Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

Potential Major Noreaster 10-26 through 10-27


ineedsnow
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, OceanStWx said:

Surge forecast is pretty wild. ETSS is nearly 4 ft at Scituate. That's big.

Yet the tide predictions for coastal Mass are actually subordinate for them two days ... Woulda been interesting to see what this sea sucker would do on top of local 4" of sea level rise and a New Moon, huh -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chrisrotary12 said:

Guidance battle: American v the world. First of the season. Let's do this.

Frankly, you're not asking my opinion but ALL the models have been warring their own continuity of this thing, spraying surface lows all over a more generalized cyclostrophic box S of LI...

It's an easy meteorological assumption as to why.

This lacks a baroclinic gradient below mid levels... badly starved.  The thermodynamics of the sounding over RUT VT are probably not significantly enough different than Cape May NJ ...or not hugely ( enough) different than the eastern tip of Long Island.  ..it's a big slab of rotted CC autumnal air with a warm front that is - yeah - detectable but when that 500 mb wind max/S/W cuts underneath, it'll frontalysis and wash out. Which leaves pretty much no mechanics to focus/anchor a surface low.

Think 2005 December.  It was coherent where that low would bomb as the meso models had this sick thermal packing along and just S of LI, to the tune of some 20C across 50 naut miles.  The low as going to track along that low level nearly upright frontal wall.  This system is opposite that coherency.

This doesn't have a low level frontal tapestry like that.  It's why the model behavior .. The GFS is really just picking whatever thunder storm cluster - first come first serve - it sees in the fractals out around 24 hours, and uses that - but those initiation points vary every run. 

That's basically what this is.  It's a lot of mid level potential over top a missing low level baroclinic instability... 

Part of it makes me humor inside that this is "over blown" - pun hopefully annoying ... because with out a stronger low level frontal "kink" points and elevated slopes to force UVM to be more proficient,  that lowers the evac proficiency to drill a deeper surface pressure result. We're getting deeper results anyway ...but I almost surmise those are other physics left to operate with poor constraints.  Little hyper fractal lows ...again, then picks one. 

It certainly is fun fun fun though.  Crazy and entertaining ...  We've earned it after that last 60 days of "Ishtar" caliber weather cinema lol

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn’t this really just a dual low set up 

tropical low well off shore gets pulled N then NW and May get far enough NW to crush se areas (if not they stand to see a big bust ) 

meanwhile the trough approaching NJ coast spasms it’s own low which can’t escape East so it just meanders around off NJ (S of L.I) and crushes NJ, NYC, parts of W CT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

Isn’t this really just a dual low set up 

tropical low well off shore gets pulled N then NW and May get far enough NW to crush se areas (if not they stand to see a big bust ) 

meanwhile the trough approaching NJ coast spasms it’s own low which can’t escape East so it just meanders around off NJ (S of L.I) and crushes NJ, NYC, parts of W CT

Yes. But to :damage: or not to :damage: is the question. That will be on any low getting pulled NW and then west. Hydro :damage: may come for NJ into NYC area if that trough really focuses the rain there for several hours or more. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

Isn’t this really just a dual low set up 

tropical low well off shore gets pulled N then NW and May get far enough NW to crush se areas (if not they stand to see a big bust ) 

meanwhile the trough approaching NJ coast spasms it’s own low which can’t escape East so it just meanders around off NJ (S of L.I) and crushes NJ, NYC, parts of W CT

Personally ... I'm having a tough time with that. It's believing, when looking at the present obs/Satellite on-going trajectories,  ...that is is going to take place. The utter lack or zero zygote identifiably even existing down off the Carolinas or off Cape Hatteras, then having one suddenly emerge, then mature to tropical storm strength over this immediate now to 36 hours .. I suggest that is all convective feedback driven - again, because this system lacks a lower tropospheric focal point(s)/axial for low.  It's almost like the convection genesis lows are given carte blanche

But we'll see I guess.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, weatherwiz said:

Holy crap...HRRR gone wild for sure. Does have some support from the 3km NAM too. That's a pretty extensive area of synoptic wind. Certainly can't be discounted when you consider the potential for a sub 990 low with a ~1028 HP to the north 

The Euro is too. They fixed its wind products I read on the recent upgrade . So the 50-60 mph you see in CT would be likely. Very anomalous setup and something we rarely see

  • Confused 1
  • Weenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Damage In Tolland said:

The Euro is too. They fixed its wind products I read on the recent upgrade . So the 50-60 mph you see in CT would be likely. Very anomalous setup and something we rarely see

they did? About time. 

There are still some uncertainties with several pieces, however, even with the uncertainties the confidence I think for a pretty impressive wind event and power outages may be on the high side...I guess just a matter of how much of the region but that's tied into the uncertainties with track/placement 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, weatherwiz said:

they did? About time. 

There are still some uncertainties with several pieces, however, even with the uncertainties the confidence I think for a pretty impressive wind event and power outages may be on the high side...I guess just a matter of how much of the region but that's tied into the uncertainties with track/placement 

Yes. According to what I read . So you won’t see those crazy high gusts it used to show . Supposed to be realistic now 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

they did? About time. 

There are still some uncertainties with several pieces, however, even with the uncertainties the confidence I think for a pretty impressive wind event and power outages may be on the high side...I guess just a matter of how much of the region but that's tied into the uncertainties with track/placement 

It's almost comical ...

The 'fix' then this ?    - it's like, "Oh yeah - we'll see"

and I guess we will either way.  It could be a scenario where assessing performance is ultimately difficult and prone to "unfair"  ... The models may not know what they are doing in picking lows and where/how deep they will ultimately be.  This has been a buck-shot run-to-run poor continuity already, wrt to that aspect of where/what/how.  

This may be a deal where there is potential to generate but getting the other stuff wrong will limit that potential. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

It's almost comical ...

The 'fix' then this ?    - it's like, "Oh yeah - we'll see"

and I guess we will either way.  It could be a scenario where assessing performance is ultimately difficult and prone to "unfair"  ... The models may not know what they are doing in picking lows and where/how deep they will ultimately be.  This has been a buck-shot run-to-run poor continuity already, wrt to that aspect of where/what/how.  

This may be a deal where there is potential to generate but getting the other stuff wrong will limit that potential. 

We'll most certainly have a stout inversion in place which will help limit winds but we should also see some CAA moving through the evening which should erode the inversion a bit but given how we're looking at mostly synoptically driven winds this may not matter much (outside of mixing down stronger winds)...but winds off the deck are pretty wild. I would think 40-50 mph gusts inland are a good be with gusts 55-70 along the coast. 

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...