Scud Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 Hints of a two phase system. WAA then mid level amplification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris78 Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:25 PM, LP08 said: Weather Models is pretty quick with the ICON. Expand That's a nice bump from it's previous runs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:25 PM, LP08 said: Weather Models is pretty quick with the ICON. Expand If we are sitting there at 48 hours out I feel good about our chances... a 30-50 mile bump north and we win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LP08 Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:27 PM, Chris78 said: That's a nice bump from it's previous runs Expand Certainly is. Coastal is just a little late getting going but definitely an improvement. Slightly better heights out front and not as much hold back out west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeguyfromTakomaPark Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 ICON is a decent shift north. 0.5 QPF almost to DC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 For those comparing this to the December threat, the NS flow to our north is much less supressive this time, but the STJ wave is much weaker. What I like about this setup is there is room for this to adjust north if we can get a slightly more organized amplified system. Last time it was running into a brick wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 Icon came really close to getting it done with the coastal. Really close looking at H5. Slightly more consolidated at H5 and it would have been a big hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthArlington101 Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 Hey @Ji Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteoutMD Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:25 PM, LP08 said: Weather Models is pretty quick with the ICON. Expand Any chance you have the previous run for comparison? Thanks up front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 Ji should see what Ian tweeted recently... mentioning Jan 30 2010 ETA: And NorthArlington beat me to it lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LP08 Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:37 PM, WhiteoutMD said: Any chance you have the previous run for comparison? Thanks up front. Expand I little more falls after this. 6z below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Chill Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 Jan 2010 was in the teens. I'll be bummed if i get 7" in the mid 20s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:37 PM, WhiteoutMD said: Any chance you have the previous run for comparison? Thanks up front. Expand 06z/18z runs only go out to 120... so its not going to have the full representation of the storm FWIW even though LP08 posted the 06z run above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scud Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:40 PM, Bob Chill said: Jan 2010 was in the teens. I'll be bummed if i get 7" in the mid 20s Expand Why? Surface conditions are just a small slice of the column. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 I would be totally happy with a repeat of Jan 2010 if we can just adjust that about 15 miles north please. Pretty please!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:44 PM, Scud said: Why? Surface conditions are just a small slice of the column. Expand I...what....do you....forget it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LP08 Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 Some subtle improvements through 72 at H5 on the GFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Chill Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:50 PM, LP08 said: Some subtle improvements through 72 at H5 on the GFS. Expand Looks almost like a carbon copy of 0z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 Comparing 12z at 66 to 06z at 72, h5 looks a bit better, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LP08 Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 NS in NE is a stronger and further south than 6z at 90. Trough is slightly more neutrally tilted which should allow it to climb a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:51 PM, Bob Chill said: Looks almost like a carbon copy of 0z Expand On 1/9/2019 at 3:51 PM, yoda said: Comparing 12z at 66 to 06z at 72, h5 looks a bit better, no? Expand at 72 there are SLIGHT improvements...its hanging a little less energy back...look at the tail of the trough in Utah... and its digging the NS a slight bit more...look at the heights in Kansas... the rest is nearly identical. So MINOR differences but they are in a good way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interstate Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:56 PM, psuhoffman said: at 72 there are SLIGHT improvements...its hanging a little less energy back...look at the tail of the trough in Utah... and its digging the NS a slight bit more...look at the heights in Kansas... the rest is nearly identical. So MINOR differences but they are in a good way. Expand At 96... it doesnt look like a good way though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:56 PM, LP08 said: NS in NE is a stronger and further south than 6z at 90. Expand yea the STJ system is more amplified, system is slightly more consolidated, but that might get offset by the flow being more hostile on top. that is one thing from last time that I would rather not repeat...as we would get improvements in one area something in another would degrade and offset it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scud Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:46 PM, stormtracker said: I...what....do you....forget it Expand An old Navy Chief told me, its not necessarily what's going on at the surface. Maybe he was wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LP08 Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:59 PM, psuhoffman said: yea the STJ system is more amplified, system is slightly more consolidated, but that might get offset by the flow being more hostile on top. that is one thing from last time that I would rather not repeat...as we would get improvements in one area something in another would degrade and offset it. Expand Yeah I edited my post to add the trough had better tilt so 1 step forward 1 step back it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeguyfromTakomaPark Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 Definitely an improvement from 6z in terms of the QPF, not as good as the big runs yesterday but definitely not another step back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 3:59 PM, Interstate said: At 96... it doesnt look like a good way though. Expand Depends, I am not looking at precip at all...but just looking at the h5 and mslp the low is a little north of 6z, and its 1014 vs 1016, and the system did hold slightly less energy back. But its only better if you compare it to 6z which was awful, going back to the runs that were really good its worse. So depends what you are comparing it too...and what you are looking at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midatlanticweather Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 This looks south! But better system for Central VA! Atmospheric memory? Well it better trend better going forward? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LP08 Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 Very close to a much bigger hit though 111. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 On 1/9/2019 at 4:01 PM, DCTeacherman said: Definitely an improvement from 6z in terms of the QPF, not as good as the big runs yesterday but definitely not another step back. Expand LOL, I havent even looked at the precip panels at all yet but that is exactly what I would have predicted just looking at H5 and MSLP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.