olafminesaw Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 4 minutes ago, yoda said: Where is that from? https://schumacher.atmos.colostate.edu/hilla/csu_mlp/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone77 Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 This thread seems quieter. I'm not able to look at models much atm, is this setup still looking as impressive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxSynopsisDavid Posted March 31, 2023 Share Posted March 31, 2023 36 minutes ago, cyclone77 said: This thread seems quieter. I'm not able to look at models much atm, is this setup still looking as impressive? We are all focused on the current, on going major outbreak. There will likely be no post made until after this current outbreak is over. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HillsdaleMIWeather Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 Might need to extend the thread into the 5th too, models are showing MI and IN could be under the gun the next day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvck Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 looks like the 15% got expanded eastwards into SW ohio, this is from this morning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
largetornado Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 First sounding I picked from the NAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago916 Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 Has back to back high risks occured at this latitude within 5 days of one another before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natester Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 9 minutes ago, Chicago916 said: Has back to back high risks occured at this latitude within 5 days of one another before? If I remember correctly it has happened back in May 2003. May 4, May 8 and May 10, 2003 all had high risks in the same latitude, albeit slightly south. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago916 Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 10 minutes ago, Natester said: If I remember correctly it has happened back in May 2003. May 4, May 8 and May 10, 2003 all had high risks in the same latitude, albeit slightly south. GFS trending in the direction to add to those Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheeselandSkies Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 Already took next Wednesday off to keep open the possibility of chasing Tuesday afternoon...even before what I saw yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
largetornado Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 Had some more time to look at the models. The warm sector is enormous with favorable parameters throughout. If the nam has its way, the warm sector is going to be relatively free of contaminating crapvection. (GFS and euro agree with the minimal rainfall in the warm sector as well) Good forcing throughout the warm sector…it certainly seems this could be a very high end event over a widespread area. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 The CSU MLP for Tuesday is absolutely maxed out. Two 60+% areas across AR and closer to the low in MO/IA/IL. First time I’ve seen that. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheeselandSkies Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 If this is the current EURO run that Trey posted (and I don't see why it wouldn't be, he seems to be trustworthy in that department), still looks like all systems go for Tuesday. As @andyhb and @largetornado noted above, a carbon copy of yesterday could be the FLOOR with this one. https://twitter.com/ConvChronicles/status/1642202540732305412 As an aside it's annoying that Twitter is still so heavily used among the met community, I've never liked the platform (had an account, deleted it when they eliminated the feature that I found most useful), times 1,000 now that it's Elon Musk's plaything. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
largetornado Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 Looking through some soundings. Looks to be a fairly stout inversion right above 850. Failure mode? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 That's at 03z and also I have strong doubt that it is going to be 66 degrees at that time given the magnitude of WAA with this trough. NAM tends to be cold biased. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxSynopsisDavid Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 1 minute ago, andyhb said: That's at 03z and also I have strong doubt that it is going to be 66 degrees at that time given the magnitude of WAA with this trough. NAM tends to be cold biased. Important to note that the NAM suite was horrible with yesterday's outbreak and was also horrible leading up to the Rolling Fork incident. NAM suite has been getting out-performed this year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 RRFA model did very well with both events, it will be interesting to see how it performs as we get closer to Tuesday. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxSynopsisDavid Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 1 minute ago, Stebo said: RRFA model did very well with both events, it will be interesting to see how it performs as we get closer to Tuesday. Yes it did, it was probably the most accurate in terms of how it depicted the warm sector and the airmass recovery between the waves of discrete. Also, while other models were trying to congeal the stuff quicker to the south like in Arkansas, the RRFA kept everything discrete or semi-discrete. The helicity swaths it outputted yesterday morning was almost a carbon copy of what was experienced. The HRRR has also done great with these last 2 outbreaks too. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone77 Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 23 minutes ago, Stebo said: RRFA model did very well with both events, it will be interesting to see how it performs as we get closer to Tuesday. That is nice to hear. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 Yeah it would be great to have the new mesoscale model be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 Amazingly high probabilities of STP ≥ 5 over a large area for Tuesday 81 hours out from the 15z SREF. Never seen anything like that at this range. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxSynopsisDavid Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 1 minute ago, andyhb said: Amazingly high probabilities of STP ≥ 5 over a large area for Tuesday 81 hours out from the 15z SREF. Never seen anything like that at this range. There were similar trends at this range for the 3/2/2012 and 4/27/11. But you are right, this doesn't happen often and its rare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted April 1, 2023 Share Posted April 1, 2023 One limiting factor with this may be mixing if we get near the progged high temperatures from some of the models. LCL heights would be an issue. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloWeather Posted April 2, 2023 Share Posted April 2, 2023 43 minutes ago, andyhb said: One limiting factor with this may be mixing if we get near the progged high temperatures from some of the models. LCL heights would be an issue. Any chance this rolls over into weds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxSynopsisDavid Posted April 2, 2023 Share Posted April 2, 2023 46 minutes ago, andyhb said: One limiting factor with this may be mixing if we get near the progged high temperatures from some of the models. LCL heights would be an issue. NAM suite is suggesting a strong cap in place in some areas that don't get breached until right before sunset. This would need to be monitored as it would suggest, if parameters hold, this would be a nocturnal event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheeselandSkies Posted April 2, 2023 Share Posted April 2, 2023 GFS sounding from the IL side of the QCA. After considering retargeting to there yesterday (good thing I didn't), I may end up there on Tuesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheeselandSkies Posted April 2, 2023 Share Posted April 2, 2023 Northern Arkansas. Holy hell. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheeselandSkies Posted April 2, 2023 Share Posted April 2, 2023 NAM sounding for near Cedar Rapids, still pops a PDS TOR despite being valid for 03Z and with the NAM's (a little more plausible in this case) cooler temperatures. Large 3CAPE again, like yesterday. My one caveat about yesterday was that the forecast hodographs in Iowa seemed to have a lot smaller curvature than I would have liked to see. Glad I didn't let that dissuade me from chasing! That is NOT an issue Tuesday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheeselandSkies Posted April 2, 2023 Share Posted April 2, 2023 The 18Z NAM EHI map almost looks like I imagine it would have for Palm Sunday 1965...large values extending from eastern Iowa across northern Illinois/far southern Wisconsin to northern IN and southwestern Lower MI. They don't extend quite as far east as the major activity did that day, but the overall pattern seems quite similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WxSynopsisDavid Posted April 2, 2023 Share Posted April 2, 2023 Looking at the soundings, they are all high-end upper echelon type stuff. If you get past the small issues the NAM has been dealing with this year, those NAM soundings are still high end. As has already been discussed, the main issues here at this point remain: mixing, LCL's, early morning convection, capping inversion issues. Should those issues materialize, the floor would be yesterdays event. If we do not have any of those issues come Tuesday, this outbreak "COULD" rival the scope and magnitude of some of the bigger outbreaks we have seen. I know a lot of people on Twitter been throwing around 4/27 comparisons for size, and its very plausible the warm sector gets into southern Canada, its important to note for size/magnitude that can be debated. Everything else, no. Yesterdays event was close to some degree, a smaller "notch down" carbon copy of 4/3/74. Same areal coverage, same upper air support, but not quite on that level with violent tornadoes. I will say that I am more concerned for this upcoming outbreak than I was with yesterdays...and I still had concerns, not just as many as I have for this next one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now