Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

January Medium/Long Range Discussion Part 2


WinterWxLuvr

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

Tantalizing run for the hills on this run of the GFS. If you go to this link below, the 96 hrs. 850 temps off the 12Z run and then click on the Left Arrow where it says "Prev. Runs", you can see how the colder temps from the Northeast have made their way closer to the Mid Atlantic versus the 2 previous runs. Like somebody said, we've got another 100 hrs. of trending to go!

http://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/models/?model=gfs&region=neus&pkg=T850&runtime=2017011912&fh=96&xpos=0&ypos=384

hmm, wonder who that somebody was:ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

I can't stand false claims.

I'm not sure anyone was making any definitive claims. WWlvr was simply pointing out that the wedge of cold air has trended closer. you chose to make it into something more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mappy said:

I'm not sure anyone was making any definitive claims. WWlvr was simply pointing out that the wedge of cold air has trended closer. you chose to make it into something more. 

The GFS shows a wedge at hour 102.  Does it have support other than individual gefs cherry-picked maps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

The GFS shows a wedge at hour 102.  Does it have support other than individual gefs cherry-picked maps?

Again -- he pointed it out. Never said it was going to happen. Never said people were going to see snow. 

You are taking a simple post that pointed out the wedge into something much bigger than it was intended to be. Not sure why. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mappy said:

Again -- he pointed it out. Never said it was going to happen. Never said people were going to see snow. 

You are taking a simple post that pointed out the wedge into something much bigger than it was intended to be. Not sure why. 

If nobody wants to hear the truth, then what's the use of these forums?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mappy said:

sigh. i give up. carry on with your saltiness. and this "truth" you are trying to make everyone see. 

For the record, I'm not "salty".  Let's see who knows how to react to a little criticism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

I'd rather not. 

ok. we are totally bantering now. not sure what your point was with the criticism line in your last post, but whatever. i dont want to argue with my fellow mid-atlantic snow lovers. we are on the same team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

  We miss that storm in March 99 and that was 2002.  Likewise we get one of those storms that missed us just south or north during a decent pattern late Dec into early Jan in 2002 and we don't remember that as anything particularly awful right now.   That is the fight were in right now.  Avoid the total crap result.  

 

March 99 had 3 events.

March 4 - 6"

March 9 - 3"

March 14 - 9"

total - 18"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, osfan24 said:

It obviously won't happen, but the cold air has trended insanely far south with this storm in a relatively short period of time over the past few days. If that trend did continue, this would be very interesting. I'm sure it won't though.

Talking about trends is all well and good but model depictions is what we are really discussing. Being 100 hours out from a possible storm that is occurring in a pattern change tells me that we may not know what will happen until possibly kickoff. More changes will be forthcoming with this storm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me try to explain why I think that wedge is not very likely.  That map is at 850mb from the operational gfs day 4. Fine.  What's it show at the surface?  No cold air.  What do the ensembles show at these levels?  Similar to 2m ops.  They support each other.  What about the para?  Its 6z run looks warm.

Is this data people want ignored just because it's not positive?...

6z gfs

gfs_T2m_eus_10.png

12z gfs

gfs_T2m_eus_18.png

para

gfsp_T2m_eus_10.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...