phil882 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The opposite happened last year and they rode it hard. I would hate to be responsible for forecasting these things. 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. Do you mean 2001? There are actually a few Euro EPS members that have close to no precipitation in New York. Ultimately I think both the ARW and NMMB runs of the SREF are hyper over and under aggressive, and don't seem well tuned to be used together in an ensemble. That's why I'm not a fan of SREF guidance in general, and the latest simulation exemplifies these problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseBlizzard2014 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Incoming through HR 30 for the I-95. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Already well North by 12z Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 7am Saturday heavy snow NYC south Mod up to HPN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyblizz44 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 NAM is in its sweet spot and we all know it, You can hear a pin drop now but once it blasts us with 20 inches. JUST YOU WATCH THIS ROOM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxEngine Posted January 22, 2016 Author Share Posted January 22, 2016 There are actually a few Euro EPS members that have close to no precipitation in New York. Ultimately I think both the ARW and NMMB runs of the SREF are hyper over and under aggressive, and don't seem well tuned to be used together in an ensemble. That's why I'm not a fan of SREF guidance in general, and the latest simulation exemplifies these problems. Thanks Phil for taking the time to explain this stuff, good discussion w you and Don. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowBlitzkrieg Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 the NAM seems to be getting the precip here a lot faster, could that be why it's so far north? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastonSN+ Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 THE 00Z NAM BEGAN AND IS RUNNING ON TIME WITH 13 ALASKAN...30 CANADIAN...70 CONUS...AND 1 MEXICAN RAOB REPORTS AVAILABLE FOR INGEST. NO CARIBBEAN RAOB REPORTS WERE RECEIVED FOR THE NAM. 7 WINTER STORM RECON DROPSONDES IN THE GULF OF MEXICO WERE RECEIVED FOR THE 00Z NAM. So it did ingest the data? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseBlizzard2014 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 So it did ingest the data?Yes. It definitely did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike1984 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Sorry. Newbie here..what does that mean that it ingested the data? Should be more accurate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Sorry. Newbie here..what does that mean that it ingested the data? Should be more accurate? It incorporated the data in its assimilation. In theory, the data should add value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisy Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 The 4km NAM looks N too so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseBlizzard2014 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Sorry. Newbie here..what does that mean that it ingested the data? Should be more accurate?Yes. Basically the new data will provide better accuracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 15z heavy snow into lower Hudson valley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike1984 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Wouldn't there be new data for each run anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 My God, I can't believe this is significantly further North than 18z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyDabbundo Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 It incorporated the data in its assimilation. In theory, the data should add value. It's still the NAM. Obviously a great trend but must be taken with grain of salt for now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Wouldn't there be new data for each run anyway? Yes. But sometimes additional data is collected to try to improve the guidance before big events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 radio show is skeptical of the 0 z nam. need real models on board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseBlizzard2014 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Massive hit for the Tri State Area through HR 39. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David-LI Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Crushed at hour 39 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 18z heavy snow from acy to HFD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 We might actually dry slot this run. That's how far Northeast it is. Heavy snow almost into Central New England. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brooklynwx99 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Oh my God heavy snow to central PA @ hr 42 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tibet Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 radio show is skeptical of the 0 z nam. need real models on board I thought the GFS shifted sharply towards the NAM in its previous run? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danstorm Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 radio show is skeptical of the 0 z nam. need real models on board I think we're all skeptical but 3 consecutive jogs to the north plus new data raises an eyebrow. It's not like the NAM is totally clueless, especially this close in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 radio show is skeptical of the 0 z nam. need real models on board I don't disagree. If the more skillful guidance begins to move in the direction of the NAM, then confidence in such an outcome would increase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyblizz44 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 radio show is skeptical of the 0 z nam. need real models on board Who is doing the Radio Show? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Wow. If the NAM comes north much further, the coast would deal with mixing and a dryslot again. And this would be bad news for coastal flooding concerns. The tucked in move north prolongs the onshore flow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Nam was ingested with a lot of data Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.