SnowGoose69 Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 Word early is the NAM was NOT impacted...the GFS may not have been either, but we don't know yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midlo Snow Maker Posted December 24, 2010 Author Share Posted December 24, 2010 From BOX AFD: "WE WANTED TO NOTE THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED MESSAGES FROM HPC ABOUT INITIALIZATION PROBLEMS ON BOTH THE NAM AND GFS RUNS THIS MORNING. " i guess it was after 10:16? MODEL DIAGNOSTIC DISCUSSIONNWS HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL PREDICTION CENTER CAMP SPRINGS MD 1016 AM EST FRI DEC 24 2010 VALID DEC 24/1200 UTC THRU DEC 28/0000 UTC ...SEE NOUS42 KWNO ADMNFD FOR THE STATUS OF THE UPPER AIR INGEST... 12Z NAM EVALUATION INITIALIZATION ERRORS DO NOT APPEAR TO SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT ITS SOLUTION. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinylfreak89 Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 Ask yourselves this as we wait for the rest of the suite: How many times has the higher res NAM/RGEM been east/weaker than the GFS at this stage? I cannot remember one time. Either the RGEM/NAM are suffering from a significant issue or the GFS is, it's staggering at this range that the roles are reversed. One thought is the situation is so extreme, and there is so much energy that the higher res models so far are being tripped up by meso features and are displacing the low further east in a feedback loop. i think you hit the nail on the head there... i see a BIG feadback loop in the 12Z NAM... the maximum vorticity jumps north from the mid atl. coast to NE of the benchmark in 6 hours... with a storm wrapped that tightly, that should NOT happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Lizard Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 HPC and NCEP sites don't look too serious with initialization problems. HPC site- model diagnostic discussion says initialization errors doesn't affect NAM. NCEP status 000NOUS42 KWNO 241340 ADMNFD SENIOR DUTY METEOROLOGIST NWS ADMINISTRATIVE MESSAGE NWS NCEP CENTRAL OPERATIONS CAMP SPRINGS MD 1337Z FRI DEC 24 2010 12Z NCEP MODEL PRODUCTION IS ON TIME.. 12Z NAM RAOB RECAP... BRW/70026 - 10142 GUM/91212 - 10142 NCC/78988 - 10142 YNN/78073 - 10142 ZED/71126 - MISSING TTAA/BB ASY/70414 - 10145 KCR/78384 - PURGED ALL HGTS AND TEMPS GYM/76256 - PURGED REPORT...TWIN REPORT CRITICAL WEATHER DAY STATUS... NCEP DOES NOT ANTICIPATE A CWD DURING THE NEXT 3 DAYS. $$ Edit, add link for future reference... http://www.nws.noaa.gov/view/validProds.php?prod=ADM&node=KWNO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 i guess it was after 10:16? It's kind of common they don't catch GFS errors until the 12-1pm statement. Very typical. It's impossible to say it effected anything. It's also impossible to say it hurt the favorable outcome, who's to say it wouldn't be a bigger GFS hit. I heard the same thing - that the NAM was not/less effected but how can that really be unless it was a data error? Would be ironic if something had been happening for a bit here that was contributing to the model flops. What a mess. We will prob see the updated status by 1 as usual....most of the time it's about 1220 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyS Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 Even if there was initialization errors, isn't the fact that the ensemble mean is westward important? Aren't the ensemble members just different perturbations of the initial conditions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 Just like the March 2001 storm shifted at the last minute, its possible that the models still arent right...either way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dino Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 WJZ just said on tv "looking at the radar, we are seeing trends that will keep this off the coast. there is still a threat of snow, but it won't be "snowmageddon" by any stretch of the imagination" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 HPC officiallly gives the GFS the heave ho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jefflaw77 Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 So what's the consensus of this Model? does anyone who knows what they are talking about think this outcome by the GFS is at all possible?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveB Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 Oh well, it was fun while it lasted anyway. Thanks for the update SnowGoose! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LVblizzard Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 INITIALIZATION ERRORS IN NUMEROUS DIAGNOSTIC QUANTITIES...INCLUDING HEIGHT/VORTICITY FIELDS/RH...ARE EVIDENT IN BOTH THE 12Z NAM/GFS WITH SMALL BUT LIKELY SIGNIFICANT SHORTWAVE TROUGHS OVER SOUTH DAKOTA/NEBRASKA ALONG WITH SASKATCHEWAN/MANITOBA...WITH THESE AREAS ALSO NOT PARTICULARLY RESOLVED OR PREDICTED WELL BY THE 00Z ECMWF. THUS...THE SPECIFIC PREDICTIONS BY ALL DETERMINISTIC GUIDANCE ARE IN QUESTION...WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO FOLLOW CONTINUITY...WITH THE FINAL OUTCOME MOST BELIEVED TO LIE BETWEEN THE 06Z GFS AND 00Z ECMWF...WITH ALL ENSEMBLE GUIDANCE INCLUDING THE SREF MEAN/GEFS MEAN/ECMWF ENSEMBLE MEAN ALSO CONSIDERED USEFUL TO ADDRESS THE CONTINUED UNCERTAINTY. THIS APPROACH DISREGARDS THE SUBSTANTIALLY DEEPER AND WESTWARD SHIFT OF THE 12Z GFS REGARDING THE POWERFUL LOW TRACKING UP THE EASTERN SEABOARD...AND TO A LESSER EXTENT THE 12Z NAM WHICH LIES NEAR THE FAST EDGE OF THE GUIDANCE WITH THE DEVELOPING LOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyS Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 12Z NAM/GFS EVALUATION INCLUDING PRELIMINARY PREFERENCES ...SPLIT SHORTWAVE TROUGHS EXTENDING OVER THE PLAINS/MIDWEST... ...LOW PRESSURE FORMING ALONG THE EAST COAST THROUGH MONDAY... PREFERENCE: EQUAL BLEND OF THE 06Z GFS/00Z ECMWF OR THE ENSEMBLE MEANS INITIALIZATION ERRORS IN NUMEROUS DIAGNOSTIC QUANTITIES...INCLUDING HEIGHT/VORTICITY FIELDS/RH...ARE EVIDENT IN BOTH THE 12Z NAM/GFS WITH SMALL BUT LIKELY SIGNIFICANT SHORTWAVE TROUGHS OVER SOUTH DAKOTA/NEBRASKA ALONG WITH SASKATCHEWAN/MANITOBA...WITH THESE AREAS ALSO NOT PARTICULARLY RESOLVED OR PREDICTED WELL BY THE 00Z ECMWF. THUS...THE SPECIFIC PREDICTIONS BY ALL DETERMINISTIC GUIDANCE ARE IN QUESTION...WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO FOLLOW CONTINUITY...WITH THE FINAL OUTCOME MOST BELIEVED TO LIE BETWEEN THE 06Z GFS AND 00Z ECMWF...WITH ALL ENSEMBLE GUIDANCE INCLUDING THE SREF MEAN/GEFS MEAN/ECMWF ENSEMBLE MEAN ALSO CONSIDERED USEFUL TO ADDRESS THE CONTINUED UNCERTAINTY. THIS APPROACH DISREGARDS THE SUBSTANTIALLY DEEPER AND WESTWARD SHIFT OF THE 12Z GFS REGARDING THE POWERFUL LOW TRACKING UP THE EASTERN SEABOARD...AND TO A LESSER EXTENT THE 12Z NAM WHICH LIES NEAR THE FAST EDGE OF THE GUIDANCE WITH THE DEVELOPING LOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 INITIALIZATION ERRORS IN NUMEROUS DIAGNOSTIC QUANTITIES...INCLUDING HEIGHT/VORTICITY FIELDS/RH...ARE EVIDENT IN BOTH THE 12Z NAM/GFS WITH SMALL BUT LIKELY SIGNIFICANT SHORTWAVE TROUGHS OVER SOUTH DAKOTA/NEBRASKA ALONG WITH SASKATCHEWAN/MANITOBA...WITH THESE AREAS ALSO NOT PARTICULARLY RESOLVED OR PREDICTED WELL BY THE 00Z ECMWF. THUS...THE SPECIFIC PREDICTIONS BY ALL DETERMINISTIC GUIDANCE ARE IN QUESTION...WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO FOLLOW CONTINUITY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jefflaw77 Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 HPC officiallly gives the GFS the heave ho So it's crap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blizzardlover Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 So it's crap? Pretty much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pythium Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 new 12z cras staying steady http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/cras/cras45_NA/12/images/cras45na_pcp_060m.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pythium Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 <a href='http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/cras/cras45_NA/12/images/cras45na_pcp_060m.gif new' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://cimss.ssec.wi...pcp_060m.gif new</a> cras 12z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocoAko Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 The statement says that the GEFS was still considered useful. I imagine it was impacted by the errors too, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riptide Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 well they need to make sure these dumb errors don't happen again. were gettin to crunch time. As a MET alluded to earlier, there are errors somewhere in every model initialization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaltimoreWxGuy Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 WHen I get my meteorology degree Im taking a baseball bat to these models .....Anyway, with what that said, you cant put much stock in the GFS....What the Euro shows this afternoon will likely be close to the solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinylfreak89 Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 what i gather from the HPC is air on the side of caution... they said those errors MIGHT have impacted the forecast... they did not say they definitively did... I'm not going to pass any judgement until the 00Z runs tonight. based on the 18Z ruc compared to the 6 hr depiction on the 12Z GFS if anything i#d say it was too weak with the norhtern shortwave and too fart NE with the TX shortwave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collegestudent11 Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 what i gather from the HPC is air on the side of caution... they said those errors MIGHT have impacted the forecast... they did not say they definitively did... I'm not going to pass any judgement until the 00Z runs tonight. based on the 18Z ruc compared to the 6 hr depiction on the 12Z GFS if anything i#d say it was too weak with the norhtern shortwave and too fart NE with the TX shortwave. Do you mean to far Ne? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 Aren't the ensembles run on slightly different initialization conditions to see the results of those changes? If so why do those also show a big hit then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest someguy Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 maybe the GFS should disregard the HPC BRILLANT you think its bad that the bad data is detected and caught? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike2010 Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 People need to relax and cool it with the angry posts - this solution was a huge shift from all recent model guidance. Data initialization errors or not it seemed like a major long shot. yeah, but the GFS trends were still West even before the 12Z run. It just needed a touch more of a pull from that 500 MB low , and it got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormman Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 BRILLANT you think its bad that the bad data is detected and caught? so dt, what is your take on the 12gfs, are you disreguarding it, or do you think it could be on to something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 Aren't the ensembles run on slightly different initialization conditions to see the results of those changes? If so why do those also show a big hit then? I thought the same thing, but I'm not too up on exactly what goes into the ensemble members or how they are generated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brettjrob Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 Aren't the ensembles run on slightly different initialization conditions to see the results of those changes? If so why do those also show a big hit then? They're run with certain artificial perturbations to the observed initial conditions. So if the observed data is significantly off, those perturbations will still cluster around the faulty data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aldie 22 Posted December 24, 2010 Share Posted December 24, 2010 Minneapolis was expecting 1-3" overnight but looks like they got around 5-6"...don't know if that means anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.