Clinch Leatherwood Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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 More sharing options...
blizzardof09 Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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 More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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 More sharing options...
varicweather Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Best site for comparing run to run changes: http://www.wxforecas...AM_00Z_500.html Thanks for the link. Great for picking up trends... like the faster retreat of the large maritime low to the Northeast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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 More sharing options...
gkrangers Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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 More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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 More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Probably should let the model run before going all doomsday on everything..jus sayin. People jumped the gun in the 18z GFS thread and got burned a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherweather Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 from 48 to 54 its starting to dig noticeably Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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 More sharing options...
Organizing Low Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 yes lets not forget the earlier NAMS were well OTS some amplificaiton is expected though admittedly, the energie(s) and phase are dramatically different not sure if anyone has done an ECM overlay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Probably should let the model run before going all doomsday on everything..jus sayin. People jumped the gun in the 18z GFS thread and got burned a bit. couldn't have said it any better myself well, I could have, but I would have gotten banned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr No Posted December 23, 2010 Author Share Posted December 23, 2010 To me, the whole thing looks more detached from the pig low. I think it would amplify more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakeEffectKing Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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 More sharing options...
snowgeek Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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..... I agree. Everything seems to be pointing towards a more northward solution to me. Interesting trends so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Probably should let the model run before going all doomsday on everything..jus sayin. People jumped the gun in the 18z GFS thread and got burned a bit. LOL very true Randy one is worried about OTS and I'm worried about a track that would yield wet here. About all we can say is it's probably a new solution for this system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joey Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Baroclynic- compare 54 hours with 18z 78 at 500mb. 00z solution is far superior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amped Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Quicker with both streams, and better defined with the troff.. Doesn't look as flat ahead of the storm as prior runs. Nice change north of RIC. May goto rain southeast of there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 The models can't make up their mind what sort of system this is, we went from a Miller B to a hybrid Miller A, now the 00Z NAM is for sure indicating a classic Miller B again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 pretty nice HAMMER look at 54, going negative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blizzardof09 Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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 More sharing options...
Dsnowx53 Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Baroclynic- compare 54 hours with 18z 78 at 500mb. 00z solution is far superior. I disagree, but we will see. This looks very similar to early GFS runs which were OTS. CAA in the low levels is beelining towards the EC and the trough amplification would be somewhat perpendicular to the Gulf Stream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 The models can't make up their mind what sort of system this is, we went from a Miller B to a hybrid Miller A, now the 00Z NAM is for sure indicating a classic Miller B again. This. Looks too Miller B, and under this configuration that means OTS. At least in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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 More sharing options...
Ji Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 The models can't make up their mind what sort of system this is, we went from a Miller B to a hybrid Miller A, now the 00Z NAM is for sure indicating a classic Miller B again. Classic miller b with a gulf low? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 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 More sharing options...
buckeye Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 This. Looks too Miller B, and under this configuration that means OTS. At least in my opinion. def looks better up this way....looks like you were good on what happens with too early of a phase Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Heights are higher ahead.. trough sharper.. pretty sure that is means west track Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowgeek Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 At 60 hours, 500H winds over PA are SW verses NW at 12Z. Ridge is really pumped up out ahead of the system. Is it the new data or does the NAM not have a clue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.