Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

December Medium/Long Range Discussion


yoda
 Share

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Sorry I posted this in the wrong thread a min ago

@dtk @WxUSAF @high risk

do you know what resolution the GEFS and EPS members are run at compared to the operational?  I have noticed that the ensemble members (of both the EPS and GEFS) have been running warmer even with similar or further east tracks then the operational runs.  This has been a consistent correlation for several runs across both ensemble suits.  The track of the operationals has changed but the presentation of the thermal structure of the storm has remained fairly consistent...meaning where you expect the thermal boundaries to be wrt to mslp is roughly the same places each run dependent on the MSLP.  But those same thermal boundaries seem to be further NW given the same MSLP track on the individual ensemble members of both the EPS and GEFS.  I am wondering if they are run at a lower resolution...they may be warmer due to not modeling the meso scale features as well.  That may not be correct...just grasping at possible causality for the observation I noted.  I know back in the day the NAM would pick up on CAD better due to its higher resolution...one of the few things it was good for at range with a winter synoptic event.  You had to adjust for its over amplified bias...but you could get an idea what the thermal structure of the storm might look like.  

            I'm not sure about the EPS, but the GEFS members are run at 25 km resolution, while the ops GFS is 13 km.     So yes, that could be making a difference.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's actually 2mb deeper this run at the critical moment for us...from 90-96 hours...it just lost that wonky due north jog that screwed us 18z.   More in line with the ensembles.  The SW associated with the primary was slightly less amplified originally and that helped.  Don't want that to go negative too soon.   

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...