SnoSki14 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Current radar makes me think the Rgem is too far south by about 30 miles or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtk Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Do you have any idea why there's a big difference b/w the regional/mesocale and globals with this storm? You'd probably know better than anyone. I've never seen the GFS and ECWMF in a camp together arrayed against the others . . . I don't take the parent (12km) NAM seriously, especially when it differs from its nest (4km). I also tend to ignore the SREFs in favor of the NCAR WRF ensemble system: http://ensemble.ucar.edu/ Having said that, I have only just started paying attention to the northern part of this forecast as I'm always fascinated by these aspects. I haven't done enough digging to be able to say anything intelligent about the "why" with respect to the differences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 RGEM still doesn't look as favorable as I'd like to see. It may have improved slightly from 6z and 0z but was hoping for better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastonSN+ Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 12z RGEM vs 06z Pretty Much identical - locked in like last year's blizzard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleetStormNJ Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 RGEM still doesn't look as favorable as I'd like to see. It may have improved slightly from 6z and 0z but was hoping for better. I wonder if somebody who could see how the RGEM has fared with southern locales on this storm so far. It seemed the storm overperformed already down in parts of ARK and nearby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemost Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 GFS looks farther north with the precip field through 18 - still need to see what it does through for the main show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Light snow into NYC by 09z saturday morning on 12z gfs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WintersGrasp Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 I've always thought of the RGEM as an excellent model for predicting snow amounts, especially at this range. From 6z to 12z, it has pretty much held it's ground showing big amounts around the Philly area and lighter up toward NYC. It can't be discounted at this range simply because the NAM shows more than 5x the amount of snow. There are also discrepancies between the two NAM models. While both give us a lot of snow, one complete annihilates the area (12km NAM). I think the NWS call for 6-10/8-12 is a great call right now. It would not be a wise move to go crazy and up amounts based on the NAM and SREFs, which I believe are the least reliable models (not sure if that is actually true, but I'm saying this based on what I've seen them do before even this close to the onset of precipitation) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Saturday 7am ripping from NYC south Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 If you were hoping the GFS was going to look like the NAM, not gonna happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allgame830 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 I've always thought of the RGEM as an excellent model for predicting snow amounts, especially at this range. From 6z to 12z, it has pretty much held it's ground showing big amounts around the Philly area and lighter up toward NYC. It can't be discounted at this range simply because the NAM shows more than 5x the amount of snow. There are also discrepancies between the two NAM models. While both give us a lot of snow, one complete annihilates the area (12km NAM). I think the NWS call for 6-10/8-12 is a great call right now. It would not be a wise move to go crazy and up amounts based on the NAM and SREFs, which I believe are the least reliable models (not sure if that is actually true, but I'm saying this based on what I've seen them do before even this close to the onset of precipitation) I agree with you... however even the UKMET and EURO showed more up through the area then the RGEM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 A small improvement in the RGEM over the 0z run: Moreover, a small portion of VA and MD (circled region) shows 100 cm or more snowfall. The northern extent of 10 cm or greater snows is also somewhat more expansive than the end of the 6z run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 15z saturday light snow up to HFD MOD-Heavy snow continues for nyc south. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The ULL is quite a bit further Northeast so that's good but it hasn't really translated to much difference at the surface so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neblizzard Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 If you were hoping the GFS was going to look like the NAM, not gonna happen. Which just shows the NAM is flat out wrong. The Rgem not coming north confirms that IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morris Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Okay this is actually quite good for the Southern 2/3rds of the sub-forum. Sharp gradient somewhere over NNJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The NAM's likely overdone and too far north with heavy snow-shocker. Let's just hope the very heavy banding that will hit south of Trenton can make it to the NYC area. If it washes out like the RGEM has, NYC will have a very tough time making it to double digit snowfall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastonSN+ Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Ouch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drz1111 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 I don't take the parent (12km) NAM seriously, especially when it differs from its nest (4km). I also tend to ignore the SREFs in favor of the NCAR WRF ensemble system: http://ensemble.ucar.edu/ Having said that, I have only just started paying attention to the northern part of this forecast as I'm always fascinated by these aspects. I haven't done enough digging to be able to say anything intelligent about the "why" with respect to the differences. My quibble with those ensembles is that they seem unrealistically tight. Right now they have a 6" gradient in mean snowfall in 30 miles (BLM-JFK). That seems improbably certain to me - isn't there more uncertainty than that even if you knew almost precisely what the initial conditions were? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 CCB crushes central/southern nj and se PA. makes it up to Hpn decays over us. PHL probably gets over 2 feet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 It's just amazing to me how the low reforms to the East and pulls everything with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Accumulating snow is over by 12am sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 vs 06z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rittenhouse Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Precip advance slows down considerably at hr 16. Basically stalls at hr 18. Not a great sign. This might be the cutoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCGreg Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 It's just amazing to me how the low reforms to the East and pulls everything with it. Well, it keeps doing it. We're obviously not going to have any model consensus for this Blizzard, much like we didn't for last year's busted storm. Now it's just a matter of whether we lose again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The NAM's likely overdone and too far north with heavy snow-shocker. Let's just hope the very heavy banding that will hit south of Trenton can make it to the NYC area. If it washes out like the RGEM has, NYC will have a very tough time making it to double digit snowfall. Another 25-30 mile shift North on the GFS and it's very similar to the NAM. Regardless of what some may say about the globals, I always favor the higher res models inside of 36 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelocita Weather Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 All hail the NAM/SREFs, GFS caves... GFS has 1" QPF north of Rt.80...1.25" QPF and 2" QPF to parts of N/C NJ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morris Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 More snow for the city on the GFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danstorm Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 vs 06z I'll take it, brought the gradient further north - would still like it to gain more latitude before ejecting east, but there's room for that in later runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.