RU848789 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Here's an interesting hypothetical. Let's say all of the models show 10-20" for NYC, except the Euro, which shows 4-6". What do you do, if you're a forecaster? Are we that far from that now, with the 18Z GFS going snowier (and I think all the rest of the models are showing 8-12" or more for NYC, no?). We need a pinned scoreboard for each model with snowfall maps (and data tables for key cities), lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil882 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The latest SREF is awful and likely unrealistic, due to some outlier ARW members that have excessive precipitation amounts where all other (non ARW) guidance essentially says there will be little/no precipitation. One member has more than 4" of liquid QPF for Syracuse, NY. Obviously this is going to significantly skew the mean towards much much higher amounts than should be expected. In short, I don't find the SREF guidance to be useful for forecasting precipitation amounts in New England, and neither should anyone else without weeding out the outlier members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseBlizzard2014 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The SLP from the NAM is about 20-30 miles north through HR 18. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemost Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Ridge looks sharper, NAM is looking more amped as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jan21 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 earlier euro and eps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F5TornadoF5 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The latest SREF is awful and likely unrealistic, due to some outlier ARW members that have excessive precipitation amounts where all other (non ARW) guidance essentially says there will be little/no precipitation. One member has more than 4" of liquid QPF for Syracuse, NY. Obviously this is going to significantly skew the mean towards much much higher amounts than should be expected. Don did weed out those members and still had a significant increase to 1.08 for NYC In short, I don't find the SREF guidance to be useful for forecasting precipitation amounts in New England, and neither should anyone else without weeding out the outlier members. Don did weed out those members and nyc had 1.08 mean which was a significant increase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Nams stronger and further north Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The latest SREF is awful and likely unrealistic, due to some outlier ARW members that have excessive precipitation amounts where all other (non ARW) guidance essentially says there will be little/no precipitation. One member has more than 4" of liquid QPF for Syracuse, NY. Obviously this is going to significantly skew the mean towards much much higher amounts than should be expected. In short, I don't find the SREF guidance to be useful for forecasting precipitation amounts in New England, and neither should anyone else without weeding out the outlier members. I agree. That's why I am more interested in what's happening with the non-ARW members and give virtually no consideration to the ARW-derived RPM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Nam looks locked and loaded here she comes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yhbrooklyn Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Here's an interesting hypothetical. Let's say all of the models show 10-20" for NYC, except the Euro, which shows 4-6". What do you do, if you're a forecaster? Are we that far from that now, with the 18Z GFS going snowier (and I think all the rest of the models are showing 8-12" or more for NYC, no?). We need a pinned scoreboard for each model with snowfall maps (and data tables for key cities), lol.The opposite happened last year and they rode it hard. I would hate to be responsible for forecasting these things. The latest SREF is awful and likely unrealistic, due to some outlier ARW members that have excessive precipitation amounts where all other (non ARW) guidance essentially says there will be little/no precipitation. One member has more than 4" of liquid QPF for Syracuse, NY. Obviously this is going to significantly skew the mean towards much much higher amounts than should be expected. In short, I don't find the SREF guidance to be useful for forecasting precipitation amounts in New England, and neither should anyone else without weeding out the outlier members. But a lot of those members you call more realistic and similar to the global models have ZERO precip into NYC. None of the globals show that. Does this storm have ANYTHING dynamically in common with the big bust of 2003?Do you mean 2001? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hazwoper Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Nams stronger and further north H5 appears to show it is heading north even further! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason WX Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Confluence over Maine is backing off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowsintherain Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Yes 2001. My bad. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil882 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Don did weed out those members and nyc had 1.08 mean which was a significant increase. Which members did he weed out? I'd argue that you'd need to remove close to all the ARW members to get anywhere close to a realistic forecast ensemble. This has been a recurring problem with SREF guidance, since the core dynamical models (ARW and NMMB) tend to cluster towards one another... and artificially produces member clustering that may not necessarily exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The NAM is even more amplified than 18z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brooklynwx99 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The PVA on the eastern side of the ULL is much stronger and the confluence is very slightly weaker. This one is gonna be a bomb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseBlizzard2014 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 00Z NAM. Light Snow entering Southern NJ by 4 PM tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Which members did he weed out? I'd argue that you'd need to remove close to all the ARW members to get anywhere close to a realistic forecast ensemble. This has been a recurring problem with SREF guidance, since the core dynamical models (ARW and NMMB) tend to cluster towards one another... and artificially produces member clustering that may not necessarily exist. All the ARW and MBP1. I still don't give it too much weight, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danstorm Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The NAM is even more amplified than 18z. Yeah she's climbin for sure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danstorm Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 00Z NAM. Light Snow entering Southern NJ by 4 PM tomorrow. I mean, at some point, you can't ignore it... And the GFS bump at 18z makes this ever more intriguing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseBlizzard2014 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 I mean, at some point, you can't ignore it... And the GFS bump at 18z makes this ever more intriguingYup. This is increasingly becoming more interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 I mean, at some point, you can't ignore it... And the GFS bump at 18z makes this ever more intriguing radio show is discounting the 18 z run basically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brooklynwx99 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 992 mb LP just south of Delaware. Stronger and more tucked in than 18z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseBlizzard2014 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 HR 27. Light Snow entering NYC (10 PM tomorrow night). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastonSN+ Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 radio show is discounting the 18 z run basically. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 This run is going to be a monster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseBlizzard2014 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The 00Z GFS ingested the Special Sounding as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Why? typical reasons we all discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blizz Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 THE 00Z NAM BEGAN AND IS RUNNING ON TIME WITH 13 ALASKAN...30CANADIAN...70 CONUS...AND 1 MEXICAN RAOB REPORTS AVAILABLE FORINGEST. NO CARIBBEAN RAOB REPORTS WERE RECEIVED FOR THE NAM.7 WINTER STORM RECON DROPSONDES IN THE GULF OF MEXICO WERERECEIVED FOR THE 00Z NAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastonSN+ Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 typical reasons we all discuss. I am more amped about the nudge north from the gefs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.