Model Mayhem VII

[dryslot]

15 minutes ago, dendrite said:

The accums start inside 48hr though. 

Typically outside its range though at hr 48

[dendrite]

13 minutes ago, dryslot said:

Typically outside its range though at hr 48

I know Will stands by that, but I don't have the raw numbers for it. I've always felt like if a model is great at 24hr it should be better at 48/72hr too...errors increase exponentially. But either way....we're inside 2 days for the onset.

[dryslot]

1 minute ago, dendrite said:

I know Will stands by that, but I don't have the raw numbers for it. I've always felt like if a model is great at 24hr it should be better at 48/72hr too...errors increase exponentially. But either way....we're inside 2 days for the onset.

Like to see the models come in a tic or so colder on the 0z suite.

[Hazey]

Guys, put the snow weenie goggles down. Just take em off. Time to move on...lol.

[dendrite]

3 minutes ago, Hazey said:

Guys, put the snow weenie goggles down. Just take em off. Time to move on...lol.

I want 80F, but I can't control the weather. It's going to snow/sleet here to some extent tomorrow. Are we not allowed to discuss reality?

[Ginx snewx]

25 minutes ago, Hazey said:

Guys, put the snow weenie goggles down. Just take em off. Time to move on...lol.

Yea especially those peeps under a WSW,  wut?

[Damage In Tolland]

First 80 looking likely next Tu/Wed.. Install this weekend 

[powderfreak]

57 minutes ago, Hazey said:

Guys, put the snow weenie goggles down. Just take em off. Time to move on...lol.

Ha, what?  They are going to get a winter weather event.  Why not talk about it?

Odd post.

[powderfreak]

4 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

First 80 looking likely next Tu/Wed.. Install this weekend 

And a bunch of seasons in seasons days before and after that.

[ORH_wxman]

10 hours ago, dendrite said:

I know Will stands by that, but I don't have the raw numbers for it. I've always felt like if a model is great at 24hr it should be better at 48/72hr too...errors increase exponentially. But either way....we're inside 2 days for the onset.

The non-hydrostatic models would have their errors multiply faster than the regular hydrostatic globals if they get a little too wacked out with convection...which is more likely if it's further out. So I could see how it does well inside of like 36 hours when it has a more realistic sample of the convective parameters and then it starts unraveling pretty quickly as it guesses more and more and it doesn't have that artificial stabilizing factor that hydrostatic models have.

[Ginx snewx]

30 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

And a bunch of seasons in seasons days before and after that.

Man that's a deep trough day 5, something that can trigger upslope for your mountain.  

[Typhoon Tip]

Taste of summer then the flood? 

Though I think floods are fascinating ... in someone else's township, in my life-time there's been three years: after 1987, 2005, and 2010, and knowing the patterns that transpired/contributed to each, I almost get the sense these are like "standard top tier events."  Kind of like 1A Supernovas are to Astronomy -

It's difficult to get a clearer perspective on the return rates for major flooding, that which reaches the scale of those years, as it seems each one affects differently.  It's almost like we'd have to break down the phenomenon of flooding in general, as it affects SNE, into zones? 

1987 was big year for interior rivers and dammed water ways.  

2005 was historic along the Merrimack Rivers and inundated the Merrimack Valley prone areas; the heavy rain event was primarily central New England and the M. river watershed.  

2010 was more so SE zones, but it did afflict overflows into the interior/N. Shore and some interiors too.  

Those are my impressions of those events - they may not be entirely fair; I wasn't trying to be precise. But, one wonders if big flooding ever inundates the whole region more unilaterally, and if so ... how many years on average before that sort of ordeal returns.  Come to think about it ... perhaps seasonality could be /included delineated usefully. To mention, if the climate is changing, flooding frequencies could certainly be plausible in that total picture, one which has yet to transpire. There's been short duration catastrophic flooding over coastal water-ways due to tide/storm action, as well as further inland due to tropical storm translations. For the purpose of this muse ... spring events, those brought about by crawling/back-filling cut-off systems that plagued and dumped for days; they come in when the wicks been set with very recent ground releases of winter water stows.  Different this time, according to the U.S. Drought Monitoring, one would suspect we are wick challenged.

So ..perhaps not on the latter.  But, post the first seasons significant ridge/warmth event next week, there are a lot of GFS members that suggest a slow moving wet pattern in the far extended.  And the teleconnectors might just be interesting in that regard, too - though they are about to become seasonally less effective. 

Just a morning coffee thought.

[dendrite]

45 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

The non-hydrostatic models would have their errors multiply faster than the regular hydrostatic globals if they get a little too wacked out with convection...which is more likely if it's further out. So I could see how it does well inside of like 36 hours when it has a more realistic sample of the convective parameters and then it starts unraveling pretty quickly as it guesses more and more and it doesn't have that artificial stabilizing factor that hydrostatic models have.

Isn't the RDPS hydrostatic still? I know the HRDPS is nonhydrostatic. 

[ORH_wxman]

Just a nitpick Tip...it was 2006 and not 2005 that we had the epic Merrimack floods.

[Cold Miser]

56 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

First 80 looking likely next Tu/Wed.. Install this weekend 

Just like clockwork, the early April install post has arrived.

 

[CoastalWx]

4 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Taste of summer then the flood? 

Though I think floods are fascinating ... in someone else's township, in my life-time there's been three years: after 1987, 2005, and 2010, and knowing the patterns that transpired/contributed to each, I almost get the sense these are like "standard top tier events."  Kind of like 1A Supernovas are to Astronomy -

It's difficult to get a clearer perspective on the return rates for major flooding, that which reaches the scale of those years, as it seems each one affects differently.  It's almost like we'd have to break down the phenomenon of flooding in general, as it affects SNE, into zones? 

1987 was big year for interior rivers and dammed water ways.  

2005 was historic along the Merrimack Rivers and inundated the Merrimack Valley prone areas; the heavy rain event was primarily central New England and the M. river watershed.  

2010 was more so SE zones, but it did afflict overflows into the interior/N. Shore and some interiors too.  

Those are my impressions of those events - they may not be entirely fair; I wasn't trying to be precise. But, one wonders if big flooding ever inundates the whole region more unilaterally, and if so ... how many years on average before that sort of ordeal returns.  Come to think about it ... perhaps seasonality could be /included delineated usefully. To mention, if the climate is changing, flooding frequencies could certainly be plausible in that total picture, one which has yet to transpire. There's been short duration catastrophic flooding over coastal water-ways due to tide/storm action, as well as further inland due to tropical storm translations. For the purpose of this muse ... spring events, those brought about by crawling/back-filling cut-off systems that plagued and dumped for days; they come in when the wicks been set with very recent ground releases of winter water stows.  Different this time, according to the U.S. Drought Monitoring, one would suspect we are wick challenged.

So ..perhaps not on the latter.  But, post the first seasons significant ridge/warmth event next week, there are a lot of GFS members that suggest a slow moving wet pattern in the far extended.  And the teleconnectors might just be interesting in that regard, too - though they are about to become seasonally less effective. 

Just a morning coffee thought.

I think you mean 06 John, but 05 did have Fall flooding. May and June 2006 were absurdly wet. There was water everywhere. June 2006 had an early month nor'easter that dropped 3-5" and renewed flooding. 

[Cold Miser]

1 hour ago, Hazey said:

Guys, put the snow weenie goggles down. Just take em off. Time to move on...lol.

Never.

I thoroughly enjoyed driving through a ranging snowstorm in The Adirondacks 2 Memorial Day weekend's ago.  Was awesome.

[ORH_wxman]

2 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Isn't the RDPS hydrostatic still? I know the HRDPS is nonhydrostatic. 

I always thought the RGEM was nonhydrostatic...did they change it somewhat recently?

I thought I distinctly remember reading a paper on how the regional gem had performed in convection due to nonhydrostatic properties....but granted this was like probably 5 or 6 years ago.

[Typhoon Tip]

13 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

I think you mean 06 John, but 05 did have Fall flooding. May and June 2006 were absurdly wet. There was water everywhere. June 2006 had an early month nor'easter that dropped 3-5" and renewed flooding. 

Right - 06 ... it was dubbed the "Mother's Day flood" ?

I remember I made a special trip to UML to check it out - seeing as I went to school there, I had to see how it was affecting the Pawtucket dam/spill way system and so forth. I had seen several over-top events along that spill way in my times there, but never anything that came close to matching the spectacle of that figurative tsunamis.  In other sort of more "standard" over the toppers ... the water falls over, thicker in some events than others.  In that Mother's day thing?  It was flat across that top - didnt' think that was physically possible...but there wasn't even a ripple or bow-shock where some sort of dam rim could be plausibly ascertained... The water literally flowed laminar straight across the top.  

I had wonder over the years if that were ever possible...heh.  Guess so -

[jbenedet]

Tough forecast for extreme southwest ME. Personally I'd have the watches extended down to encompass Portland, considering how these cold tucks tend to trend colder inside 48 hrs. Also, precip rates right along the coast should be the most impressive with this, with that moisture feed right off the Atlantic. Portland needs to watch this very closely. Looks like the mid levels already stay cold enough throughout, and the BL will be aided by dynamic cooling. If this coastal low develops 3-6 hrs earlier, this is a significant event for them. 

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

Snow days are not over in nne,

22 minutes ago, Cold Miser said:

Just like clockwork, the early April install post has arrived.

 

Yea, and the runway BDL temps for his backyard.

[Typhoon Tip]

28 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Just a nitpick Tip...it was 2006 and not 2005 that we had the epic Merrimack floods.

yeah i responded to Scott too oops - tru.  

Hey guys, ...man, I was just looking over the EPS and GEFs mean for that D4.5 amplification scheduled to bore out a NE U.S. atmospheric canyon and wow - that is really Meteorologically close to being a surprise here.  It already is for PA; so much height implosion while heavy precip is going on and I bet someone out there gets a pretty solid blue whack out of that deal.   I was also thinking that look should pummel our area with 2 to 5" of rain - speak of the flood devil.  

Thing is, too bad we don't have cold air in place because ..that's close enough that it would force a low out and effectively carve the whole structure a bit farther SE due to cyclogenic feed-backs on height falls and so forth.  AS is, we lack baroclinicity unfortunately.  So the storm does most of its juggernaut aloft, and we have a comparatively weaker surface response (though not "weak" per se, but relative to the look of the deep layer amplitude/evolution). That behavior of collocating the surface low up under the deeper mid levels so soon in the total system evolution is classic spring fetid surface gradients at work.  

 

[dryslot]

2 hours ago, Hazey said:

Guys, put the snow weenie goggles down. Just take em off. Time to move on...lol.

Halifax Hash?

[dendrite]

26 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

I always thought the RGEM was nonhydrostatic...did they change it somewhat recently?

I thought I distinctly remember reading a paper on how the regional gem had performed in convection due to nonhydrostatic properties....but granted this was like probably 5 or 6 years ago.

Yeah idk...all I have is this.

http://collaboration.cmc.ec.gc.ca/cmc/CMOI/product_guide/docs/changes_e.html#20151215_rdps_4.1.0

It may be a bit of a hybrid, but it does state...

Formulation: Hydrostatic primitive equations.

[dryslot]

2 hours ago, Ginx snewx said:

Yea especially those peeps under a WSW,  wut?

Yeah, Nothing to see here

[dendrite]

24 minutes ago, jbenedet said:

Tough forecast for extreme southwest ME. Personally I'd have the watches extended down to encompass Portland, considering how these cold tucks tend to trend colder inside 48 hrs. Also, precip rates right along the coast should be the most impressive with this, with that moisture feed right off the Atlantic. Portland needs to watch this very closely. Looks like the mid levels already stay cold enough throughout, and the BL will be aided by dynamic cooling. If this coastal low develops 3-6 hrs earlier, this is a significant event for them. 

The 6z NAM has PWM sleeting 18z tomorrow.

[dryslot]

06z Nam and RGEM looked warm even to here.

[jbenedet]

2 minutes ago, dryslot said:

06z Nam and RGEM looked warm even to here.

You see where that high sets up though? That's a great location to funnel low level cold right down to the coastal plain. 

[dendrite]

1 minute ago, jbenedet said:

You see where that high sets up though? That's a great location to funnel low level cold right down to the coastal plain. 

It's got going to mean squat at H75

[dendrite]

5 minutes ago, dryslot said:

06z Nam and RGEM looked warm even to here.

I think you're in a good spot for a strong net gain.