Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

March 13/14th PSU Storm


stormtracker

Recommended Posts

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

Any verification discrepancies between the two paras?  One would expect the 3km higher resolution to be better regardless, right?

       depends.    it's going to put more mesoscale features in the precip field, which won't always be correct.    But I overall trust its synoptics more than the 12 km versions of the NAM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WinterWxLuvr said:

I'm sorry, and I never do this, but that solution put out by the regular NAM seems to be ridiculous.  It is so out of sync with every other piece of guidance.

It goes nuts on the western flank so we're stuck in subsidence between the southern energy and northern energy. Total outlier right now and may be a case of what I talked about earlier. Get something wrong early and then magnify the error through time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

I'm sorry, and I never do this, but that solution put out by the regular NAM seems to be ridiculous.  It is so out of sync with every other piece of guidance.

This is what I'm hoping and I'm not sure why I'm letting it spook me..if this was outside of 36, I'd lol at it and not even discuss it...but supposedly we're in it's "wheelhouse" :rolleyes:  High risk added a little comfort is saying the para seems to be better

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...