Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

January Medium/Long Range Discussion


WinterWxLuvr

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, high risk said:

     no,  the FIM is a global model that is run by NOAA's Earth System Research Lab.   It's not bad, but it will never be an operational model.

     The "para" being discussed is the next version of the GFS that is current in its evaluation period.    If approved, it will replace the current GFS version in May.

 

 

 

Based on its performance last night I vote that it should replace the current GFS now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, C.A.P.E. said:

For now I am going with the Euro idea and focusing on the Friday event. It has trended better, and still time for it to trend a bit closer and stronger. It wont be a big storm but I would gladly take a 1-3 or 2-4 type event.

Except realize the euro having a first wave is why there is no second. I'd gladly give up 2-3" for a decent chance at a 10"+ storm. Those are rare and we don't get that many chances at one in a year. I don't like throwing them away for a common nickel and dime event that no one will remember in 5 years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect the bigger problem on the 6z gfs compared to 0z is it trended a bit more amped with that first wave. There just isn't room for them both, at least spaced as shown now. The first wave creates a more suppressive flow behind it and so the second is forced south. Minor differences. We're still pretty far out. The good news is the gfs held with better consolidated energy coming out and that's a bigger problem if we don't have that. The euro both has a more healthy wave one and much weaker energy coming into the west and so it has a very weak strung out system.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Thanatos_I_Am said:

 


Yeah congrats to them for jackpotting 6 days out..

 

It was interesting to see both the para and regular GFS consolidate on a similar solution even if it's not the one we want.  At the point now where all I have to do is look at 500mb.  I knew 0z would be good and 6z not as good.  500mb makes it more clinical and less emotional like the precip maps which have a huge hit not that far south of us.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Except realize the euro having a first wave is why there is no second. I'd gladly give up 2-3" for a decent chance at a 10"+ storm. Those are rare and we don't get that many chances at one in a year. I don't like throwing them away for a common nickel and dime event that no one will remember in 5 years. 

GFS also has an initial weaker wave. There is a lot still to be determined obviously. But given how erratic the GFS has been from run to run, I was simply expressing a lack of confidence in its solution for the second wave being that amplified per the 0z run. The overall pattern to me argues for weaker and progressive, so my expectations are for something more modest. I am rooting for something more amped though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SnowGoose69 said:

As a whole the pattern does not really favor suppression IMO for the MA or NE.  However, because we have zero clue as to which disturbances/when the disturbances will eject out its possible suppression does occur because there are windows of time in the Thu-Mon time period where if a shortwave ejects out at the right time this could be a SE event.

Agree it's not that the overall pattern is squashing this but if you get several weak waves ejecting close together they run interference on each other and the suppression comes that way. Not sure that even is suppression as much as just a splitting of everything leading to a weak system. Weaker systems are naturally going to track further south since they won't pump as much ridging ahead of them. 

One thing I would be careful about though is this assumption I keep reading that suppression won't be our problem. Call it whatever you want but a miss south is a risk. So is a mix if the system were to really amp up too much. Maybe it's because over the long run more storms will miss us north (because usually getting enough cold down to our lat is a problem) or that the gfs used to have a bad southeast bias (not so much anymore) but we have missed plenty of systems to our southeast this way the last several years. I'm not just assuming it will come north. If there is sufficient spacing or the first wave is weaker or the second has more energy, then it will come north. Absent those factors it could slide out to our south as a strung out mess and we waste a good window. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PennQuakerGirl said:

So in that case, what would cause the trough to sharpen?

A weaker first wave and stronger second. Less first clears the way for more ridging out in front and a stronger shortwave will also pump heights in front. Think of like waves. Everything has a reaction. You can't have two waves too close together or they conflict with each other. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

Agree it's not that the overall pattern is squashing this but if you get several weak waves ejecting close together they run interference on each other and the suppression comes that way. Not sure that even is suppression as much as just a splitting of everything leading to a weak system. Weaker systems are naturally going to track further south since they won't pump as much ridging ahead of them. 

One thing I would be careful about though is this assumption I keep reading that suppression won't be our problem. Call it whatever you want but a miss south is a risk. So is a mix if the system were to really amp up too much. Maybe it's because over the long run more storms will miss us north (because usually getting enough cold down to our lat is a problem) or that the gfs used to have a bad southeast bias (not so much anymore) but we have missed plenty of systems to our southeast this way the last several years. I'm not just assuming it will come north. If there is sufficient spacing or the first wave is weaker or the second has more energy, then it will come north. Absent those factors it could slide out to our south as a strung out mess and we waste a good window. 

Good points, PSU. I likewise don't automatically assume a system too far SE will come farther north. I know there's been a historical bias for that with the GFS, but the model has been improved quite a bit over the years. So that's not necessarily a general rule as much, I don't think. Also, yes, the reason for SE misses in this case may not be so much due to suppression as it is due to several waves moving through and not quite able to amplify enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, high risk said:

     no,  the FIM is a global model that is run by NOAA's Earth System Research Lab.   It's not bad, but it will never be an operational model.

     The "para" being discussed is the next version of the GFS that is current in its evaluation period.    If approved, it will replace the current GFS version in May.

Thanks for the clarification.  Another question, and I know it doesn't belong here, but since we are discussing it and some others are interested, any idea on the para and the old gfs verification scores compared to each other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, nw baltimore wx said:

Thanks for the clarification.  Another question, and I know it doesn't belong here, but since we are discussing it and some others are interested, any idea on the para and the old gfs verification scores compared to each other?

Para is apparently verifying better @ h5. But that probably doesn't mean much beyond d5. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

Well s/w is a hair stronger than 6z, but about the same position.  Definitely not like 0z tho.

I'm ok if gfs simply keeps the look of a healthy second wave ejecting from the west into the plains. From there we have a shot. Euro solution is all mucked up even by then with a strung out mess with no hope of doing much coming out at that time and a further north initial wave just to make sure it has no shot. The differences are pretty extreme fairly early on.  Get a healthy system coming out and as can do the whole model watching trends thing to the end. If it moves towards the euro idea it's game over. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...