Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,787
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    countessweather
    Newest Member
    countessweather
    Joined

Jan 15-16 Storm Threat Thread: The Return of Hope??


stormtracker
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

It’s best to ignore the NAM. Actually the totals further south seem safer. It’s all from the initial band. Further north it’s a combo of getting fringed by wave 1 and 2. That’s the kinda stuff that’s risky. NW of 95 has more upside but also more bust potential is the initial band sets up south like non NAM guidance and then the coastal doesn’t get going in time. Would leave places NW dry. 

That’s a good point, but also incorrect. The Euro doesn’t do the first part and you and I still get the good totals. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

It’s best to ignore the NAM. Actually the totals further south seem safer. It’s all from the initial band. Further north it’s a combo of getting fringed by wave 1 and 2. That’s the kinda stuff that’s risky. NW of 95 has more upside but also more bust potential is the initial band sets up south like non NAM guidance and then the coastal doesn’t get going in time. Would leave places NW dry. 

OK , I'll follow your advice and look forward to the 18z GFS for comparison

The ECM is really conservative compared to the others. Are the better physics telling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DDweatherman said:

That’s a good point, but also incorrect. The Euro doesn’t do the first part and you and I still get the good totals. 

The euro and icon are kinda in between with a wider more uniform distribution from the initial frontal banding because it shifts north then no real coastal enhancement. That would be acceptable. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stormy said:

OK , I'll follow your advice and look forward to the 18z GFS for comparison

The ECM is really conservative compared to the others. Are the better physics telling?

This is also kinda incorrect. The Euro shows 4-5” totals up towards Mt.PSU, whereas a model like the ICON, GGEM, RGEM have a 2-4 distro…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Anyone know what that RRFS experimental thing is?  Hopefully is sucks because it’s the only thing that has looked consistently awful for our area. 

Yeah...about that...

The Rapid Refresh Forecast System -- RRFS -- will ultimately replace the current CAMs, including the NAM, HRRR, ARW, ARW2, and HREF suite. Many aren't on board with that, at least right now, given (a) the poor verification of the RRFS at this point, and (2) while the RRFS is an ensemble, it's ensembles are of the same system. Whereas the HREF is comprised of an ensemble of multiple (different) systems. Not looking forward to that day...hopefully it'll be put off. 

 

Rapid Refresh Forecast System

GSL, NCEP/EMC, and other partners are working together on a project to design a single-model, convection-allowing, ensemble-based data assimilation, and forecasting system called the Rapid Refresh Forecast System (RRFS). This project aims to develop advanced high-resolution data-assimilation techniques and ensemble-forecasting methods while supporting the unification and simplification of the NCEP modeling suite around the FV3 model. (<-- But the FV3 has been pretty crappy verification-wise).

Within the NOAA model unification effort, the RRFS represents the evolution of the NAM, RAP, HRRR, and HREF systems to a new unified deterministic and ensemble storm-scale system. This new system is targeted for initial operational implementation in late 2024 as a planned replacement for the NAMnest, HRRR, HiResWindows, and HREF. While the standalone regional (SAR) FV3 model is being developed for convection-allowing forecasting of a limited area (CONUS), other possible components of the RRFS are being tested now in the experimental, WRF-based High-Resolution Rapid Refresh Ensemble (HRRRE). Experimental runs of the HRRRE at GSL are focused particularly on:

  • Improving 0-12 h high-resolution forecasts through ensemble-based, multi-scale data assimilation
  • Producing spread in 0-36 h ensemble forecasts through initial-condition perturbations, boundary-condition perturbations, and stochastic physics.

GSL is the owner and responsible for all data in this AWS S3 Bucket.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WxMan1 said:

Yeah...about that...

The Rapid Refresh Forecast System -- RRFS -- will ultimately replace the current CAMs, including the NAM, HRRR, ARW, ARW2, and HREF suite. Many aren't on board with that, at least right now, given (a) the poor verification of the RRFS at this point, and (2) while the RRFS is an ensemble, it's ensembles are of the same system. Whereas the HREF is comprised of an ensemble of multiple (different) systems. Not looking forward to that day...hopefully it'll be put off. 

 

Rapid Refresh Forecast System

GSL, NCEP/EMC, and other partners are working together on a project to design a single-model, convection-allowing, ensemble-based data assimilation, and forecasting system called the Rapid Refresh Forecast System (RRFS). This project aims to develop advanced high-resolution data-assimilation techniques and ensemble-forecasting methods while supporting the unification and simplification of the NCEP modeling suite around the FV3 model. (<-- But the FV3 has been pretty crappy verification-wise).

Within the NOAA model unification effort, the RRFS represents the evolution of the NAM, RAP, HRRR, and HREF systems to a new unified deterministic and ensemble storm-scale system. This new system is targeted for initial operational implementation in late 2024 as a planned replacement for the NAMnest, HRRR, HiResWindows, and HREF. While the standalone regional (SAR) FV3 model is being developed for convection-allowing forecasting of a limited area (CONUS), other possible components of the RRFS are being tested now in the experimental, WRF-based High-Resolution Rapid Refresh Ensemble (HRRRE). Experimental runs of the HRRRE at GSL are focused particularly on:

  • Improving 0-12 h high-resolution forecasts through ensemble-based, multi-scale data assimilation
  • Producing spread in 0-36 h ensemble forecasts through initial-condition perturbations, boundary-condition perturbations, and stochastic physics.

GSL is the owner and responsible for all data in this AWS S3 Bucket.

Sounds like they’re having a hard time coming up with a quality system. Oh well. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stormtracker said:

yeah, looks like it evens out.  Looks the same as 12z. no huge changes

I like seeing the ass hair more amped early and the axis of precip. 
need to beef up that back end now since the first batch is looking a fair bit wetter. Mesos will be our asset moving into tonight and the overnight 

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...