Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,600
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

Feb Long Range Discussion (Day 3 and beyond) - MERGED


WinterWxLuvr
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, The Ole Bucket said:

I want/need someone much smarter than me to explain how the moisture wouldn't just get eaten up by the mountains in the Piedmont area given how this system will be moving..

Generally that only happens with lighter moisture starved systems, this system isn’t moisture starved.  Plus the mountains aren’t like the Sierra’s and we aren’t like Nevada.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, The Ole Bucket said:

I want/need someone much smarter than me to explain how the moisture wouldn't just get eaten up by the mountains in the Piedmont area given how this system will be moving..

Some of it will. The reason you are seeing the max qpf being modeled over the mountains. But there is plenty of juice with this event. And let's face it the Apps aren't the Rockies. I am more worried about ice now than I was yesterday though. More robust shortwave and we are going to torch somewhere in the upper levels most likely. Regardless I think it's clear that this is going to be a long duration high impact event for just about all of us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GATECH said:

Generally that only happens with lighter moisture starved systems, this system isn’t moisture starved.  Plus the mountains aren’t like the Sierra’s and we aren’t like Nevada.

Also, the Gulf of Mexico seems to be open for business, low level winds blowing from the south into the system feeding moisture.  That’s the whole magic with this system warm moist air from the south, the cold from the north = moisture and a steady long duration over running event.  Notice there is no potent vort or shortwave for this system.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, high risk said:

I'm really stunned to see the NAM so warm for Wednesday night / Thursday.    Hoping it's just its usual day 3 synoptic struggles, but it certainly doesn't make me feel good.

It did lead the way sniffing out the extent of the warm air intrusion for the Dec storm, so I don't like seeing it come in warmer than the globals....but weenie handbook sez it's just NAM being NAM at this range so nothing to worry about!

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i guess if the euro showed what the NAM showed and vice versa--we would be in more of a world of hurt but i dont like seeing the NAM this either even though("its out of range". it was first model to bring the storm back from yesterday

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ji said:

i guess if the euro showed what the NAM showed and vice versa--we would be in more of a world of hurt but i dont like seeing the NAM this either even though("its out of range". it was first model to bring the storm back from yesterday

Yeah it's a weird feeling. Like I know we're supposed to trust the Euro way more than NAM from 3 days out, but I feel like the NAM has done well at range in telling us which way things are trending.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotta agree with high risk. Very fun shy after the last two debacles. It’s annoying that the NAM is different. Yes even if it’s after it’s supposed 48 hour wheelhouse. But at the same time if I’m gonna pick who I’d rather have in my corner,  euro vs NAM. Well...

Hopefully all other guidance holds and NAM is gonna play catch-up 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CAPE said:

All good info and we have discussed this before, but the OP said something to the effect that it would be depressing or a fail if we didn't get a big storm with the persistent blocking we have had this winter. Sure a -AO/NAO favors more snow than average regardless of ENSO state, that should be evident to every weenie here by now lol, but in my replies to that post I simply stated that it is more likely to come in multiple "smaller" events rather than a KU for the MA in a Nina. I just find the "bar setting" thing to be a little silly, especially given the climo for much of this region tends to be hostile for snow.

This is 100% true if we are talking about HECS level snowstorms.  But frankly it's only in the last 20 years they have become common enough to even be a "thing" that we chase.  When I first started this it was KU or MECS level events that were the BIG DOGS.  HECS or 20" plus type storms were so rare it wasn't even worth a thought.  Then they started happening every few years and so it became a thing.  But it is really only a thing under one VERY specific pattern, a Moderate or stronger Nino with a -NAO.  6 of the last 7 HECS storms fall under that category with the one exception being 1996.  Yes I know technically the NAO was neutral in the 2003 storm but there was a massive north atlantic vortex that simulated the exact same thing as a -NAO so essentially it was a de facto same pattern.  Point is a moderate to strong nino with blocking is the only situation that makes a widespread 20" type storm likely in the mid atlantic.   

But if we lower the bar to a KU or MECS level event I don't think the nina really affects our chances much at all so long as we have blocking.  If we look at Nina's in the last 30 years that featured significant blocking periods we got a MECS/KU level storm in 96, 2000, 2006, 2011 and March 2018 would have DEFINITELY been at least a MECS maybe HECS level storm if it hadn't been March 21 and the blocking had set in earlier that winter.  I also don't think the close miss in 2011 had anything to do with the nina.  There was a nice STJ feed and that was a miller A, we just got really unlucky with a vort and that can happen in a nino also...remember December 2018!  That was just bad luck.  We almost had another HECS nina event imo.  The only Nina winter with significant blocking that failed to produce a MECS event here was 2001 which is historic for its fail's.  I think if we run the table with blocking we should expect at least one flush hit of a MECS level and if we don't get one I do think that counts as a fail (on the level of 2001) regardless of the nina status.  

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

1 hour ago, The Ole Bucket said:

I want/need someone much smarter than me to explain how the moisture wouldn't just get eaten up by the mountains in the Piedmont area given how this system will be moving..

Two things. One, the mountains do a better job of eating the precip when the orientation of the precip is perpendicular to the mountains. Two, when the moisture is just a plume off of the Great Lakes, the mountains are the only source of lift. Once past the mountains the air is descending and there’s no precip. With a system providing the lift, there’s still precip beyond the mountains.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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