Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,609
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

February 16-17th Storm II


stormtracker

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 561
  • Created
  • Last Reply

12z RGEM as was mentioned is pretty dry....maybe 0.25 - 0.3 for DC

...and around .15" for BWI.

As mentioned yesterday, this "squeeze play" with the QPF gradient -- i.e. drier on the dry side and wetter on the wet side -- fits right into the strength of the w-e frontogenesis we're dealing with here. I had a feeling that the gradient on both ends was gonna tighten, that's what they do in highly frontogenetic cases like these, which is why the means (sref mean particularly) should be ignored.

Still, ratios north of D.C. will be better, likely averaging somewhere 15-18 to 1 for this event. Even with .25 QPF, that's still 4-4.5".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to remind myself that if we didn't have that arctic wall pushing down on this it might be a cutter...without blocking I am not sure what would stop it so we would end up mixing...the current scenario isn't perfect for everyone but better than most of us imagined 3 days ago

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and around .15" for BWI.

As mentioned yesterday, this "squeeze play" with the QPF gradient -- i.e. drier on the dry side and wetter on the wet side -- fits right into the strength of the w-e frontogenesis we're dealing with here. I had a feeling that the gradient on both ends was gonna tighten, that's what they do in highly frontogenetic cases like these, which is why the means (sref mean particularly) should be ignored.

Still, ratios north of D.C. will be better, likely averaging somewhere 15-18 to 1 for this event. Even with .25 QPF, that's still 4-4.5".

 

thanks...it could still be too far south even despite the configuration making sense (I hope)

 

rgem_apcpn_neus_12.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks...it could still be too far south even despite the configuration making sense (I hope)

 

rgem_apcpn_neus_12.png

 

My guess is that the RGEM has things too suppressed. It seems to be on the low side of the cluster, possible but I'd go witht he NAM before the RGEM and would go witht eh euro either of them.  Plus I think there is potential for some goofy band to set up farther north than where the models have their max QPF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is that the RGEM has things too suppressed. It seems to be on the low side of the cluster, possible but I'd go witht he NAM before the RGEM and would go witht eh euro either of them.  Plus I think there is potential for some goofy band to set up farther north than where the models have their max QPF.

Quantico/Dale City/Aquia area perhaps.  That would make Jeb happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is that the RGEM has things too suppressed. It seems to be on the low side of the cluster, possible but I'd go witht he NAM before the RGEM and would go witht eh euro either of them.  Plus I think there is potential for some goofy band to set up farther north than where the models have their max QPF.

 

This should help talk some of us off the ledge. The one concern is the RGEM has handled the Boston storms very well this year. But the Ukie has been very good as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rarely post my amateur discussions here from my Facebook page, but this one seems relevant. Feel free to move to banter if needed.

 

Overnight models shifted largely in favor for a little more snowfall in and around D.C., but the latest GFS does have a very slight shift to the south. The NWS forecast was bumped up from 4-8" to 6-10" this morning that I very much agree with. Because temperatures are expected to be so cold, our liquid to snow ratios may be higher than we typically see. This means that an inch of liquid precipitation would produce greater than the typical 10" of snowfall. Now we probably will not see a full inch of liquid precipitation this far north, but with the modeled .5"-.7" give or take of liquid equivalent precipitation, the ratio conversions could give anywhere from snowfall values of between 12X to as much as up to 20X the liquid values at times during the snowfall.

Temperatures will greatly affect how much snow we get because of these factors. More liquid equivalent precipitation is good, because there's more moisture to fall as snow. A slight shift to the south would indicate a colder atmosphere and higher ratios, which if cold enough can also increase our snowfall.

My overall view is the following. If the atmosphere has higher moisture content, then the .7" liquid multiplied by about an average of ratio multiplier of 12-13 would be about 8" to 9" in in the District. If on the other hand the the storm shifts more to the south, temperatures would be slightly colder giving higher ratio multipliers of 13-15 leading to between 6.5"-8.5".

This is almost a win-win for the D.C. area, but if both the storm track is more to the south AND temperatures are closer to the freezing point with lower liquid to snow ratios, less snow would fall. This scenario is less likely, but not impossible.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sitting at 12.6F here in Annapolis and still have a light wind from the WNW. Thermal profiles are cold. Soundings from 7am were in line with GFS, maybe a degree colder at 700mb. Waiting for the 18z sounding...hope the launch one from IAD. The snow ratio is going to be the killer here, much more impactful than the 0.1 QPF changes we are fighting over - a 2 degree change at 700mb could be the difference between a 12:1 and a 15:1 ratio or a 15:1 and an 18:1 ratio. With 0.5" QPF, 12:1 is 6" while 18:1 is 9". We're right on the warm edge of the best dendritic growth zone. The temperature profile is going to be key.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be a battle between the dry arctic airmass pushing down and the precip. I'm concerned with drying...at least to start. wish the best forcing was further north which would more easily overcome dry air. I'm most nervous for NOVA and points north.

Wouldn't dry air initially allow temperatures to fall more until precipitation arrives?

 

eta: assuming precip starts around sundown

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always hate these last minute slices....just feeds on the paranoia for future events

the models are just sampling reality better. Model runs don't spook me the reality of how hard it is to get big snows does. I'm always looking for what the most likely fail is because 9/10 times a threat will fail. This one the progressive flow was our problem. Had the tues night storm been the big player cutting probably was the threat. It's going to snow I just doubt the 6" totals get much north of dc. The pattern looks better the foreseeable future. Just hope we get lucky and it's not a year where storms seem to deflect north or south of us.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be a battle between the dry arctic airmass pushing down and the precip. I'm concerned with drying...at least to start. wish the best forcing was further north which would more easily overcome dry air. I'm most nervous for NOVA and points north.

where would you place the most worry in NOVA? North of 50?  66? route 7?  just curious 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be a battle between the dry arctic airmass pushing down and the precip. I'm concerned with drying...at least to start. wish the best forcing was further north which would more easily overcome dry air. I'm most nervous for NOVA and points north.

What are your thoughts down here around EZF in terms of dynamics and such?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...