ag3 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 GFS op is clearly the outlier. Ukmet, Ggem, Rgem, Nam, Gefs and Srefs are all a consensus of 5"-9" for KNYC. GFS is the clear outlier with 3"-6". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 GEFS is much further north and wetter than the op. GFS is an outlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCG RS Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Why does its op keep going so much further south!!This is the mean of the ensemble members, many of which are likely much more liberal with the northern extent of the precip. The op is seeing quite a bit of confluence and squashing the precip shield while many of the ensemble members are not.Edit : it seems that the flatter and apparent SE bias of the GFS is likely at play here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Let's go slowly: 21z Srefs: 5"-9" 0z Nam: 5"-9" 0z Rgem: 5"-9" 0z Gfs: 3"-5" 0z Navgem: 5"-9" 0z Ukmet: 5"-9" 0z Ggem: 5"-9" 0z Gefs: 5"-9" This is an easy forecast right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blizzard-on-GFS Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 GEFS is much further north and wetter than the op. GFS is an outlier. Care to post the map? Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 GEFS is much further north and wetter than the op. GFS is an outlier. Part of that could be crappy GFS resolution and 2-3 outliers, remember 2/6/10 I think 2 outliers in the ensembles had 2 inches liquid for NYC and skewed everything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCG RS Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Let's go slowly: 21z Srefs: 5"-9" 0z Nam: 5"-9" 0z Rgem: 5"-9" 0z Gfs: 3"-5" 0z Navgem: 5"-9" 0z Ukmet: 5"-9" 0z Ggem: 5"-9" 0z Gefs: 5"-9" This is an easy forecast right now. Yes. Trace to a coating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjr231 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 GFS south and east of all other guidance leading up to an event on the east coast. New storm, same script. Remember when people proclaimed it the new king? Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Part of that could be crappy GFS resolution and 2-3 outliers, remember 2/6/10 I think 2 outliers in the ensembles had 2 inches liquid for NYC and skewed everything Gefs mean matches the 0z model consensus. 5"-9". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WintersGrasp Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Let's go slowly: 21z Srefs: 5"-9" 0z Nam: 5"-9" 0z Rgem: 5"-9" 0z Gfs: 3"-5" 0z Navgem: 5"-9" 0z Ukmet: 5"-9" 0z Ggem: 5"-9" 0z Gefs: 5"-9" This is an easy forecast right now. I wouldn't count on anything until the JMA comes out..... But yes, it seems like there's a very good chance of a 5"+ snowfall around the city and south as well 4 or 5" for much of NNJ as well.....hopefully the precip shield is a bit more expansive (like the GGEM shows), so that everyone can cash in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metasequoia Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Let's go slowly: 21z Srefs: 5"-9" 0z Nam: 5"-9" 0z Rgem: 5"-9" 0z Gfs: 3"-5" 0z Navgem: 5"-9" 0z Ukmet: 5"-9" 0z Ggem: 5"-9" 0z Gefs: 5"-9" This is an easy forecast right now. Very helpful post. Thanks. 12Z model runs should make NYC folks feel better. We just need a bump north for those north of the city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RU848789 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Maybe this belongs in the vendor thread, but I was happy to see that Lee went with 4-8" for the NYC metro and 6-10" for Central Jersey, basically ignoring whatever model projection he was showing. Seems odd to even show the model, then - why show so little precip on a model and then say it's likely to move north and ignore the model output and go with 4-8"? I usually like Lee, but he blew this one badly. He didn't blow it, because he explained that the futurecast was likely wrong. I believe they're required to show that futurecast. Completely disagree. It's meteorology, not the law. If you think the futurecast is wrong, don't show it - it's just plain stupid to show something then have to explain it away as being wrong. Why confuse your viewers? I can't think of a single reason why they showed it, so yeah, he blew it, IMO (and I like Lee). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjay Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Part of that could be crappy GFS resolution and 2-3 outliers, remember 2/6/10 I think 2 outliers in the ensembles had 2 inches liquid for NYC and skewed everythingUsing Doug's ( Dsnowx) site, here's the individualshttp://synoptic.envsci.rutgers.edu/dougsimo/GEFSIndiesUSPrecip00030.gif http://synoptic.envsci.rutgers.edu/dougsimo/GEFSIndiesUSPrecip00036.gif http://synoptic.envsci.rutgers.edu/dougsimo/GEFSIndiesUSPrecip00042.gif http://synoptic.envsci.rutgers.edu/dougsimo/GEFSIndiesUSPrecip00048.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCG RS Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Completely disagree. It's meteorology, not the law. If you think the futurecast is wrong, don't show it - it's just plain stupid to show something then have to explain it away as being wrong. Why confuse your viewers? I can't think of a single reason why they showed it, so yeah, he blew it, IMO (and I like Lee).To be fair, it's not his decision. Producers control what is shown and not shown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjay Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Here's a link to the site above if anyone is interested http://synoptic.envsci.rutgers.edu/dougsimo/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 I wouldn't count on anything until the JMA comes out..... But yes, it seems like there's a very good chance of a 5"+ snowfall around the city and south as well 4 or 5" for much of NNJ as well.....hopefully the precip shield is a bit more expansive (like the GGEM shows), so that everyone can cash in Speaking of the JMA, it's 6"-10". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 JMA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 This continues to make me think the GFS is too far south or not juicy enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder7842 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 To be fair, it's not his decision. Producers control what is shown and not shown. Exactly. When do you ever see a weathercast without them showing futurecast, especially if there's a storm? Showing futurecast is the big thing these days. I'm sure Lee would have not showed it, had he had the option. At least he explained that it was wrong and stayed with his 4 to 8 forecast. I thought he did a good job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherfreeeeak Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Let's see what the euro says Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 I like the 4-8" Mt. Holly has because it covers the least amounts possible to nearly the highest. I could actually see them increasing it slightly to 5-9 or 6-10 for central NJ counties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 LOL rpm. Shows nothing for NYC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherfreeeeak Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 LOL rpm. Shows nothing for NYC.Is this a new run or the same one from before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Is this a new run or the same one from before? New Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RU848789 Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 To be fair, it's not his decision. Producers control what is shown and not shown. Makes no sense - can you explain? Is there some contract to show the futurecast? If there were, why wouldn't they at least show what model it is to give it some publicity? And if there's no contractual obligation to show it, why the hell would the producer have control of the scientific content of the weather report? I get having control over the "look and feel," including the progression of elements to show, but I can't even fathom a producer having control over the scientific content, forcing the met to show what the met knows is wrong. It's like telling a sportscaster he has to predict that the Cubs are going to win the World Series before the season starts, when everyone knows that's ridiculous. :>) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxNoob Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 How much rain are we expecting prior to the changeover to snow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yhbrooklyn Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 NewHow has it performed so far this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCG RS Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 Makes no sense - can you explain? Is there some contract to show the futurecast? If there were, why wouldn't they at least show what model it is to give it some publicity? And if there's no contractual obligation to show it, why the hell would the producer have control of the scientific content of the weather report? I get having control over the "look and feel," including the progression of elements to show, but I can't even fathom a producer having control over the scientific content, forcing the met to show what the met knows is wrong. It's like telling a sportscaster he has to predict that the Cubs are going to win the World Series before the season starts, when everyone knows that's ridiculous. :>)At the end of the day it's about ratings, and more importantly what those ratings represent: money. Producers are the ones in the control room and behind the scenes who are controlling the content and what it is shown to the public. Flashy graphics make the public tune in. Yes they want to know what to expect weather wise, but they want to see the pretty graphics regardless of their accuracy, much like many on here want to see the darn snow maps. The public expects us to be wrong, but when we're wrong with pretty and shiny things on the screen, well that's ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
negative-nao Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 what does the euro say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikehobbyst Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 This continues to make me think the GFS is too far south or not juicy enough Do you think NYC and LI can get the 11.5 to 13.0 inch amounts?I am confident. I think we'll be very close or just north to the 14 inch CNJ jackpot. Do u think we can keep the snowpack straight through the first week of April ???? The mild pattern looks muted on the models, 35-40 will not wipe it out during the 3/10-3/16 muted chilly period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.