Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,589
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

3/4 - 3/5 Post-Frontal Snow Chance


Capt. Adam

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

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

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

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

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

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

Using Doug's ( Dsnowx) site, here's the individuals

http://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

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

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

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

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

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

This continues to make me think the GFS is too far south or not juicy enough

 

nvg10.prp.042.conus.gif

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

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...