mitchnick Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Anybody in the know care to throw out some QPF numbers for those of us with no early access .53" for DCA Randy .41 or so for IAD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 RICH 0.90" all snow DCA 0.50" tops SHARP drop off to the west PHL...0.65 or 0.70" much less to the west MUCH heavier over s NJ LGA 0.75... Much heavuer over LI much less over interior se NY and nw NJ BDL 0.90" BOS 1.00" TAKEN VERBATIM EASTERN MD IS BIG WINNER FROM 0Z ggem and 0z euro shouldn't we wait for the 6z NAM and DGEX before getting excited? on second thought, maybe not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dino Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 I heard people throwing around Jan96 as an analog for this storm? Is it plausible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HM Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 I heard people throwing around Jan96 as an analog for this storm? Is it plausible? It won't be similar at all. This one will be more compacted toward the shore if the EC/GGEM are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 I think the last time we a saw a slp that deep modeled near ACK, it was one of last summer's cane hallucination runs from CT Blizz' basement. Wasnt March 1960 that intense around that area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest someguy Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Yeah. You called BS. As you sometimes do. Which was the basis for my initial question, i.e., define BS. And what's the source of the BS error... bad model, bad input etc?... Everything's cleared up so no reason to draw out... ed I am still worried about that PIG Low sitting out there and ALL the Models moving it out If you wnat something that isa could go wrong thing that would be it ps come on ed man the RANTS thing was a needless dig ya Know?.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzucker Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 It won't be similar at all. This one will be more compacted toward the shore if the EC/GGEM are correct. I seriously think the ECM is paltry on QPF compared to the strength of this system....with the low pressure and captured H5 trough, we're probably talking about 2" QPF for PHL/NYC/SE NY/LI/CT/NJ....I think this is basically a January 1996 solution with huge QPF and amazing ratios due to the 1036mb high pressing in from the Midwest. Finally a true blizzard if this comes close to verifying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 RICH 0.90" all snow DCA 0.50" tops SHARP drop off to the west PHL...0.65 or 0.70" much less to the west MUCH heavier over s NJ LGA 0.75... Much heavuer over LI much less over interior se NY and nw NJ BDL 0.90" BOS 1.00" TAKEN VERBATIM EASTERN MD IS BIG WINNER FROM 0Z ggem and 0z euro I think it's safe to say that the ECMWF is flirting with cat 5 NESIS status given the large area impacted. Although, the snowfall distribution may keep it below that. Does sound more like March 1960 than Jan 1996..... although March 1960 didnt have heavy snowfall as far southward as this. But intensity-wise and with more snow on the coast, it seems to be somewhat similar to March 1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Amenzo Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 It's been obvious for days there's been an incredible threat, but after the 12z and concurrent 18z data suites came out, along with SREF extrapolations, the signal for a NESIS 4 or 5 type event has been plainly visible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest someguy Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 It won't be similar at all. This one will be more compacted toward the shore if the EC/GGEM are correct. strongly agree BUT it may be emore like Jan 1996 in terms of its size but HM is correct all the 0z MODELS do show a real clear sharp western edge to the Precip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VAsnowlvr82 Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Quick explanation why this stays compact instead of expanding inland as it moves north? It won't be similar at all. This one will be more compacted toward the shore if the EC/GGEM are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 I'm not sure I've ever seen anything like this (two major lows in that close of proximity) in a non-tropical scenario. Isnt there an invest in the Caribbean right now? 30% chance of developing? I wonder if this can tap into that moisture..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest someguy Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 I seriously think the ECM is paltry on QPF compared to the strength of this system....with the low pressure and captured H5 trough, we're probably talking about 2" QPF for PHL/NYC/SE NY/LI/CT/NJ....I think this is basically a January 1996 solution with huge QPF and amazing ratios due to the 1036mb high pressing in from the Midwest. Finally a true blizzard if this comes close to verifying. Not sure I agree its not JUST the 0z EURO the 0z GGEM is like that as well a very sharp west side to the precip sure the qpf numbers COULD go up .... But they are showing ths western edge for a reason Nz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 RICH 0.90" all snow DCA 0.50" tops SHARP drop off to the west PHL...0.65 or 0.70" much less to the west MUCH heavier over s NJ LGA 0.75... Much heavuer over LI much less over interior se NY and nw NJ BDL 0.90" BOS 1.00" TAKEN VERBATIM EASTERN MD IS BIG WINNER FROM 0Z ggem and 0z euro on the pay site I have, PHL records .95" qpf I know Dave was just estimating, but for those of you in PHL, closer to 1 inch qpf looks like the better number (assuming my pay site numbers are correct) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eduggs Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 ed I am still worried about that PIG Low sitting out there and ALL the Models moving it out If you wnat something that isa could go wrong thing that would be it ps come on ed man the RANTS thing was a needless dig ya Know?.... It was poor word choice. But also part of the caricature that makes you a forum legend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 on the pay site I have, PHL records .95" qpf I know Dave was just estimating, but for those of you in PHL, closer to 1 inch qpf looks like the better number (assuming my pay site numbers are correct) Mitch Baltimore is .75 correct?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzie Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 is there a precedent for a strong storm like this being fairly close to the coast and yet having such a sharp cutoff just to the west where places in central maryland like montgomery county would get much less than places in east of dc in maryland? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzucker Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Not sure I agree its not JUST the 0z EURO the 0z GGEM is like that as well a very sharp west side to the precip sure the qpf numbers COULD go up .... But they are showing ths western edge for a reason Nz I agree that there'd be a sharp cut-off to the precip field as a very intense low pressure tends to have banding pretty tight to the low center. But I still think the QPF within the deformation band will increase if the models hold this solution...there's definitely going to be more areas with 1.5"-2.0" than shown verbatim with a low bombing from 980s to 960s very close to the coast. I think NYC would approach 2 feet of snow if the ECM verified. Also, I think the Atlantic low is acting like a 50/50 and giving us the blocking we need...it doesn't look suppressive to me. My biggest worry with this storm is that the surface low will move slightly more quickly from west to east, allowing it to escape before the potent northern stream energy phases in completely and allows for the H5 capture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Quick explanation why this stays compact instead of expanding inland as it moves north? Not much easterly component from the Atlantic at 500mb to drive moisture inland initially, and the whole storm not being a true mature Noreaster until it's up past the Delmarva. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Amenzo Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 The sharp western cutoff could be due to the arctic nature of the energy responsible for the amplification (i.e. dry). I'm not talking about the initial PAC s/w that comes out of the roaring PAC jet, but the PV-like feature that dives in from NE Canada and creates this monstrous trough complex that seems reminiscent of triple phases of the past, but I am not sure an AJ exists in this case with all the higher latitude blocking thats been present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 is there a precedent for a strong storm like this being fairly close to the coast and yet having such a sharp cutoff just to the west where places in central maryland like montgomery county would get much less than places in east of dc in maryland? Thinking of storms like March 1960 and Feb 1989-- which occured in a mod la nina, coincidentally enough 20 inches in ACY basically nothing in Philly. Most storms have a sharp cut off somewhere lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HM Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Quick explanation why this stays compact instead of expanding inland as it moves north? 1. Limited moisture when compared to the greats like anything from last year. It will pick up moisture for sure, but it won't be quite as intense as past HECS events. 2. Phasing job means sharp vorticity max that begins to get channelized toward the Mid Atlantic coast. This decreases PVA across much of the interior regions. 3. Atlantic moisture and frontogensis will focus the main lift over the coastal areas and ageostrophic flow would produce subsidence to the west of this feature. All this makes for a tight UVM center but an explosive one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzie Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Thinking of storms like March 1960 and Feb 1989-- which occured in a mod la nina, coincidentally enough 20 inches in ACY basically nothing in Philly. Most storms have a sharp cut off somewhere lol. yea but the low was probably further east than what the euro is showing right now for that storm im sure right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Mitch Baltimore is .75 correct?. technically, .71" per pay site MOS I have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozz Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Thinking of storms like March 1960 and Feb 1989-- which occured in a mod la nina, coincidentally enough 20 inches in ACY basically nothing in Philly. Most storms have a sharp cut off somewhere lol. Not to mention December 2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CooL Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Just throwing this out there but the Euro looks like the 96' storm at 500mb. It could be that the precip is less and less widespread because the southern jet is weaker in la ninas...thought? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 I agree that there'd be a sharp cut-off to the precip field as a very intense low pressure tends to have banding pretty tight to the low center. But I still think the QPF within the deformation band will increase if the models hold this solution...there's definitely going to be more areas with 1.5"-2.0" than shown verbatim with a low bombing from 980s to 960s very close to the coast. I think NYC would approach 2 feet of snow if the ECM verified. Does this resemble any of the storms from last winter? When I read what you wrote, with a storm intensifying that close to the coast, the storm I immediately thought of was the middle Feb storm last winter.... Feb 11, 2010. Two feet might be asking a bit much, but we've gotten a foot before in the kind of scenario youre depicting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 technically, .71" per pay site MOS I have Thanks i will book it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Not to mention December 2000. Yea true-- there were two very sharp cut offs on land with that one..... one for snow vs no snow, and another for snow vs rain lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozz Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Thanks i will book it . Good enough for 8-12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.