40/70 Benchmark Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 7 minutes ago, AstronomyEnjoyer said: FWIW, the 00z ICON looks nearly identical to the 18z. REGGIE does, too. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyEnjoyer Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 5 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said: REGGIE does, too. Whoa, now don't sell it too short. the 18z spat out 4" at my location. The 00z? 5". Incredibly thrilling stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 hour ago, Spanks45 said: Impressive resolution on that map, circled mylocation, right in the snow death valley of Southbury...quite impressive That’s the first thing I saw too lol. This could be like this past March. I get a soaked 3” while you struggle with mangled flakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyEnjoyer Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 hour ago, Spanks45 said: Impressive resolution on that map, circled mylocation, right in the snow death valley of Southbury...quite impressive That is quite the little bastard of a valley there. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JKEisMan Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 Does anyone know what this model is and why it exists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotSureWeather Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 minute ago, JKEisMan said: Does anyone know what this model is and why it exists? Copium? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotSureWeather Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 2 minutes ago, JKEisMan said: Does anyone know what this model is and why it exists? Looks like it’s related to the hrrr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JKEisMan Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 2 minutes ago, NotSureWeather said: Looks like it’s related to the hrrr Yeah found this : 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). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dendrite Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 6 minutes ago, JKEisMan said: Does anyone know what this model is and why it exists? It has its own model derived snow totals. Toss the 10:1. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyEnjoyer Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 6 minutes ago, JKEisMan said: Does anyone know what this model is and why it exists? Sounds like an experimental convection allowing model that is currently being trialed/tested. Presumably it exists because they are attempting to build better models for the future. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyEnjoyer Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 00z GFS is a slight improvement from the 18z for most people, but nothing really that'll blow your hair back. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spanks45 Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 36 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said: That’s the first thing I saw too lol. This could be like this past March. I get a soaked 3” while you struggle with mangled flakes. Might push you over 10 at least for the year...despite the clown look, I could almost go all in on nothing but mangled flakes before the dryslot moves in. The hill that I can see from my deck will probably be plastered white Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuteirishgirl25 Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 https://x.com/eweather13/status/1751454790431784981?s=46&t=Y3ICRnzOhtk67YmRQyZssQ 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSky Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 39 minutes ago, JKEisMan said: Yeah found this : 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). Omg they have created the Frankenstein model do they know what they have done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MegaMike Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 Consider the RRFS an ensemble consisting of multiple (9 members + 1 deterministic) high-resolution (3km) simulations on a constant grid (unlike the HREF and NBM). In other words, it's similar to the HREF, but without any post-processing... The HREF requires post-processing since its ensemble members have various domain configurations (which is a bit taboo). Based on < https://gsl.noaa.gov/focus-areas/unified_forecast_system/rrfs >, it's set to replace the NAMnest, HRRR, HiResWindows, and HREF modeling systems. Besides what I mentioned above, the lateral boundary conditions come from the GFS (control) and the GEFS (members). All share the same core (FV3). Currently, they're testing a bunch of different options to improve the initial conditions (data assimilation) of the RRFS. Overall, it sounds like it'll be a significant improvement over the HREF and NBM once the RRFS becomes operational (and well tested). Note: I can't find much on the RRFS' performance... Based on what I've seen so far, It performs better in terms of reflectivity detection < https://www.spc.noaa.gov/publications/vancil/rrfs-hwt.pdf > 3 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmcginvt Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 hour ago, 40/70 Benchmark said: My one year old will not stop shitting molten lava....holy off topic, but the poor kid's a$$....yikes, the joys of parenthood.....maybe I'll soothe his wounds with my Final Call map on Monday. There was nothing worse than when they have an explosive shit that goes out of the diaper up their whole back and then dries while they are sleeping. Oh the days I dont miss, literally need a brillo pad to get that shit off 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyEnjoyer Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 3 minutes ago, MegaMike said: Consider the RRFS an ensemble consisting of multiple (9 members + 1 deterministic) high-resolution (3km) simulations on a constant grid (unlike the HREF and NBM). In other words, it's similar to the HREF, but without any post-processing... The HREF requires post-processing since its ensemble members have various domain configurations (which is a bit taboo). Based on < https://gsl.noaa.gov/focus-areas/unified_forecast_system/rrfs >, it's set to replace the NAMnest, HRRR, HiResWindows, and HREF modeling systems. Besides what I mentioned above, the lateral boundary conditions come from the GFS (control) and the GEFS (members). All share the same core (FV3). Currently, they're testing a bunch of different options to improve the initial conditions (data assimilation) of the RRFS. Overall, it sounds like it'll be a significant improvement over the HREF and NBM once the RRFS becomes operational (and well tested). Note: I can't find much on the RRFS' performance... Based on what I've seen so far, It performs better in terms of reflectivity detection < https://www.spc.noaa.gov/publications/vancil/rrfs-hwt.pdf > Appreciate someone chiming in with an actual answer, thanks! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyEnjoyer Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 UKMET big improvement for the CNE crowd. Glad to have that powerhouse on our side. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8611Blizz Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 5 minutes ago, AstronomyEnjoyer said: UKMET big improvement for the CNE crowd. Glad to have that powerhouse on our side. If that is correct you'll see people in CT wading into the ocean to end their pain... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyEnjoyer Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 2 minutes ago, 8611Blizz said: If that is correct you'll see people in CT wading into the ocean to end their pain... Can't guarantee people won't be wading into the ocean come Monday, but I can assure you that the UKMET will not be correct. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MegaMike Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 23 minutes ago, RedSky said: Omg they have created the Frankenstein model do they know what they have done The HREF is a Frankenstein model since it requires post-processing to obtain fields on a constant grid. It's not a standard modeling system like the HRRR, NAM, GFS, etc... NWP requires a lot of static/time varying fields to run atmospheric simulations: vegetation type, elevation height, ice coverage, etc... By interpolating data onto a grid (or even transforming a horizontal datum), you degrade model accuracy since this information is lost. The HREF exists simply because we created a high-resolution ensemble with what we currently have. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MegaMike Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 19 minutes ago, AstronomyEnjoyer said: Appreciate someone chiming in with an actual answer, thanks! No problem, friend! I run simulations fairly regularly so I thought I'd chime in 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyEnjoyer Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 Just now, MegaMike said: No problem, friend! I run simulations fairly regularly so I thought I'd chime in Out of curiosity, are these models developed by NWS or NCEP or whatever government guys, or is there a fair amount of contractor support? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MegaMike Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 Just to be clear, the HREF and NBM are great tools (I specifically use them for precipitation forecasting), however, we can do better. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MegaMike Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 minute ago, AstronomyEnjoyer said: Out of curiosity, are these models developed by NWS or NCEP or whatever government guys, or is there a fair amount of contractor support? I published a paper for the EPA regarding an air quality modeling system/data truncation, but I haven't collaborated with NCEP on atmospheric models/simulations. I do have experience with a bunch of different modeling systems though (in order): ADCIRC (storm surge), SWAN (wave height), WRF-ARW (atmospheric and air quality), UPP (atmospheric post-processor), CMAQ (air quality), ISAM (air quality partitioning), RAMS ( atmospheric), ICLAMS (legacy atmospheric model). 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyEnjoyer Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 4 minutes ago, MegaMike said: I published a paper for the EPA regarding an air quality modeling system/data truncation, but I haven't collaborated with NCEP on atmospheric models/simulations. I do have experience with a bunch of different modeling systems though (in order): ADCIRC (storm surge), SWAN (wave height), WRF-ARW (atmospheric and air quality), UPP (atmospheric post-processor), CMAQ (air quality), ISAM (air quality partitioning), RAMS ( atmospheric), ICLAMS (legacy atmospheric model). Well, I certainly appreciate what you guys do. I can't even begin to imagine how difficult it is to sit down to develop some sort of model that attempts to deterministically predict what is going to happen in the atmosphere of an extremely dynamic planet. The number of moving parts boggles the mind. You guys get way too little love. I'm even guilty of it - making fun of weather models that took many people much smarter than I to develop, test, and run. Thanks again! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstronomyEnjoyer Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 00z Euro is fairly anemic, especially to the east (in terms of snow). Really only favors the Berkshires and the southern Greens. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 4 Seasons Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 17 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said: Sarcasm, @The 4 Seasons So was the emoji. I'm one of those who throws around emoji reactions all nilly willy anyway so I wouldn't read to much into them Anyway rain has commenced, 39F hope yall northern folk do OK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ineedsnow Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 Warning up but not thinking it will be anything great here 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnno Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 Woke up and checked the radar looks like one hellacious thump in bound… of rain 1 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