wxsniss Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Yeah, just too reaffirm that we are being objective...Even before the 18z bonanza, I commented that the GFS was actually realistic and we should not dismiss it reflexivelyWhat a prolific pattern this is becoming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, ORH_wxman said: From a synoptic pattern perspective, the bigger solution does look pretty reasonable...we've got a negatively tilted shortwave loaded with gulf moisture. There's not a lot that wants to shove it east on a scenario like that. It’s also not an amplified pattern. Flow is actually zonal across the country so it’s not going to gain much latitude either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Check out the classic dual jet structure on the 18z gfs. This wreaks of potential 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, Baroclinic Zone said: Check out the classic dual jet structure on the 18z gfs. This wreaks of potential Reminds me a bit of the Jan 2011 system... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 10 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said: Its just never wise to do a 180 in one shift.. It’s not a 180, just a gradual step up as reliable guidance indicates. I thought 2-4” nw of 84 and 4-8” se would be a reasonable call for tonight. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 RGEM is a mess too...18z had a nuking consolidated low....this is like 12-14mb weaker and not consolidated. It's still a pretty good snowstorm, but not like 18z. Clearly, the mesos are not feeling the consolidated idea on the 00z run. It will be interesting to see what the global models do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Wonder if 18z was a fluke. It wouldn't surprise me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 minute ago, ORH_wxman said: RGEM is a mess too...18z had a nuking consolidated low....this is like 12-14mb weaker and not consolidated. It's still a pretty good snowstorm, but not like 18z. Clearly, the mesos are not feeling the consolidated idea on the 00z run. It will be interesting to see what the global models do. If this ever fell apart, oh the melts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weathafella Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 ICON is a massive hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeonPeon Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 We don't exactly have a consensus yet, to feel totally hoodwinked, but we're getting better. There is one absolute consensus - the overwhelming thirst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 minute ago, CoastalWx said: Wonder if 18z was a fluke. It wouldn't surprise me. A 12-14mb fluke at hr 36? Cmon, Scott....BS. That's a modeling travesty. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said: If this ever fell apart, oh the melts. I don't think it will end up well east like earlier runs....but I could see the 18z nuke idea being overdone. But I don't really see this becoming a 1-3" scraper for SE MA like we saw yesterday. I think we've locked in the idea of a further west shortwave climbing the east side of the longwave trough....but the consolidated nuke idea is still in doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Icon not backing down one bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weathafella Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Reggie is still 6+ for most of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoth Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 10 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said: Reminds me a bit of the Jan 2011 system... Which one? 11-12th or 27th? I would gladly take a repeat of either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 2 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said: A 12-14mb fluke at hr 36? Cmon, Scott....BS. That's a modeling travesty. I mean the nuke job the euro had. I could easily see that toned down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 4 minutes ago, CoastalWx said: Wonder if 18z was a fluke. It wouldn't surprise me. Keep at it debbie, you’ll jack. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Reggie and Icon aren't far apart. RGEM is still nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, weathafella said: Reggie is still 6+ for most of us. Yeah it's still a good storm, but it's not the 18z run...the warning criteria area def is smaller this time....it's not as paltry as the NAM at all though. For the QPF queens..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said: Keep at it debbie, you’ll jack. Just doing my job. Seriously, I got to think about Saturday here on shift. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 minute ago, Hoth said: Which one? 11-12th or 27th? I would gladly take a repeat of either. lol I’d take half of either. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Relative model noise with that icon solution from 18-00z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 4 Seasons Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 we've seen massive model discrepancy closer than 24hrs out. Jan 26th 2015 and march 21st 2018. Every model expect the ec had a Foot+ for sne up until go time on 3/21/18. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
78Blizzard Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 8 minutes ago, weathafella said: ICON is a massive hit. ICON is way SE of other guidance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomNH Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, The 4 Seasons said: we've seen massive model discrepancy closer than 24hrs out. Jan 26th 2015 and march 21st 2018. Every model expect the ec had a Foot+ for sne up until go time on 3/21/18. What was the event in like March 2010 that ended up as a sloppy inch or so with some rain that the NAM had as a 12''+ isothermal interior paste bomb like 12 hours out? That was probably the worst I can remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCAPEWEATHERAF Posted March 1, 2019 Author Share Posted March 1, 2019 I am not trusting the mesoscale models lately given their track record, I will cave towards them for now when the rest of the global models come in at 00z and they agree with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCAPEWEATHERAF Posted March 1, 2019 Author Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 minute ago, 78Blizzard said: ICON is way SE of other guidance. Then how is he saying its a massive hit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, The 4 Seasons said: we've seen massive model discrepancy closer than 24hrs out. Jan 26th 2015 and march 21st 2018. Every model expect the ec had a Foot+ for sne up until go time on 3/21/18. Pretty amazing how where I am had two big busts in the negative direction in March 2018 and I still ended up with over 40 inches for the month. The March 2nd storm was a big bust....we were supposed to flip to snow and get 5-8/6-10 but instead it took until about 7-8pm to flip and we only got about 1.5 inches. That storm and Mar 21 were awful....but those other two monsters made up for it, lol....but it could have been a legit 60 inch month if those other two didn't fail. Anyways, bit OT there. Despite some of the uglier looking meso runs at 00z, I'm still pretty optimistic on this system. I think there's more mechanisms to move this a bit NW versus east. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, USCAPEWEATHERAF said: Then how is he saying its a massive hit? I think he's talking about the wrong storm...prob March 4th 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 7 minutes ago, CoastalWx said: I mean the nuke job the euro had. I could easily see that toned down. Toned down..sure. The NAM? That would be a modeling failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now