nzucker Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 1 minute ago, ORH_wxman said: I said it before, but I have a feeling the non-hydrostatic models might end up as the superior guidance in this system...we'll see. Still some time as we're about 60 hours out, but given the extreme height falls showing up on most guidance in such a tight gradient, I'd pay attention to the non-hydros as we get closer. Yea you need high resolution to see such a compact, deep system. 4k NAM and RGEM may be useful, tho NAM is always too wet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 1 minute ago, ORH_wxman said: I said it before, but I have a feeling the non-hydrostatic models might end up as the superior guidance in this system...we'll see. Still some time as we're about 60 hours out, but given the extreme height falls showing up on most guidance in such a tight gradient, I'd pay attention to the non-hydros as we get closer. It's one of the few times where I can view the NAM and not say "tossed" this far out. Given those height falls and source region of development...I certainly would give it credit even at this stage...just with the typical caveats obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Is Euro hydrostatic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Canadian looks to be more over and just east of the canal. Much faster development too compared to 00z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 1 minute ago, Damage In Tolland said: Is Euro hydrostatic? Yes, but with good physics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 4 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said: I said it before, but I have a feeling the non-hydrostatic models might end up as the superior guidance in this system...we'll see. Still some time as we're about 60 hours out, but given the extreme height falls showing up on most guidance in such a tight gradient, I'd pay attention to the non-hydros as we get closer. It's not that the GFS is bad in my mind, I wonder if it's just the coding of the model itself to "smooth out" these explosive systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCAPEWEATHERAF Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 CMC is east of CHH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCAPEWEATHERAF Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Sorry the CMC I just saw was the 00z run east of CHH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Non-hydrotstatic just means the models can simulate events where the atmosphere is not an hydrostatic balance...like in convection. It's more for models with a small horizontal grid space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 2 minutes ago, CoastalWx said: Yes, but with good physics. Yeah, the non-hydrostatic models are the NAM, RGEM, and RPM I think. The SREFs are too...but I wouldn't trust them even in this situation. Maybe a glance. ECMWF does better than most hydrostatic models in this situation due to it's excellent vertical resolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Not that its useful, You probably don't want to look at the 12z GGEM unless you live in the lakes region of NH and NE into ME Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 1 minute ago, dryslot said: Not that its useful, You probably don't want to look at the 12z GGEM unless you live in the lakes region of NH and NE into ME Trended faster with development...which was a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Just now, dryslot said: Not that its useful, You probably don't want to look at the 12z GGEM unless you live in the lakes region of NH and NE into ME Has been the case for quite a few runs now. Never really gets it ramped up in SNE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 6 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said: Trended faster with development...which was a good thing. About all there is to say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 5 minutes ago, Baroclinic Zone said: Has been the case for quite a few runs now. Never really gets it ramped up in SNE. It also came west a good 50 miles or so from 0z to be more inline to what we have seen so far today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 12 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said: Yeah, the non-hydrostatic models are the NAM, RGEM, and RPM I think. The SREFs are too...but I wouldn't trust them even in this situation. Maybe a glance. ECMWF does better than most hydrostatic models in this situation due to it's excellent vertical resolution. Is that why GFS and a GGEM are still playing catchup to Euro? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 2 hours ago, HoarfrostHubb said: Virtually none. Nothing there to stop it Bombing captured storms can put on the breaks even for 3 hours and with intense rates someone sees 20 plus. Save a horse ride the Euro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 3 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said: Is that why GFS and a GGEM are still playing catchup to Euro? This would be my guess...there's a chance that they end up more correct, but in my experience with these high dynamic systems with tight gradients, they are usually last to the party. We saw it in the Jan 12, 2011 storm and we saw it to a lesser extent in the Oct 2011 storm and Feb 2013 storms. Same deal in the 12/9/05 storm though that was obviously much longer ago....but the relative differences in guidance were similar. Those were still hydrostatic models and a model like the NAM (even the old ETA back then) was non-hydrostatic. I think the old SUNY MM5 back then did well in that system too as a non-hydrostatic model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typhoon Tip Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 the RGEM's going to be interesting - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 8 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said: This would be my guess...there's a chance that they end up more correct, but in my experience with these high dynamic systems with tight gradients, they are usually last to the party. We saw it in the Jan 12, 2011 storm and we saw it to a lesser extent in the Oct 2011 storm and Feb 2013 storms. Same deal in the 12/9/05 storm though that was obviously much longer ago....but the relative differences in guidance were similar. Those were still hydrostatic models and a model like the NAM (even the old ETA back then) was non-hydrostatic. I think the old SUNY MM5 back then did well in that system too as a non-hydrostatic model. Miss that Suny inside 24 hours it's handling of the last 1000 ft of the atmosphere was fantastic. Talk about DejaVu, that NAM run.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 5 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said: the RGEM's going to be interesting - Yeah the 00z run will finally be in range to capture the peak of the event...though it will still be a bit out of the RGEM's wheelhouse on reliability. I really like to get to 36 hours on that model. But it should do well with this type of system in theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typhoon Tip Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 2 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said: Yeah the 00z run will finally be in range to capture the peak of the event...though it will still be a bit out of the RGEM's wheelhouse on reliability. I really like to get to 36 hours on that model. But it should do well with this type of system in theory. right - that's the key ... this is different than the more classic Norwegian model low theory... This a good ole fashioned set where there is a ton of thermal compression along a line from about along an axis from NJ to E of Porltand Maine (or so..); basically the termination edge from tonight and tomorrow's fresh CAA. Sorry if this is covered I don't have much time to go back after morning coffee; I did mention it awhile ago but it smacks of Dec 2005 in that regard. Very tight thickness and very upright structured frontal slopes and the inflow from all that huge jet max riding over top turning vertical and tapping that difluence gets a jolt - it causes this to get tainted by convective type mechanics. anyway, ...RGEM may also be better qualified once we start getting thunderstorms involved ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCAPEWEATHERAF Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Definitely John, this reeks of DEC092005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoarfrostHubb Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 32 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said: Bombing captured storms can put on the breaks even for 3 hours and with intense rates someone sees 20 plus. Save a horse ride the Euro True. But I don't see this hanging around for long. Something interesting could happen I guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 13 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said: True. But I don't see this hanging around for long. Something interesting could happen I guess Even a 3hr delay could be epic if your getting 2-3"/hr rates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Looked like the 12z GEFS were a couple tics east of the OP fwiw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Ukie looks warm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 One of those panels did not want to load at hr 72 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 51 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said: This would be my guess...there's a chance that they end up more correct, but in my experience with these high dynamic systems with tight gradients, they are usually last to the party. We saw it in the Jan 12, 2011 storm and we saw it to a lesser extent in the Oct 2011 storm and Feb 2013 storms. Same deal in the 12/9/05 storm though that was obviously much longer ago....but the relative differences in guidance were similar. Those were still hydrostatic models and a model like the NAM (even the old ETA back then) was non-hydrostatic. I think the old SUNY MM5 back then did well in that system too as a non-hydrostatic model. suny mm5, rest in peace. it did very well for nyc metro in boxing day 2010. sucks its no more because it was useful for big events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbutts Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Damn I was out of the loop.. This threat looks pretty legit, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.