOW PRES MOVE OUT

OF THE OHIO VALLEY TO THE MID ATLC COAST BY 12Z MON. BY THEN...

THOUGH...EXCELLENT OVERRUNNING IN PLACE WITH DEEP MOISTURE FEED

WORKING INTO THE REGION. WITH COLD AIR ALREADY IN PLACE...AND HIGH

PRES MOVING IN TANDEM ACROSS SOUTHERN CANADA... WILL NOT BE

DISPLACED. EXPECT LIGHT SNOW TO SPREAD ACROSS THE REGION SUNDAY

NIGHT."

Let's see if they change that opinion at all in the next discussion.  With the GFS out of whack with everything else, I don't think so.

I don't think the arctic front will budge that much after it clears the cost on Sunday.  With deep snowpack and arctic air all the way to the coast while this storm is getting its act together, it's going to be tough for that warm air to mix in, even at the upper levels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know I mentioned this after the Euro failed in Juno...its greatest asset is its consistency. But that also means it's much slower to pick up on trends. With Juno the slight ticks east in the final 24-36 hours should've been a clue in NYC when the Euro was already on the west side of guidance. This time it's on the southern side of guidance with slight ticks north each run, leading me to believe it's still not done coming north and the GFS/GGEM will be closer to reality.

Sent from my iPhone

 

The whole concept of model consistency is interesting.  I expect that the models evaluate the data completely anew with each run, so they really shouldn't be consistent unless the projections from the previous run are verifying reasonably well in the intervening hours.  As a consequence, consistency should be closely linked to accuracy and shouldn't prevent a model from being equally apt at picking up trends.  Am I misunderstanding how this works?

 

Consistency for it's own sake, especially at the cost of agility, seems totally worthless to me and not an asset at all.

 

I could come up with a very consistent model on my own.  It predicts 8 inches of snow every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole concept of model consistency is interesting. I expect that the models evaluate the data completely anew with each run, so they really shouldn't be consistent unless the projections from the previous run are verifying reasonably well in the intervening hours. As a consequence, consistency should be closely linked to accuracy and shouldn't prevent a model from being equally apt at picking up trends. Am I misunderstanding how this works?

Consistency for it's own sake, especially at the cost of agility, seems totally worthless to me and not an asset at all.

I could come up with a very consistent model on my own. It predicts 8 inches of snow every day.

I have no idea how it actually works. But I could imagine that the model might be programmed to dampen or throw out all together any major outlier inputs in order to essentially QC the input data, even if it is real.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea how it actually works. But I could imagine that the model might be programmed to dampen or throw out all together any major outlier inputs in order to essentially QC the input data, even if it is real.

 

Sure, but I don't think that would artificially improve consistency, because real deviations in the initialization data vs. the projected state from the previous run would presumably be reflected across the board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, the more I look at this thing ...heh, long duration despite rapid translation of features.  It's because we relay one favorable mechanical setup (overrunning) right into one driven by cyclogenic processes... The whole thing is a solid 18 hours to play out... 

 

With such fantastic overrunning structures...would not be at all surprised if both uniform cirrus and lowering ceiling cuts to steady light snow prior to the models Sunday around game time.. and goes steady eddy until it gets windier/squallier and more banded associated with elevated meso features as the S/W mechanics pass over sometime on Monday/Monday evening. 

 

That GGEM solution was a quintessential snow-machine. Period.  I mean, it just squeezes a deeping low and associated elevated jet fields parabolically around the BL resistance of all this nascent cold air pumping into the lower thickness intervals, out of a polar-arctic high that is moving just perfectly in tandem across E Ontario.  You can't draft this stuff up any better....  Granted, there are other guidance' to rely upon, just sayin'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were saying NOGAPS and I believe the Canadian sniffed this out early; did they do the same for the 1/26 storm?

Nogaps (now navgem) sniffed the 1/26 event quickly. It used to be the progressive model but now it seems almost too amplified. Eg today's run floods alt of is with 40F at the height.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must be completely missing something but I am really shocked at some of the forecasts out there.  I went with 4-7'' for much of CT with the exception of 2-4'' down across the southern portion of the state.  There just seems to be too many flags for my liking which I think will negate against a much more substantial event.  Speed of the system, lack of a pronounced mid-level circulation, not much lift in the best snow growth zone.  Maybe so many are gung ho b/c of the QPF but I just don't see anything justifying widespread 8" or even 12"+ amounts.  

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...