RUMG11 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I must say the consistency of the NAM is notable. The fact that the RGEM looks to be with it means it may just be onto something. If the globals come on board with a NAM'ey solution, we'll be in business, and the NAM will be the hero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mophstymeo Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I must say the consistency of the NAM is notable. The fact that the RGEM looks to be with it means it may just be onto something. Crack? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drz1111 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 You must be kidding me. Hugging the NAM to begin with is unwise ... and hugging it 48 hours in advance is even riskier. Especially when you have the GFS and Euro converging on a different solution. The NAM is just not all that reliable. Will it be right in this case? You never know. But it's unlikely. I ask again, what's your basis for saying this? Feel free to point to verification scores or whatnot. There's a lot of assertions without evidence in your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edge Weather Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 The high resolution NAM looks more like all the other models. I must say the consistency of the NAM is notable. The fact that the RGEM looks to be with it means it may just be onto something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 The NAM is like the cutest guy/girl in high school asking you to the dance. The entire lead up to the event it makes you feel warm and fuzzy. It surpasses even your wildest dreams. Then suddenly.... Just don't freak out later when you're covered in pig's blood. This is really odd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhaulagiri1 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Crack? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Now that's funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yhbrooklyn Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Hey guys, good job keeping this thread on topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowDemon Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Keep the banter in banter, folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drz1111 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Keep the banter in banter, folks. It's not banter to point out that the odd hug-toss view of the models is bad forecasting. The NAM is a piece of evidence. So are all the other models. As everyone is pointing out, high-res models are coming north and the globals aren't. That's odd. If there's an explanation for this based on how models are actually coded, I'm all ears. Would love to understand it. I hate blackboxing models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hazwoper Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Don't look at the NAM until 24 hours away. Period. well, the driving factor as to why it is further north (the h5) is showing a non cloised off h5 well within the NAMs range, which drives the rest of the evolution of the storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYStorm Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I ask again, what's your basis for saying this? Feel free to point to verification scores or whatnot. There's a lot of assertions without evidence in your post. I can't give you objective facts on this because I don't have any compiled. Any reputable met will tell you that based on past experience, what I've said is true. I've seen it over and over again on this forum over the years with past storms. The NAM always overdoes QPF and is just not as reliable ... not even close ... as some of the other models. Especially when you have divergence from a solution that the other models are converging on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian5671 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 The high resolution NAM looks more like all the other models. that only runs to hour 60. The regular nam has precip to hour 72 give or take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drz1111 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I can't give you objective facts on this because I don't have any compiled. Any reputable met will tell you that based on past experience, what I've said is true. I've seen it over and over again on this forum over the years with past storms. The NAM always overdoes QPF and is just not as reliable ... not even close ... as some of the other models. Especially when you have divergence from a solution that the other models are converging on. This is 30 words to say, "I don't know." OK. If anyone understands why the RGEM and NAM are deviating from the Euro and GFS, holler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drz1111 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Also, I think OKX is spot on with their current min/most likely/max forecast. 2"/11"/20". That's basically a shrug emoticon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e46and2 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 This is 30 words to say, "I don't know." OK. If anyone understands why the RGEM and NAM are deviating from the Euro and GFS, holler. there is vast empirical data that shows the NAM trailing all other major models. you just want someone else to do the heavy lifting in an argument you started. trust me, the evidence, scientific and all, is out there. it trails the euro, gfs, ggem/rgem and I do believe even the UKMET in overall verification from more than 48 hours out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisy Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 that only runs to hour 60. The regular nam has precip to hour 72 give or take. No, it is def south of the 12z. Doesn't mean it won't get precip to the region, but it is certainly south Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUMG11 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 This is 30 words to say, "I don't know." OK. If anyone understands why the RGEM and NAM are deviating from the Euro and GFS, holler. Scientific reasoning wouldn't be a better explanation then simply stating that they are historically inferior models to the Euro and GFS. Especially the NAM, at this range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rittenhouse Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 If the globals come on board with a NAM'ey solution, we'll be in business, and the NAM will be the hero. They essentially are. The NAM is less than 50 miles north of the Globals. That's nothing. You can't expect medium-range models to have pinpoint accuracy. That's not what they were designed for. NAM is typically better in these situations (higher res). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 The high resolution NAM looks more like all the other models. No it doesn't. What other model shows the deform band setting up this far NW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUMG11 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 They essentially are. The NAM is less than 50 miles north of the Globals. That's nothing. You can't expect medium-range models to have pinpoint accuracy. That's not what they were designed for. NAM is typically better in these situations (higher res). Good point. If the 50 mile jog wasn't such a crucial component to this, the feeling would be that the models are relatively in agreement. The problem is 50 miles will make or break someones storm here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchel Volk Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 NAM good to 48, OK to 60 after that not very good. For this storm I believe it has some credibility because the overrunning hit within it's range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ericjcrash Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 4km isn't remotely similar to the 12km NAM. No snow in the city by 60. It's extremely south. Um, over .5" QPF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 4km isn't remotely similar to the 12km NAM. No snow in the city by 60. It's extremely south. This is the most innacurate post I've seen today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morris Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 5 inches in the city by 60 on the 4km. A foot on the 12km. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 This is the 4k NAM through hr 60 which is only about halfway through the storm. Areas N&W begin cashing in sometime around 21z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David-LI Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Quiet. GFS running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYStorm Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 This is 30 words to say, "I don't know." OK. If anyone understands why the RGEM and NAM are deviating from the Euro and GFS, holler. Those are YOUR words, not mine. There are times when one draws a conclusion from inductive reasoning based on anecdotal evidence. Suit yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brooklynwx99 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I know that this is the 4km NAM At the end of its range, but it's actually further NW than the 06z run. 06z 12z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 The craziest part of the nam is the confluence was def stronger, yet we got a wider range of precip and northern gradient... If this thing has a precip shield like the SREF and Nam suggest, and weaker confluence like the globals... We could be in for some surprises up north and heavy NYC/LI/Jersey totals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 5 inches in the city by 60 on the 4km. A foot on the 12km. Then Make your statement accurate.. 5" is NOT "no snow" stop trolling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.