Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,584
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    23Yankee
    Newest Member
    23Yankee
    Joined

Tracking Jan 7 coastal storm. Lingering compression/flow velocity has not lent to consensus, but it seems at 30 hours out.. finally?


Typhoon Tip
 Share

Recommended Posts

Meh … first we capitulate, future cycles begin to slow down - maybe not a lot but at least a little. 

Looking at the NAM …. I’m noticing better ridge response over western North America after the S/W ejection east of the Rockies. That’s always been a crucial sensitivity in this whole thing …driving the translation speed of the trough exit off the east coast is anchored in that ridge amplitude

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Welp …just saw the NAM

Y’all undersold that. The extrapolation off that end frame would approach the upper physical bound. 

If you overlay the 500mb vorticity chart of the NAM at 84hrs with the GFS at 80hrs, they look pretty similar considering the lead time. The NAM is maybe a touch sharper and there's more ridging both up- and downstream. But still very similar. So the GFS should be a reasonable estimation of what the NAM run might have led to. In this case, a deep and powerful storm in the Maritimes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dryslot said:

He did, But that's not necessarily correct.

But neither is the other philosophy either. Sure if it was crawling it’d be even worse. But we’ve had plenty of very major events with systems that have been really moving along too of late. So that’s where I’m coming from. 
 

Still lots to nail down with this anyway…I don’t want to jump to soon just yet. I’m Just liking the trends at 0z so far for most of us. :sled:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WinterWolf said:

But neither is the other philosophy either. Sure if it was crawling it’d be even worse. But we’ve had plenty of very major events with systems that have been really moving along too of late. So that’s where I’m coming from. 
 

Still lots to nail down with this anyway…I don’t want to jump to soon just yet. I’m Just liking the trends at 0z so far for most of us. :sled:

If you get 3-6 hrs of good rate you did well, The other 3-6 would be light snows, Slow this down where you get bands overhead for a 6-9 hr period then yeah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

All you need is 12 hours if the dynamics are there...if they aren't,  who needs a extra 12 hours of snow grains.

Absolutely. GFS bias is more progressive anyway. 

But I can already see the sparkle in the weenies' eyes of 2 ft in 9 hours or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HIPPYVALLEY said:

Hasn't that been a given with this one from the get go?  Anything over 2" here is a win as that will be my biggest snow fall of the season so far.

That aspect of the pattern is a limiting factor for sure. But if you can get a real dynamic deepening in our backyard it will want to cut across thickness lines and every hour counts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dryslot said:

If you get 3-6 hrs of good rate you did well, The other 3-6 would be light snows, Slow this down where you get bands overhead for a 6-9 hr period then yeah.

If you can't get heavy totals from a 12 hours event, then the storm either sucked, and/or didn't take a favorable track. 

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...