Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,607
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

December Medium/Long Range Discussion


WxUSAF

Recommended Posts

Just now, psuhoffman said:

euro is trying that late save thing... its not gonna get it done this run but it moved that way.  Dives a piece of the NS in behind and tries to open the door a day later.  UK was even more pronounced at 144 with that idea.  

That ns vort dropping down is much stronger than any previous run unless I'm missing something. Honestly, the run is pretty close to a phased bowling ball...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
7 minutes ago, midatlanticweather said:

I became less skeptical! And boom! Rug is pulled!

 

 

6 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

Euro is a buzzkill, but I hope nobody is wringing their hands.  It's Tuesday.  

you were saying?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

That ns vort dropping down is much stronger than any previous run unless I'm missing something. Honestly, the run is pretty close to a phased bowling ball...

Sort of encouraging.   Maybe when NWP start picking up on that more, maybe we'll get the solution we want.  Something to watch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stormtracker said:

Stout confluence is murdering us.  Frustrating for sure, but you all see how this keeps changing up and down. 

We have two ways this could work... have that northern stream vort over New England be weaker and north of where its currently projected by the GFS and Euro.   Or have the whole thing kind of stall and crawl until the next NS vort dives in and phases and by then the flow has relaxed enough to let it come up. 

Right now the FV3 is going with option 1.  The GGEM almost was a big hit with option 2.  The GEFS seems to think our best chance is with option 2 and so did the UKMET.  But currently were stuck in between on the consensus of guidance.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

That ns vort dropping down is much stronger than any previous run unless I'm missing something. Honestly, the run is pretty close to a phased bowling ball...

I mentioned this back on the GFS run.  If the northern plains kicker comes down once the SS gets far enough ahead it could grab it as confluence eases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

That ns vort dropping down is much stronger than any previous run unless I'm missing something. Honestly, the run is pretty close to a phased bowling ball...

There are enough hints across guidance that the idea of the NS diving in behind and phasing a day later is now something to consider.  There is enough lead time here still for that kind of change to the evolution to take place.  That is kind of how things evolved with the 2009 storm from day 5 actually.  Lots of differences but from 144 the guidance was underplaying the depth of the vort coming in behind...and so everything was suppressive and progressive in front.  Then as the trough dug more behind it tilted everything on a more favorable axis.  That change took place from about the same range we are now.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

Nah, he is more famouser.  

Time for me to fess up. I ruined a good relationship by letting politics and some other issues interfere with our love for weather. I hope you have seen since my reinstatement that I am different

i will Never forget 2/07 and other experiences. I was foolish to let other issues overwhelm great things like that. Same thing for Mat*, I stepped on that good relationship also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tenman Johnson said:

Time for me to fess up. I ruined a good relationship by letting politics and some other issues interfere with our love for weather. I hope you have seen since my reinstatement that I am different

i will Never forget 2/07 and other experiences. I was foolish to let other issues overwhelm great things like that. Same thing for Mat*, I stepped on that good relationship also.

you will never be you till you switch to weather53

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dtk said:

It's all part of our plan to get people to pay attention.  In reality, it is going to be dead wrong.

This is a pretty solid implementation, considering that we haven't had a chance to put a ton of new science into the package (outside of the model dynamics and MP scheme, a few DA enhancements, etc.).   For things like extratropical 500 hpa AC, it has gained us about a point (about what we'd expect/want from a biannual upgrade).  Improvements are statistically significant. 

I should caution, our model evaluation group has noted that there are times where the FV3-based GFS appears to be too progressive at longer ranges.  It's not clear how general this is and for what types of cases this has been noted.  

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, osfan24 said:

I like that there are now two ways this can work and we can get a big storm, but I don't like how it complicates things and that we could end up with an in-between solution and miss out entirely.

i like the FV3 way...less complicated. Just get the NS out of the way and let us have our wet 2-3 feet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

We have two ways this could work... have that northern stream vort over New England be weaker and north of where its currently projected by the GFS and Euro.   Or have the whole thing kind of stall and crawl until the next NS vort dives in and phases and by then the flow has relaxed enough to let it come up. 

Right now the FV3 is going with option 1.  The GGEM almost was a big hit with option 2.  The GEFS seems to think our best chance is with option 2 and so did the UKMET.  But currently were stuck in between on the consensus of guidance.  

Which "good" option (other then the crap stuck in the middle version) is most viable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ji said:

i like the FV3 way...less complicated. Just get the NS out of the way and let us have our wet 2-3 feet

Yeah this is what I'd rather see, too. FV3 is perfect right now. Heaviest axis just a tiny bit south of us. You know that would end up a bit farther north, and we get buried with 18-24.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, osfan24 said:

Yeah this is what I'd rather see, too. FV3 is perfect right now. Heaviest axis just a tiny bit south of us. You know that would end up a bit farther north, and we get buried with 18-24.

As easy as that all sounds, of course this is the MA and we're looking like a transition to the second scenario could be coming to the table. Interesting that psu pointed out in 09 we did something similar, and we do know how that one turned out. 

However, I'm with you. I'd much prefer the FV route. It just seems like wherever this thing goes, big numbers are being thrown out every run on QPF and snow output. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DDweatherman said:

As easy as that all sounds, of course this is the MA and we're looking like a transition to the second scenario could be coming to the table. Interesting that psu pointed out in 09 we did something similar, and we do know how that one turned out. 

However, I'm with you. I'd much prefer the FV route. It just seems like wherever this thing goes, big numbers are being thrown out every run on QPF and snow output. 

If we can get a December 2009 scenario, I'm sure that would be more than fine with all of us. The Euro was upgraded since then and it isn't quite as reliable as it used to be for our weather, so that's a bit of a concern to me.

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...