Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,607
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

March 13 - 15 Major Winter Storm Potential


NEG NAO

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, UlsterCountySnowZ said:

985 WELL west of the benchmark. And nobody north or west of NYC gets into the really pounding echoes... I'll believe that as much as I believe Long Island flips to rain.. b.s

GGEM actually seems like a good model compared to GFS. THAT'S how bad GFS has been this winter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I've noticed GFS isnt that bad with track, but it's northern and western precip shields are absolute garbage compared to all other guidance


Which is normal for the GFS with these storms. With the h5 between the American and foreign models, the whole area is getting destroyed. End of discussion. :)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, winterwx21 said:

GGEM actually seems like a good model compared to GFS. THAT'S how bad GFS has been this winter. 

It's seemed to always have a problem as of late with large scale coastals. It refused to budge on last January blizzard til the oz run as snow was starting. Like Ucs said if you just looked at upper air patterns and low placement it would match up with the other globals there is something really wrong with it regarding east coast coastal storms

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, UlsterCountySnowZ said:

It's not the east and west that seems to matter on the GFS... it's the northern extent of the precip shield... it's just non existent on the GFS... ever model has a massive swath of heavy precip north of the LP, except the GFS 

GFS does this often with southern stream juiced up systems. Can't handle dynamics with its low resolution. You guys are going to get crushed. This isn't a Miller B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, swamplover56 said:

Any mets, or jm, bluewave, don, can explain why the gfs has this problem? Lower resolution?

My hypothesis is that the Euro's better initialization scheme and resolution probably give it a better mid-level processing than the GFS. The end result is a broader qpf field. That the RGEM also has a broader qpf field lends support to such an idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, donsutherland1 said:

My hypothesis is that the Euro's better initialization scheme and resolution probably give it a better mid-level processing than the GFS. The end result is a broader qpf field. That the RGEM also has a broader qpf field lends support to such an idea.

Perfect answer from the expert.  Getting the mid levels right is crucial. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any mets, or jm, bluewave, don, can explain why the gfs has this problem? Lower resolution?


It's a combination of the lower resolution and bias. The GFS does very poorly with Southern stream systems as well. They tend to be much more dynamic and with phasing, it tends to not have the resolution to see the phasing correctly (assuming it is indeed incorrect). The thing with this storm is that it's all about the phase a stronger phase will slow this down and bend it back west. Without, we'll see the GFS

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

My hypothesis is that the Euro's better initialization scheme and resolution probably give it a better mid-level processing than the GFS. The end result is a broader qpf field. That the RGEM also has a broader qpf field lends support to such an idea.

Thanks as always don s spreading the knowledge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GFS and NAM are also later starting the snow which leads to lower amounts.  They do for different reasons though.  The NAM hangs onto the inland low too long and is slow developing coastal precip til late.  The GFS isn't recognizing the extent to which overrunning snows probably break out north of the surface low so it's fairly late as well 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CIK62 said:

The 18Z Cobb Method for the NAM/GFS    is 15" & 20" respectively (LGA), except the GFS does more with less precipitation.   

The SREF Plumes for LGA seem to have settled at 10".

Now this is concerning.  The SREF Plumes - while out of ideal range - are very helpful in identifying trends.  In our busts, the SREFs have lowered steadily towards the event.  In last year's blizzard, they increased steadily as the event grew near.  I'm not suggesting LGA will end up with 10", but the fact that the mean continues to decrease is a bad omen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, USCG RS said:


It's a combination of the lower resolution and bias. The GFS does very poorly with Southern stream systems as well. They tend to be much more dynamic and with phasing, it tends to not have the resolution to see the phasing correctly (assuming it is indeed incorrect). The thing with this storm is that it's all about the phase a stronger phase will slow this down and bend it back west. Without, we'll see the GFS

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
 

Do the upper patterns in your opinion look favorable for the stronger phase?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NYCGreg said:

Now this is concerning.  The SREF Plumes - while out of ideal range - are very helpful in identifying trends.  In our busts, the SREFs have lowered steadily towards the event.  In last year's blizzard, they increased steadily as the event grew near.  I'm not suggesting LGA will end up with 10", but the fact that the mean continues to decrease is a bad omen.

Our resident pessimist is back 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do the upper patterns in your opinion look favorable for the stronger phase?  


Yes, imho the h5 for this storm is one of the best looking potentials for a storm I've seen outside of a class textbook. Even the GFS looks like it should be better than what the surface shows. That being said, I still believe the storm should translate around 50-75 miles east tonight as while I believe the phase will be strong, I'm not positive it will be as clean as some of the models are showing. A three hr difference in phasing makes all the difference.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NYCGreg said:

Now this is concerning.  The SREF Plumes - while out of ideal range - are very helpful in identifying trends.  In our busts, the SREFs have lowered steadily towards the event.  In last year's blizzard, they increased steadily as the event grew near.  I'm not suggesting LGA will end up with 10", but the fact that the mean continues to decrease is a bad omen.

There are probably some overamped members in there which is likely bringing dryslot issues/mixing. Or we have the ones like the GFS which are likely incorrectly chasing convection east. Either way I wouldn't worry much about it yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now this is concerning.  The SREF Plumes - while out of ideal range - are very helpful in identifying trends.  In our busts, the SREFs have lowered steadily towards the event.  In last year's blizzard, they increased steadily as the event grew near.  I'm not suggesting LGA will end up with 10", but the fact that the mean continues to decrease is a bad omen.



The current run of the SREF plumes give NENJ/NYC area closer to 15". The prior run gave closer to 10"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, USCG RS said:


Yes, imho the h5 for this storm is one of the best looking potentials for a storm I've seen outside of a class textbook. Even the GFS looks like it should be better than what the surface shows. That being said, I still believe the storm should translate around 50-75 miles east tonight as while I believe the phase will be strong, I'm not positive it will be as clean as some of the models are showing. A three hr difference in phasing makes all the difference.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using
 

Would that east tick translate to big differences in snow amounts inland? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, USCG RS said:


Yes, imho the h5 for this storm is one of the best looking potentials for a storm I've seen outside of a class textbook. Even the GFS looks like it should be better than what the surface shows. That being said, I still believe the storm should translate around 50-75 miles east tonight as while I believe the phase will be strong, I'm not positive it will be as clean as some of the models are showing. A three hr difference in phasing makes all the difference.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
 

I agree-the models may have overamped today and may correct east a bit. I'm not sure I see the low going almost due north from Cape Hatteras given how progressive the overall pattern is. I'm pretty sure it goes southeast of Montauk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, danstorm said:

Our resident pessimist is back 

It's not pessimism.  I am not throwing myself off a cliff over the GFS or other models that may not be showing great solutions, as the explanations for those are fine.  But I've found in the past that the SREF trends are pretty helpful in identifying whether a storm will underperform or overperform.  I'm not suggesting that we're now in line for 2 inches; I'm just saying I'd rather see those plumes go up than down.

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...