NorthArlington101 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 1 minute 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. I tried to use it for our last event and it crapped out before we got 24 hours in, but it showed a lot of sleet and I got a lot of rain, so it's not a magic bullet. I do think it is "supposed" to be the latest and greatest short/hi-res model, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamn3 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 How concerned are yall with the dry air eating up the snow? Do the models take that into consideration? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MillvilleWx Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 Just now, NorthArlington101 said: I tried to use it for our last event and it crapped out before we got 24 hours in, but it showed a lot of sleet and I got a lot of rain, so it's not a magic bullet. I do think it is "supposed" to be the latest and greatest short/hi-res model, though. It’s not. It has a lot of work to do imo. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 2 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. It Rapid Refresh...It incorporates the NAM and some other short terms. I think it's mostly meant for convection. A met probably knows more. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 1 minute ago, Benjamn3 said: How concerned are yall with the dry air eating up the snow? Do the models take that into consideration? not concerned 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraff Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 8 minutes ago, Scarlet Pimpernel said: Is this going to be a drunken PBP (sort of like Drunken Boxing)??? Hopefully we'll get a very slurred "FOLKS!", and then you can return to your martini(s)! It would be more fun if he said “FUCKS!” Am I wrong? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormy Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 52 minutes ago, Jeff R. said: Stormy, I would be interested in receiving your newsletter- can I send you a PM with my e-mail address? sure 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nw baltimore wx Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 7 minutes ago, Deck Pic said: Have they run the 1.33 km NAM over the mid atlantic. Often they'll do it if there is a storm. That’s for real??? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 14 minutes ago, stormy said: Just smile and be happy, that's headed in the right direction. The NAM Nest has raised you from 3.5" to 6.3". Wow!!! If this keeps up You may need to get your blower out!!! 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Reilly Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 1 hour ago, DDweatherman said: Ya know, I’m thinking back. The NAM yesterday kinda started the good trends back with this storm, no? The old times are back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamn3 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 3 minutes ago, Deck Pic said: not concerned I only mention it because NWS Blacksburg did in their short term discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVclimo Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 1 minute ago, Benjamn3 said: I only mention it because NWS Blacksburg did in their short term discussion. My DP just fell below zero. RH is 27% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamn3 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 5 minutes ago, Deck Pic said: not concerned 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDweatherman Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 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 More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 18z GFS snow begins at 9z Monday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherCCB Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 34/5 here. wouldn’t thinks temps should be an issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamn3 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 2 minutes ago, WVclimo said: My DP just fell below zero. RH is 27% Very good, I’m sure I’m just over thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeesburgWx Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 GFS initialized 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 carbon copy of 12z so far through 18hr 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormy Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 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 More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 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. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 just very slightly...an ass hair amp'd than 12z...like really, it's just noise 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDweatherman Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 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 More sharing options...
WxMan1 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 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. 5 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDweatherman Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 Just now, stormtracker said: just very slightly...an ass hair amp'd than 12z...like really, it's just noise Makes me wonder why we’d mention an ass hair or a CH if it’s noise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 for sure a bit wetter than 12z up to 33hr .... 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 wetter still at 36...12z was light precip at the same hour...now it's darker green 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeesburgWx Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 The orientation of the precip does looks slightly better so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 Still going 9z 48...lighter than 12z. so maybe even out overall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 yeah, looks like it evens out. Looks the same as 12z. no huge changes 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