Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,584
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    23Yankee
    Newest Member
    23Yankee
    Joined

0Z Guidance Discussion 12/23/2010


Dr No

Recommended Posts

If this thing never detaches from the northern stream it remains N and doesn't tap the GOM, game over. Also, as discussed in the 18Z forum, the trough won't deepen far enough S...both game over solutions. I don't like this NAM run already.

What's funny is I know it's impossible with the situation over the NE US that precedes the low but watching this unfold (NAM) I'd have worried about a more inland/coastal track.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 386
  • Created
  • Last Reply

If this thing never detaches from the northern stream it remains N and doesn't tap the GOM, game over. Also, as discussed in the 18Z forum, the trough won't deepen far enough S...both game over solutions. I don't like this NAM run already.

well as eluded to over the past few days the nam cant be trusted 48 or more. the solutions have been atrocious lately lol. the gfs 18z 12z and especially 12z euro solutions today really showed this storm is gonna be a serious threat to the eastern seaboard after it was sad today an east trend was gona start

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not this early....It may go neg tilt sooner...not going out to sea with the height field ahead of it developing.....NE PV is hauling ass.....

What will happen is this system tracks on a more eastward heading. This is exactly what the early GFS runs suggested. We need the CAA to head towards the GOM, not towards the East Coast before tapping the GOM. I could be wrong, I just don't like the fast solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this thing never detaches from the northern stream it remains N and doesn't tap the GOM, game over. Also, as discussed in the 18Z forum, the trough won't deepen far enough S...both game over solutions. I don't like this NAM run already.

How is this run going out to sea? I'm not sure if I buy the early phase...but you have higher heights over the east...and pretty strong neutral tilted trough in Missouri and a 50/50 low getting out of the way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this thing never detaches from the northern stream it remains N and doesn't tap the GOM, game over. Also, as discussed in the 18Z forum, the trough won't deepen far enough S...both game over solutions. I don't like this NAM run already.

Look how sharp the 300mb jet is compared to 18z. That screams amplification. (I think)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well as eluded to over the past few days the nam cant be trusted 48 or more. the solutions have been atrocious lately lol. the gfs 18z 12z and especially 12z euro solutions today really showed this storm is gonna be a serious threat to the eastern seaboard after it was sad today an east trend was gona start

Well yeah, I should temper my thoughts and say it is just the NAM. What I am really saying is I don't like this NAM run and it won't be a good solution. Doesn't mean I change my thoughts on the potential storm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is this run going out to sea? I'm not sure if I buy the early phase...but you have higher heights over the east...and pretty strong neutral tilted trough in Missouri and a 50/50 low getting out of the way?

This NAM run is slightly different than anything we have seen, but under this configuration I am afraid the low level CAA is shunted eastward too early before interacting with the GOM. this will develop the trough farther E and the eventual low will track too far off the coast. We will see, but this NAM run likely won't be the solution folks want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What will happen is this system tracks on a more eastward heading. This is exactly what the early GFS runs suggested. We need the CAA to head towards the GOM, not towards the East Coast before tapping the GOM. I could be wrong, I just don't like the fast solution.

GFS never had the ridge ahead being pumped as much....this is still going to be progressive, but I think LP formation is sooner and somewhere in NW GA area...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well yeah, I should temper my thoughts and say it is just the NAM. What I am really saying is I don't like this NAM run and it won't be a good solution. Doesn't mean I change my thoughts on the potential storm.

yea i know what you were saying its really nothing new that past 72 hours the nam spits out some rather different solutions than the other operational/global operation models

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that an earlier phase is not good. Obviously we don't want the phase too late, but I think this is too early. The really good runs of the Euro had the phase with the southern vort in the northern Gulf.

with the cyclops, Canadian vortex still hanging out around 50/50, the too early phasing concern is misplaced

we need it to phase and turn negative quicker than prior runs and, imho, it ain't gonna go inland with that vortex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This. Looks too Miller B, and under this configuration that means OTS. At least in my opinion.

I can't tell as of yet and the NAM is now updating beyond hour 60 which means I won't trust what it shows anyhow unless the ensuing models look the same...this scenario while I think it works for C NJ on northeastward kills most of the MA and likely also tempers the blizzard potential for the NE and SNE outside of far northern New England.

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...