MJO812 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 2 minutes ago, EastonSN+ said: Yep. Ticked a bit west down in the Delmarva and a bit east up here. I still think we can score at least a 1 to 3 inch storm for 90% of the forum given the ensembles. Maybe we get lucky with a bit more. The meso models will handle this storm better than the globals because of the convection involved down south. See Jan 2016 Not saying it similar but sometimes the globals jump towards the convection. This storm is looking very similar to Juno as of right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 18 minutes ago, jbenedet said: Disagree here. Convection itself will not produce the best surface pressure falls. What we're interested in is how convection results in UL height rises, impacting the orientation of the Jet and downstream UL ridge. To my eye the 6z Nam is making a critical error here in collocating the best surface pressure falls with the deepest convection rather than the location further east where the best upper level divergence exists. There is a very broad zone of upper divergence near and East of the Bahamas. Most of the guidance has the best convection and pressure falls further east than the NAM is showing hence the further east tracks. We would need the NAM to be right here with the further west development. Remember the critical model error in January 2000 was jumping the convection and best pressure falls too far off the coast. When final studies were done on that case, the error came down to the models inability to correctly simulate the correct location and intensity of the convection. Everything else followed from that error. We would need the NAM to score a major coup here against the other guidance for a further west track. Zhang, F., C. Snyder, and R. Rotunno, 2003: Effects of moist convection on mesoscale predictability. J. Atmos. Sci., 60,1173–1185. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 1 minute ago, bluewave said: There is a very broad zone of upper divergence near and East of the Bahamas. Most of the guidance has the best convection and pressure falls further east than the NAM is showing hence the further east tracks. We would need the NAM to be right here with the further west development. Remember the critical model error in January 2000 was jumping the convection and best pressure falls too far off the coast. When final studies were done on that case, the error came down to the models inability to correctly simulate the correct location and intensity of the convection. Everything else followed from that error. We would need the NAM to score a major coup here against the other guidance for a further west track. Rgem at 6z was also further west like the Nam. SREF is also similiar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 The 12z NAM initialized with all three pieces well within the model parameter, so no more excuses for poor sampling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbenedet Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 9 minutes ago, bluewave said: There is a very broad zone of upper divergence near and East of the Bahamas. Most of the guidance has the best convection and pressure falls further east than the NAM is showing hence the further east tracks. We would need the NAM to be right here with the further west development. Remember the critical model error in January 2000 was jumping the convection and best pressure falls too far off the coast. When final studies were done on that case, the error came down to the models inability to correctly simulate the correct location and intensity of the convection. Everything else followed from that error. We would need the NAM to score a major coup here against the other guidance for a further west track. I don't disagree that the convection and how that relates to surface pressure falls is and will continue to be a significant source of model error going forward. My point is the 6z NAM solution looks particularly odd if you look at the Upper levels relative to where it develops the best location of surface pressure falls. The Upper Levels closely match the GFS and Euro. To me it doesn't make sense. Now if the convection per the nam sufficiently altered the UL's that would be quite different in my view... All that being said, I do think the mesos are onto something regarding the deep convection--so I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. But I am strongly hedging the mesos against the 0z Euro right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Just now, jbenedet said: I don't disagree that the convection and how that relates to surface pressure falls is and will continue to be a significant source of model error going forward. My point is the 6z NAM solution looks particularly odd if you look at the Upper levels relative to where it develops the best location of surface pressure falls. The Upper Levels closely match the GFS and Euro. To me it doesn't make sense. Now if the convection per the nam sufficiently altered the UL's that would be quite different in my view... All that being said, I do think the mesos are onto something regarding the deep convection--so I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. But I am strongly hedging the mesos against the 0z Euro. Yeah, that was the point that I was trying to make. The models that come closest correctly simulating the most realistic location and intensity of the initial convection will carry the day here. It's a pretty high stakes game with all the models agreeing on such an intense system. Getting the exact track correct will be important for the sensible weather details further up the coast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternLI Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 24 minutes ago, NJwx85 said: You have to remember that location is very important. Your blizzard is my cirrus and my blizzard is your rainstorm, most of the time anyway. No kidding. But we are both part of the same sub forum as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ericjcrash Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 All I ask is 50 miles W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbenedet Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 H5 trough is def sharper on 12z Nam out to 27. At the very least this run shouldn't be worse... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 The 12z NAM is looking better, need that trough go negative tilt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 2 minutes ago, NJwx85 said: The 12z NAM is looking better, need that trough go negative tilt Looked like better stream interaction over FL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 I have a feeling no matter what we’re not getting that diving vort behind the northern stream to phase, so we can only come so far west Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Black line is current track of the SLP, need the blue track instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Surface low is west of the surface low at 39 hours on the Nam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Still a disconnect between the trough and the Southern stream shortwave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Going to be painfully close this run, look how the winds are backed to the coast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Double barreled lows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F5TornadoF5 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Well that's progress, one SLP @ 962mb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 3 minutes ago, NJwx85 said: Going to be painfully close this run, look how the winds are backed to the coast. We,really are painfully close, with that piece diving in i don’t see how we tug this west anymore, seems like we’re milking a dry cow right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormlover74 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 City east gets hit hard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 958mb, East of NYC crushed, January 2015 track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UlsterCountySnowZ Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Northern stream was weaker but southern stream was more amped, better heights...not sure I buy that weak western precip shield..yanks what’s ur thought on the surface reflection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Wow LI and SNE get crushed. NYC does very well also Sharp cutoff west of NYC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Going to pass just Southeast of the benchmark. Need about a 50 mile shift to the West in order to get a Boxing Day track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 1 minute ago, UlsterCountySnowZ said: Northern stream was weaker but southern stream was more amped, better heights...not sure I buy that weak western precip shield..yanks what’s ur thought on the surface reflection LOL, it's not weak by any means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherfreeeeak Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Just now, NJwx85 said: Going to pass just Southeast of the benchmark. Need about a 50 mile shift to the West in order to get a Boxing Day track. Is that shift possible this close do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 954mb, CCB cranking from Maine to Long Island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthShoreWx Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Plain English: 12Z NAM is a ferocious blizzard for LI. That might get lost in the whining from NJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 It's still 4-8" for NYC and 2-4" or 3-5" for the Western suburbs. Most of Long Island is 8"+. Northern New England is 30"+. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.