Bob Chill Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Why though? You said it yourself there is nothing to keep this from cutting and we already went from pretty good on 12z to almost game over on 18z. Weaker and strung out we lose front end dump. Strong cuts west. Departing high and gl low. Hard to see a win scenario but lesser degrees of losing I guess. What kind of set up does the best ensemble member show I wonder. West track is fine if the airmass is legit. We're way outside of op skill for fine details. 18z is within the envelope and op solutions will jump every 6-12 hours. Myself among others said its not a cold powder setup. Still could happen that way but looking at the overall setup says otherwise for now. We can't be certain that there won't be cold hp to the north 6+ days out. I will say the vast majority of euro ens members had a very cold hp wedged in as the storm approaches and the tracks were mixed. I'll stay optimistic until that part starts looking iffy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 Just a quick glance at some of the ensemble members gives one pause. The scenario of a west track is very real and the seasonal trend with the models is that the modeled cold air 7 days in advance is too deep. So figure on some temperature moderation and a west track and things don't look too good for the 4+ inches scenario. One would think a more wound up low would produce more QPF on the front end, but that also means more west which usually equals more warm air. Not feeling too good on this at the moment. There are scenarios where this could work, but has been mentioned many times, it's 7 days away. It WILL change. Fingers crossed for the better. the GFS ensemble mean has been west of us since 6Z (I didn't check any earlier runs), but the operational at 12Z was perfect and 18Z only slightly flawed imby (90% falls as snow) it's just too early to know anything for certain, but it beats hoping on a clipper needing to travel from Detroit to Norfolk to see snow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BristowWx Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 West track is fine if the airmass is legit. We're way outside of op skill for fine details. 18z is within the envelope and op solutions will jump every 6-12 hours. Myself among others said its not a cold powder setup. Still could happen that way but looking at the overall setup says otherwise for now. We can't be certain that there won't be cold hp to the north 6+ days out. I will say the vast majority of euro ens members had a very cold hp wedged in as the storm approaches and the tracks were mixed. I'll stay optimistic until that part starts looking iffy. Good enough. 18z was a bit unnerving but not unexpected at this lead. On to 0z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLPressure Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 the GFS ensemble mean has been west of us since 6Z (I didn't check any earlier runs), but the operational at 12Z was perfect and 18Z only slightly flawed imby (90% falls as snow) it's just too early to know anything for certain, but it beats hoping on a clipper needing to travel from Detroit to Norfolk to see snow The EURO members do show a colder scenario than the GEFS. Too many members of the GEFS show a quick warming of the air mass. But I agree it is too early and it is definitely better than the clipper express! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Chill Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Good enough. 18z was a bit unnerving but not unexpected at this lead. On to 0z. Exactly. On to 0z. The shortwave responsible is a long ways off. And the moving parts in front of it are far from resolved. We have all forgotten what it's like to have a long lead track with a stable block. Without that, 6-7 day leads on ops are as stable as a drunk in a kayak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlet Pimpernel Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Exactly. On to 0z. The shortwave responsible is a long ways off. And the moving parts in front of it are far from resolved. We have all forgotten what it's like to have a long lead track with a stable block. Without that, 6-7 day leads on ops are as stable as a drunk in a kayak. Ha!! I literally LOL-ed at this! Much needed humor, that's for sure. Anyhow, yes, it's still a week out. A part of me feels like here we go again, like the Feb. 1-2 fiasco when all the models immediately latched on to the more north track all at once in that fateful 00Z run and never looked back. But that was more like ~3.5 days out when it all fell apart, not 7. So hard to say at this point that we're looking at the same scenario. Hopefully not. The thing I think which is a bit more positive here is the antecedent cold air in place (others have mentioned this already). I don't think we had quite the same level of cold with the other event. One nagging thing is that darned low up near the Lakes, we've seen that all too often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterWxLuvr Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 i worry more about lack of precip/dryslotting than anything with this event Always my biggest worry. I never feel bad when it's rain....but knowing it was cold enough for snow but can't get any precip out of a storm drives me nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLPressure Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Exactly. On to 0z. The shortwave responsible is a long ways off. And the moving parts in front of it are far from resolved. We have all forgotten what it's like to have a long lead track with a stable block. Without that, 6-7 day leads on ops are as stable as a drunk in a kayak. I wanted to highlight portions of this post but they are all pertinent. Earlier this season I was completely dismayed (destroyed) by the inaccuracies of the model predictions in the medium to long range. You responded to one of my rantings and I was still adamant about the low quality of the models in the 7+ day range. I have since taken the time to ingest your and others postings on the models and the season we are having. I understand much better and have accepted the reality of weather forecasting and chaos. Thank you (and all others) for your patience and exceptional clarity in conveying the realities of the world of reading weather models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 I wanted to highlight portions of this post but they are all pertinent. Earlier this season I was completely dismayed (destroyed) by the inaccuracies of the model predictions in the medium to long range. You responded to one of my rantings and I was still adamant about the low quality of the models in the 7+ day range. I have since taken the time to ingest your and others postings on the models and the season we are having. I understand much better and have accepted the reality of weather forecasting and chaos. Thank you (and all others) for your patience and exceptional clarity in conveying the realities of the world of reading weather models. just keep in mind that Bob learned everything from me...in a kayak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLPressure Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 just keep in mind that Bob learned everything from me...in a kayak LOL! (But scary). I want to stay up for the 0z suite but I can't. Here's to a good run... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Chill Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 just keep in mind that Bob learned everything from me...in a kayak What's even scarier is that we've been reading each other's posts for nearly a decade. Your history with others around here is much longer. Weird hobby. One of my favorite things to do here is short lead discussions about start/end times, how much of each ptype and when/where they occur, and how much will stick based on temp data. Last year was so fun for that. I'd like to get at least one of those discos going this year that covers all of us. Not some little lucky stripe somewhere like the Jan clippers. I'm hoping we get at least one of those this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 What's even scarier is that we've been reading each other's posts for nearly a decade. Your history with others around here is much longer. Weird hobby. One of my favorite things to do here is short lead discussions about start/end times, how much of each ptype and when/where they occur, and how much will stick based on temp data. Last year was so fun for that. I'd like to get at least one of those discos going this year that covers all of us. Not some little lucky stripe somewhere like the Jan clippers. I'm hoping we get at least one of those this year. my wife and every other person I know who treats weather "normally" think I am so effed by going on a weather board and talking, arguing, celebrating, etc. with strangers about it...I just don't understand them??? Amen +1000 to the rest of your post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I wanted to highlight portions of this post but they are all pertinent. Earlier this season I was completely dismayed (destroyed) by the inaccuracies of the model predictions in the medium to long range. You responded to one of my rantings and I was still adamant about the low quality of the models in the 7+ day range. I have since taken the time to ingest your and others postings on the models and the season we are having. I understand much better and have accepted the reality of weather forecasting and chaos. Thank you (and all others) for your patience and exceptional clarity in conveying the realities of the world of reading weather models. Day 7+ has been junk forever for storm stuff regardless of pattern. It's a recent phenomenon that people began to think there was much if any value d7-10+. I know "it's a weather board" and all.. but that end of the useful range keeps getting pushed out further than the models are advancing.. maybe because we're bored. Even d5-7 is often junk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 NAM has sped up the weekend vort and seems to have the entire broad vortex over SE Canada spinning a little faster I hope that doesn't hinder the s/w from dropping far enough south with its cold over the weekend as earlier modeled (paranoia just creeps in from every direction I suppose) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighStakes Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 my wife and every other person I know who treats weather "normally" think I am so effed by going on a weather board and talking, arguing, celebrating, etc. with strangers about it...I just don't understand them??? Amen +1000 to the rest of your post My wife and family know I'm nuts, but she is ok with it because she always says at least I'm addicted to something where she always knows what I'm doing and where I'm at. I'm not so open with friends about this problem. They know I'm into weather but have no idea to what extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LP08 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Day 7+ has been junk forever for storm stuff regardless of pattern. It's a recent phenomenon that people began to think there was much if any value d7-10+. I know "it's a weather board" and all.. but that end of the useful range keeps getting pushed out further than the models are advancing.. maybe because we're bored. Even d5-7 is often junk. I think its mostly sites like tropical tidbits and instantweather. I know very little however they spit out all of these pretty graphics that even novice weenies can be like "hey, thats snow!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StudentOfClimatology Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Just a quick glance at some of the ensemble members gives one pause. The scenario of a west track is very real and the seasonal trend with the models is that the modeled cold air 7 days in advance is too deep. So figure on some temperature moderation and a west track and things don't look too good for the 4+ inches scenario. One would think a more wound up low would produce more QPF on the front end, but that also means more west which usually equals more warm air. Not feeling too good on this at the moment. There are scenarios where this could work, but has been mentioned many times, it's 7 days away. It WILL change. Fingers crossed for the better. In my opinion, the "seasonal trend" thing is hyperbolic nonsense, with the coming blasts just the latest example. Back in early January, the supposed trend was for vorts to come south, including our clipper. Cold shots (including the blast that preceded the clipper) were trending stronger as we closed in. The way I see it is, the large scale boundary state(s) change(s), and the models respond. I still think we score a snowfall this month, based on statistics alone. I can't find a weak/snowless Feb w/ an airmass of this caliber upcoming. The fact that tropical forcing is favorable w/ the best +AAM/Walker Cell response of the year certainly helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 pinky swears that nobody freaks regardless of what the GFS shows tonight, K? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 In my opinion, the "seasonal trend" thing is hyperbolic nonsense, with the coming blasts just the latest example. Back in early January, the supposed trend was for vorts to come south, including our clipper. Cold shots (including the blast that preceded the clipper) were trending stronger as we closed in. The way I see it is, the large scale boundary state(s) change(s), and the models respond. I still think we score a snowfall this month, based on statistics alone. I can't find a weak/snowless Feb w/ an airmass of this caliber upcoming. The fact that tropical forcing is favorable w/ the best +AAM/Walker Cell response of the year certainly helps. What's your excuse for still being a dope? I agree we'll get snow this month.. but that doesn't really disprove the idea of a seasonal trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Day 7+ has been junk forever for storm stuff regardless of pattern. It's a recent phenomenon that people began to think there was much if any value d7-10+. I know "it's a weather board" and all.. but that end of the useful range keeps getting pushed out further than the models are advancing.. maybe because we're bored. Even d5-7 is often junk.For this forum it's probably because the models have done well enough to eliminate all threats before they get inside 72 hours. All we had wasting range ghosts. There was a time when other then the once a day euro and mrf the models only went to 48 or 72 hours. The old eta Ngm avn days. It wasn't that long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I think its mostly sites like tropical tidbits and instantweather. I know very little however they spit out all of these pretty graphics that even novice weenies can be like "hey, thats snow!" Yes that's definitely a big part of it.. all the closeup zooms, simple clicks to get hi res maps of everything. Plus a huge increase in weather drugs pushers among the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BristowWx Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 pinky swears that nobody freaks regardless of what the GFS shows tonight, K? lol I'm freakin out now to get it out of my system. Just gotta ram my head against the wall once more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StudentOfClimatology Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 What's your excuse for still being a dope? I agree we'll get snow this month.. but that doesn't really disprove the idea of a seasonal trend. Touché. I was saying that I don't think the trend is static. We've seen it go both ways this winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 For this forum it's probably because the models have done well enough to eliminate all threats before they get inside 72 hours. All we had wasting range ghosts. There was a time when other then the once a day euro and mrf the models only went to 48 or 72 hours. The old eta Ngm avn days. It wasn't that long ago. Yeah that's part of it for sure. I do wonder if maybe some of it is traced back to 09-10 where we did have some good long leads that though they trended up seemed relatively stable. We've been burned at all ranges repeatedly since then.. sometimes in fantastic fashion. There's too much data... I guess it's better than drinking till you black out though. I think it was you who mentioned the models seemingly used to 'trend' more often.. I have thought about that a lot and think it is sort of right. Anything outside d3 and without massive agreement and pattern support feels like cause to be super skeptical now. Partly pattern.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Yeah that's part of it for sure. I do wonder if maybe some of it is traced back to 09-10 where we did have some good long leads that though they trended up seemed relatively stable. We've been burned at all ranges repeatedly since then.. sometimes in fantastic fashion. There's too much data... I guess it's better than drinking till you black out though. I think it was you who mentioned the models seemingly used to 'trend' more often.. I have thought about that a lot and think it is sort of right. Anything outside d3 and without massive agreement and pattern support feels like cause to be super skeptical now. Partly pattern.. I have to preface this by saying I know the guidance is way more accurate now then 15 years ago. But I do think when the models were low resolution they tended to have more consistent biases that were easier to read. If you got used to their tendencies you could figure them out easier. They would trend towards reality and away from their bias. The north trend on the old mrf was very real. Now with the high res they are more likely to be right any given run but also more erratic and with less consistent biases. At least I have yet to figure out their new tendencies as well as I could read the old ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 Yeah that's part of it for sure. I do wonder if maybe some of it is traced back to 09-10 where we did have some good long leads that though they trended up seemed relatively stable. We've been burned at all ranges repeatedly since then.. sometimes in fantastic fashion. There's too much data... I guess it's better than drinking till you black out though. I think it was you who mentioned the models seemingly used to 'trend' more often.. I have thought about that a lot and think it is sort of right. Anything outside d3 and without massive agreement and pattern support feels like cause to be super skeptical now. Partly pattern.. when I think about it I wonder, what's happened? the answer I get is several "upgrades" over the past few years in both GFS and Euro that has to have something to do with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I don't like the higher resolution personally. If I can get the larger details right usually I can figure out the meso scale stuff without needing a model that can show it. I'd rather a consistent tool I am familiar with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 I don't like the higher resolution personally. If I can get the larger details right usually I can figure out the meso scale stuff without needing a model that can show it. I'd rather a consistent tool I am familiar with. me too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 when I think about it I wonder, what's happened? the answer I get is several "upgrades" over the past few years in both GFS and Euro that has to have something to do with it I think psuhoffman is onto the right general idea.. I am not a modeler so I don't know other than guessing based off what I see. Some may be the way we remember things too. My overall sense is the models are indeed a lot better but not necessarily at range for your ordinary event. They do seem to tend to pick up on the big ones and latch on earlier and earlier.. which I suppose is really a main reason to upgrade them anyway. The majority of events that are finer detailed to get various results seem to bounce more now than in the past at least at times. I wonder if it's just that the higher resolution picks up more initial conditions that can spin up junk or aberrations run to run compared to the past. That's always been a problem with the NAM and other hi res short term models.. they are often very good in the short range but can quickly become very bad too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WEATHER53 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 What's your excuse for still being a dope? I agree we'll get snow this month.. but that doesn't really disprove the idea of a seasonal trend. Seasonal trends are real and front end thumps greater than backlash around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.