Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,617
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    RyRyB
    Newest Member
    RyRyB
    Joined

Active mid December with multiple event potential


Typhoon Tip
 Share

Recommended Posts

Personal experience with the NAM:

It's passing thru classic 'NW bias' intervals for the next 2 .. 3 cycles.   

Thereafter, it will likely receded a couple lat/lon ticks SE ...but also shave some of QPF -  ...which, I am noticing that despite other observers speaking of stronger overall synoptic evolution thru/by the region, the latter has already commenced ... part of that is systemic bias correction, but also, par of that is owing to its axis of band-back "quasi" trowal/WCB termination over cold dome, as being position NW too.  Probably less than fun to try and separate those. 

The 0z and 6z runs were nearing 2." liq equiv+ at Logan ( for ex..) and this run keeps that location short of that number.  That said, it is upping the totals at ALB over prior guidance... so there are two aspect going on, (some systemic bias correction + position differences)/2 ... effecting snow totals and QPF and so forth.. 

Bottom line for those using the NAM ... ( hopefully no one at intervals beyond 36 hours without a mischievous grin ), future cycles probably bump said axis' SE and take maybe another 1/5th of QPF ... which, isn't even saying either is correct - just that it is my experience that it does this moving through intervals < 60 hours..

Otherwise, it seems this run from orbit is showing what the other models are... a tendency for deamplification of the total wave space as this event is leaving... The NAM is slower to do so, where as the other extreme.. .the GFS wants to do so at least excuse imagined - I mean, it's like the model heard that a memo 'might' be written that allows it to do a-b-c, and before the others even got to read it.. it's already onto d-e-f ..  That's sarcasm for the GFS is too fast to decay the kinematics ... probably ( tho not certain ), at the expense of it's own accuracy in this case... We'll see..

But, this - I think - explains what/why some of these more recent layouts of snow totaling/consensus is for the max out there NE PA/SE NY ...  then a trailing off ( at little less climo-like for coastals storms in cold columns ) along the same axis nearing central MA ...etc... It's because the total system is losing mechanics during ... So when a major model refuses to budge, the end result will invariably demo that some vestige of "why" is evidenced - even if the model in question proves more erroneous over all, you can "see the point it was making" ?  well, should that play out like that... that's the GFS' echo in the outcome...  I think this is an important concept and philosophy during this era of models not actually controlling the future weather ( like a sci dystopian future lol ), but still being imperfect

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I know is that it makes much more sense to have the low closer to the PVA from the vort. When it was way east with the H5 low closing near NYC..just looked like it was going towards the WAA and baroclinic processes. These solutions going near ACK make sense from a meteorology standpoint.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, dendrite said:

At least we get the SNE weenies stressing a little bit. They had been having it way too easy with this system. I still expect something closer to the euro/gfs16 to verify. But we shall see. 

Coastal weenies have been through too much, and live in a constant flux of paranoia, delusion or resignation.  Snow in dec here is bonus snow.  I assume things aren't going to work out, I watch models to figure out exactly which way they won't work out.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

All I know is that it makes much more sense to have the low closer to the PVA from the vort. When it was way east with the H5 low closing near NYC..just looked like it was going towards the WAA and baroclinic processes. These solutions going near ACK make sense from a meteorology standpoint.

The look at H5 did not warrant these lows at the surface being that far east, I know you and Will were all over that yesterday, I was scratching my head on these runs when it looked good @H5 to only have the SLP track suck in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NeonPeon said:

Coastal weenies have been through too much, and live in a constant flux of paranoia, delusion or resignation.  Snow in dec here is bonus snow.  I assume things aren't going to work out, I watch models to figure out exactly which way they won't work out.  

Sounds like a very mid-Atlantic mindset. I'm used to thinking in much of the same way for many years considering where I came from.

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...