Hoosier Posted January 10, 2018 Author Share Posted January 10, 2018 3 minutes ago, Chicago Storm said: The NAM didn’t have any convective feedback. Some of you are grasping straws . What caused the surface low to jump around then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, Chicago Storm said: The NAM didn’t have any convective feedback. Some of you are grasping straws . You are incorrect, there is very obvious convective feedback with the low location jumping east along the frontal convection which pulls the main low east. If you can't see this, I don't know what to tell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted January 10, 2018 Author Share Posted January 10, 2018 Just now, Jim Martin said: A new weather model over on TropicalTidbits.com with a look at the upcoming storm this weekend. I think Tidbits has jumped the shark lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Just now, Hoosier said: I think Tidbits has jumped the shark lol I don't know about that, but there is such a thing as too much information, I don't think putting resources into bad, Read:JMA or unproven, Read:German ICON model, is a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 There does appear to be some convective feedback issues. However, the NAM did pretty well with that east coast blizzard. We'll see if changes occur as we get closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackstraw Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 NAM really amped that ridge to the north this run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, Snowstorms said: There does appear to be some convective feedback issues. However, the NAM did pretty well with that east coast blizzard. We'll see if changes occur as we get closer. Yeah because it trended west for 48 hours straight right before the event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowlover2 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 The track on the 0z NAM in the end really didn't change much if at all from its 18z. The low on the 18z bounced a bit too but its generally the same track 0z run was just colder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Just now, snowlover2 said: The track on the 0z NAM in the end really didn't change much if at all from its 18z. The low on the 18z bounced a bit too but its generally the same track 0z run was just colder. It is east compared to the 18z... And both suffered from the same issues... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted January 10, 2018 Author Share Posted January 10, 2018 imo, the double barrel type structure with the 1002 mb low in SC would not be there if there weren't convection occurring in the same area. How much that is affecting the overall output is debatable and probably hard to figure out, but I think it's something you have to at least be mindful of. It is particularly important for areas riding the edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago Storm Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 What caused the surface low to jump around then? You are incorrect, there is very obvious convective feedback with the low location jumping east along the frontal convection which pulls the main low east. If you can't see this, I don't know what to tell you.I don’t see the low jumping around.The surface wind field reflection is still tucked in with the lowest pressure that runs up west of the Apps. 850 low runs just to the NW in the same path.The lower pressure that runs up east of the Apps is driven by convection, but not really convective feedback. It’s not like we’re seeing the whole surface wind reflection and full low pressure all shift east and be displaced from the UL’s.The NAM is definitely a viable solution.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Just now, Chicago Storm said: I don’t see the low jumping around. The surface wind field reflection is still tucked in with the lowest pressure that runs up west of the Apps. 850 low runs just to the NW in the same path. The lower pressure that runs up east of the Apps is driven by convection, but not really convective feedback. It’s not like we’re seeing the whole surface wind reflection and full low pressure all shift east and be displaced from the UL’s. The NAM is definitely a viable solution. . The weaker pressure is with the low associated with the convection, which pulls the main low to the right as well. In relation to the 500mb pattern the low should be further northwest from 54 hours and beyond. It is the epitome of convective feedback modulating the mass fields and screwing with the surface low track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbcmh81 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 On GFS, trough may be a hair faster and not as sharp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Surface low in AL at 60 is a couple mb stronger, the trough is a bit more vertical this run in the northern stream compared to 18z run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeye Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 6 minutes ago, jbcmh81 said: On GFS, trough may be a hair faster and not as sharp? Western ridge flatter, heights lower in East....my guess is it goes southeast of 18z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago Storm Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 The weaker pressure is with the low associated with the convection, which pulls the main low to the right as well. In relation to the 500mb pattern the low should be further northwest from 54 hours and beyond. It is the epitome of convective feedback modulating the mass fields and screwing with the surface low track.Keep trying, stebo.The main low rides west of the Apps and is clearly visible. There is no true convective feedback this run. The surface reflection is not displaced from the UL’s. Plain and simple.I know you want the storm, but come on.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 0z GFS will come in a bit further SE of 18z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbcmh81 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Definitely a little southeast this run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nflow6 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 23 minutes ago, Chicago Storm said: The NAM didn’t have any convective feedback. Some of you are grasping straws . Have to disagree those early East jogs and pauses in deep Dixie look unnatural. They're called parameterization "schemes" for a reason, lol. Think this Nam run likely displaced by about 50-75 miles too far east. However at 72/84 out still time for larger scale energy to alter the course by decent amount anyways Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Just now, Chicago Storm said: Keep trying, stebo. The main low rides west of the Apps and is clearly visible. There is no true convective feedback this run. The surface reflection is not displaced from the UL’s. Plain and simple. I know you want the storm, but come on. . Keep trying what? Dude I know what I am talking about here, you are incorrect. I know you want to just troll, but come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Just now, Snowstorms said: 0z GFS will come in a bit further SE of 18z. Yeah, looks a tick faster, the vort running behind is quicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackstraw Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 GFS hinting at a hand off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago Storm Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Keep trying what? Dude I know what I am talking about here, you are incorrect. I know you want to just troll, but come on.I’m trolling on a storm I was never in the game for?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 1 minute ago, Stebo said: Yeah, looks a tick faster, the vort running behind is quicker. Yeah, as you mentioned earlier, subtle changes at H5 @60 hours plays a role in its track later on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Just now, Chicago Storm said: I’m trolling on a storm I was never in the game for? . You are trolling because you are bored? I don't know what your game is on this one. Its either that or you don't understand what you are talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Wow the GFS is well east of 18z. Edit: Uncanny resemblance to yesterday nights 0z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxdudemike Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Honestly, convective feedback aside, it's the 84 hour NAM. So......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 1 minute ago, Snowstorms said: Yeah, as you mentioned earlier, subtle changes at H5 @60 hours plays a role in its track later on. Yep, with it running further east, it wants to transfer away from the region much quicker. Not a favorable run overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 1 minute ago, Stebo said: Yep, with it running further east, it wants to transfer away from the region much quicker. Not a favorable run overall. Terrible run for most of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geddyweather Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Oof, that's a rough look on the GFS. Fast, surpressed, and southeast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.