Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,609
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

Winter Storm? Jan 18-19th, 2019


cyclone77

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
6 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

Yep, a pleasant surprise. Good sign considering that known tendency with the OP model. Despite what I posted earlier about the GEFS in particular, this is a good reason to lean more heavily toward the ensembles at this range. The op models are not useless, they shouldn't be taken verbatim but they can be instructive on the positives and negatives with a particular setup.

 

 

 

I’m not at all worried that the GFS ticked south and progressive because it’s a well known tendency with that particular model. It’s almost always too fast with strong/amped systems at this range and usually ends up correcting towards the slower consensus. What concerned me is that the rest of the 12z suite(so far) followed suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

Yep, a pleasant surprise. An encouraging sign considering that known tendency with ensembles vs. the OP model. Despite what I posted earlier about the GEFS in particular, this is a good reason to lean more heavily toward the ensembles at this range. The op models are not useless, they shouldn't be taken verbatim but they can be instructive on the positives and negatives with a particular setup.  

 

 

 

 

Is an op run any better than its ensembles? Or is it the lucky one that gets the spot light? In other words...could any one of the 51 euro emsembles be considered the same as the op? Or any of the 20 gefs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is an op run any better than its ensembles? Or is it the lucky one that gets the spot light? In other words...could any one of the 51 euro emsembles be considered the same as the op? Or any of the 20 gefs?
The ensemble members have the same background model physics but are run at a lower resolution than the OP so the operational model is certainly better in that aspect. The big thing is that the small changes in initial conditions in the ensembles show you the range of possible outcomes and give you a sense of confidence or lack thereof in a certain solution (uncertainty interval). One of the members could certainly end up being close to what verifies, but if there's a ton of spread at a certain lead time that individual member is not really useful.

The EPS itself is considered a very useful ensemble suite because it has 51 members and does a better job than the GEFS in showing that pdf (probability density function) of the projected future state of the atmosphere.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol, I guess I was wrong with FV3. Does some weird jumping around with the slp between 96 and 114 hours...almost looks like it jumps the slp with convection from 102-108...but still manages to drive a 999mb storm into SE Ohio. I'm punting that solution verbatim. End result would probably be more favorable for N IL, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

the small changes in initial conditions in the ensembles show you the range of possible outcomes and give you a sense of confidence

In other words, it quantifies the magnitude of uncertainty for small differences of initial conditions/assumptions.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CheeselandSkies said:

That would be hilarious given how much MKX and our local mets (including the chief met at my employer) have been downplaying this system.

I think we'll be hard pressed to see radical north shifts, especially that far west.  Madison could get a good snow though especially with that initial band streaking east.

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...