wthrmn654 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Yes lows not hugging the coast as much. This of course would help with mixing potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 My only worry is that the ULL is quite a bit further East so far.That's good. You don't want the best dynamics maxing out before getting to you. And maybe the low can be nudged a bit further east offshore, so the coast doesn't have as prolonged a period of crazy winds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 We're good, overall this is very similar to 06z so far. It's a hearbreaker North of Rockland County. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wthrmn654 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Yanks are you seeing double low at 60hr? Several runs have been showing this. Cmc shows it as well. Must be the double barrel low Nws mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstorm93 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 GFS is another big hit. Wind looks really impressive as well. Woudln't be shocked to see some kiss-of-death Blizzard Watches posted tonight or tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David-LI Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Does it stall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstorm93 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Might be some CFI taint on this run, but still a really good look Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 This run is better for the coast and worse for the interior. Snows would be just about done NW of the city by Saturday night vs early afternoon on Sunday on the 06z run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstorm93 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 These high precip rates are probably dragging the low too far east too quickly, so we'll have to see how the later runs hold up. I would have expected this run to come in nearly the same, if not better than the 6z based on the 700mb RH field and 500mb heights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstorm93 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 This run is much drier For comparison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 This run doesn't stall, pulls low east way too quick for interior Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Gorilla Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 This run is much drier NW of the city. For comparison I wonder why? Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstorm93 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I now further don't agree with the jump east. This is because strengthening systems are westward tilted with height (higher height lows are further west, associated surface lows are further east), but when the storm is mature, it's closer to being more vertically stacked. Thus, the surface low should be much closer to the base of the H5 low than to the convection. Like this Doug S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 This run doesn't stall, pulls low east way too quick for interior It jumps the low bet 78 - 84 . Convective feedback .. possible . Will have to see if the other models do it . The Euro did at 0z yesterday corrected at 12z . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCGreg Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Gotta play these things out until the end. Snow maps don't look better for anyone here; dropped QPF considerably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morris Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormlover74 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Gotta play these things out until the end. Snow maps don't look better for anyone here; dropped QPF considerably. Its one run, many more to go. The setup was still very good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlirish Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 So general 8-12...looks like the big amounts are off the table Don't bother with qpf at the moment and this is just 1 model run in a series of already good runs and more to come. A big storm is coming. It will have a lot of dynamics. Someone will get clobbered and there will be a sharp cutoff to the nw but hard to tell where exactly that will setup yet. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drz1111 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 This run is much drier For comparison Oh god, we're doing the "chasing verbatim model QPF" modelology again. Up with the NAM, down with the feedback-influenced GFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I agree, might be feedback. Note the strengthening shortwave over the ocean at 84hr and heavy convection that force a redevelopment to the east and weakens the activity that makes it to the coast. The whole system is dragged east by that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCGreg Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I agree, might be feedback. Note the strengthening shortwave over the ocean at 84hr and heavy convection that force a redevelopment to the east and weakens the activity that makes it to the coast. The whole system is dragged east by that. But isn't this what messed up last year's storm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 People read way too much into every model run. The targeted zone has been outlined and the cutoff is likely NW of the city in terms of very heavy totals . I think 8-12" is decent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbc Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I agree, might be feedback. Note the strengthening shortwave over the ocean at 84hr and heavy convection that force a redevelopment to the east and weakens the activity that makes it to the coast. The whole system is dragged east by that. Juno started doing exactly the same thing right at this range I believe and it came to fruition. Let's hope that this time the feedback is completely bogus and we do not get a Juno repeat at least in my area as well as many others in New Jersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 GGEM is much slower already HR 54 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstorm93 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 12z CMC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F5TornadoF5 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Looks like the CMC does the same thing as GFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Wiggum Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Havent seen a single person make reference to the 250 mile due East jump of the slp between 78-84 hrs. If already mentioned, sorry, i missed it. Seems suspect to me that as the low is about to get captured it makes such a large center jump to an area of strong convection due East of the main slp. Possible? Anything is possible. Likely? Not imho with the main low in the process of getting captured. Seems like convective feedback to me affecting the track of the slp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 12z GGEM should be another big hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drz1111 Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 People read way too much into every model run. The targeted zone has been outlined and the cutoff is likely NW of the city in terms of very heavy totals . I think 8-12" is decent. Really? Name all the strong Miller As with no mixing issues that ended up with 10" in NYC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.