Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,608
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

December 23-27th Storm System's/Severe Weather Potential


HillsdaleMIWeather

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 763
  • Created
  • Last Reply

e6f6899bd700055fea4dbf22bd95cb73.jpg

 

 

 

Any thoughts on locally?  The morning/early afternoon stuff looks to be lacking surface based instability and I'm not too thrilled about it, though it looks like there's enough elevated CAPE to support at least a modest severe threat.  My main focus is what happens later in the day but I'm wondering about convective coverage with that round.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New 4km is fairly ominous for the QCA.  Slightly slower timing allows the broken line of low-topped sups to develop in eastern IA and then impact the MS river region.  12km NAM forecast sounding showing around 750j/kg cape at 00z just ahead of that near QC.  Not the most impressive cape, but as many have pointed out that should be enough given all the other available ingredients.  Guessing the slight will be pulled northwest to include more of the DVN area if model trends continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some pretty solid mid-level lapse rates up into Illinois. Looks like a function of height falls and mid/upper level cooling. The NAM tries to develop a little something near the Quad Cities and surrounding areas.

 

Otherwise, most of the environment is blown out to the north, keeping the best instability/shear overlap well to the south, across the Gulf Coast states and Tennessee. 00z 4km NAM:

post-533-0-53581800-1450838690_thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some pretty solid mid-level lapse rates up into Illinois. Looks like a function of height falls and mid/upper level cooling. The NAM tries to develop a little something near the Quad Cities and surrounding areas.

 

Otherwise, most of the environment is blown out to the north, keeping the best instability/shear overlap well to the south, across the Gulf Coast states and Tennessee. 00z 4km NAM:

attachicon.gifnam4kmSGP_con_1kmehi_021.gif

 

the Non 4K NAM has good lapse rates further north.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any thoughts on locally?  The morning/early afternoon stuff looks to be lacking surface based instability and I'm not too thrilled about it, though it looks like there's enough elevated CAPE to support at least a modest severe threat.  My main focus is what happens later in the day but I'm wondering about convective coverage with that round.  

I agree that the early day activity could pose some severe threat, especially in the WAA regime with increasing elevated CAPE and DP's. Probably would be limited to a hail threat obviously.

 

As for the afternoon, I'm still on the fence. One thing I can say, is even though DP's in the 50's will be easily enough, I hate seeing that early convection sort of push the higher DP's (60F+) that are feeding northward off to the east during the afternoon. Luckily sun won't be needed either, since there might not be a ton of clearing. If all goes well I'm on board for a broken line of cells developing near the Mississippi River in IL, then racing NE...with a continued threat into the night into IN/MI, and possibly OH. I do think there will be a gap in coverage too for the second round, with the line north and then activity farther down south.

 

Obviously it all hinges on the early day activity, as that's really the only deal breaker I could see right now.

 

I cleared tomorrow out, so I'll be chasing if it looks warranted. Right now a good starting point might be out near Macomb/Galesburg area, though I'm not sure I'd actually head that far west.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick question for y'all, do you use the RAP model? Reason I'm asking is it's showing the airmass recovering a lot better than some other models.. *cough* 4k. 

 

Because at this point the RAP is pretty much obsolete. Its lower resolution and I cant even recall the last upgrade it had. 

 

The HRRR was its replacement  once it became operational 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say on the 11/16 event the NAM definitely overestimated 0-3km CAPE. I remember seeing sounding after sounding with 300 j/kg in MO. But, the SPC mesoanalysis that day never got above 150 j/kg. That's a huge difference and it definitely had a detrimental effect on the storms in MO...a la the single tornado in the state that day. 

 

I realize equilibrium levels are much higher in this event so the low level CAPE probably won't matter as much. But, the 200 j/kg in many of the soundings for this event could be a bit high. And the SREF means are still well below 1000 j/kg for many of the Ohio Valley sites. So if it weren't for the fact that the Euro was also showing those pockets of higher CAPE I'd be whacking a good chunk right off the top of the NAM instability estimates. With that said I agree with everyone that the GFS is probably low balling the instability on this event and the NAM isn't unrealistic.

 

Yipes...on the 80+ kts of 6km shear and 115+ kts of 8km shear!

 

I really wish IND was an upper air station.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because at this point the RAP is pretty much obsolete. Its lower resolution and I cant even recall the last upgrade it had. 

 

The HRRR was its replacement  once it became operational 

The RAP was the RUC replacement. V2 was implemented in early 2015, and V3 is set for early 2016.

 

The HRRR is of higher resolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any thoughts on what the SPC risk level will be on the Day 1 outlook?

Sent from my XT1563

They may go moderate for a small area from NW MS into Middle Tennessee, but I don't expect any drastic changes. By 1300, once convective evolution and mesoscale details are more certain, then some things could change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They may go moderate for a small area from NW MS into Middle Tennessee, but I don't expect any drastic changes. By 1300, once convective evolution and mesoscale details are more certain, then some things could change.

Alright, thanks

Sent from my XT1563 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of the HRRR...the experimental v2, which runs out to 24 hours, is showing a thin ribbon of 1000 j/kg of SBCAPE at 00Z in IL. There isn't any convective activity under that more juicy spot though. The CIN is a little high and it does appear to be increasing after Sunset, but it's not insurmountable so I'd take the lack of convective activity with a grain of salt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The RAP was the RUC replacement. V2 was implemented in early 2015, and V3 is set for early 2016.

 

The HRRR is of higher resolution.

 

HRRR v2 goes live in 2016 as well. It's probably important to note that the RAP is used to initialize the HRRR.

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...