Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,584
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Model Discussion for April


Quincy

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Yeah that's what I meant. In April, Impossible to be all rain in elevation anywhere in SNE and get 100% rain while other elevations got snow. It's never happened in Napril.

Midlevels never torched for you while remaining cold enough in ORH to support snow aided by its 1000' elevation?

While maybe that hasn't ever happened verbatim, it doesn't mean it's impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feb 2010?

 

 

No, he's asking for one where it was 100% rain there and an ORH jackpot...which basically never happens anyway. Feb 2010, he had like 5" and then heavy rain while our area got 12"+. Even MLK 2010 was a bit of snow/sleet at the onset there...but probably 90% rain.

 

Plus he wanted an April version. The sample of storms in April isn't very high...they had rain issues (or according to Metherb, mixing issues) in April 1987 which cut down on their accumulations while ORH got 17".

 

This storm wasn't April, but close: March 30, 2001. I'm pretty sure they were almost all rain south of the pike in that one...maybe brief snow at the start and ORH was on the line the whole time. Like 6-8" of paste on the north side of town while a lot of sleet and rain was mixing in south side of town. Up by your area, it was about a foot of cement.

 

 

I'd have to go through a list of all the April storms, but there can be latitude dependent storms in April...2007 certainly was. Elevation is definitely way more important, but Kevin is just spouting typical hyperbole again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah the rest of the parameters they show are pretty good because they just pull them directly from the GFS data at NCEP...but the snow maps are algorithms that are created by the vender. So the snow maps do not show "verbatim" solutions...they show what the vender algorithm interpretes as snow.

 

QPF is verbatim, the snow amounts are not. Every algorithm is a bit different, and none of them are even that good.

 

When you really think about it, it's a terrible idea for a graphic. Models are notoriously bad with QPF, so who thought it was a great idea to make snow (another very difficult weather element to forecast) graphics based on that QPF and maybe one other level?

 

Your two most common "algorithms" are probably [iF 850 mb T < 0 C, then (QPF*10)] or [iF surface T ≤ 35 F, then (QPF*10)].

 

Pretty simplistic when you think about it. And anyone can get a hold of it and post it on the 6 PM news or throw it up on Facebook. Plus the fun new caveat is, "it's not my forecast, but this is what X model shows."

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...