Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,600
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

May 2024 Discussion - Welcome to Severe Season!!!!


weatherwiz
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Some knew 

Yes, many areas have seen a bit more sun than forecast over the last two weeks, but the overall pattern is wetter, cooler, cloudier.  The fact we are getting excited over it implicitly suggests we are not seeing "enough" of it.  1 or 2 days of sun every week- or 4-6 hours/day- is not cutting it for me.  To be sure, central CT looks pretty good on water vapor right now- we enjoy it for as long as it lasts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Aurora watch this weekend. They say you can see the sunspot with eclipse glasses.

20240510_081122.jpg

Not going to lie, I glanced up at the sun yesterday through some low cloud and I seen it with my naked eye. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Aurora watch this weekend. They say you can see the sunspot with eclipse glasses.

20240510_081122.jpg

It's been fun monitoring that beast all week. 

According to Spaceweather's front page info ... that spot mass rivals that which proceeded the great event in 1859 denoted as "Carrington"   - not sure if that is a geographic location or a person but that Carrington Event is famous for setting primitive transformer stations on fire, and frying the early telegraph grid.   As we all know ... it is theorized that a similar event today would basically "anesthetize the grid'"... if you get my meaning.  Henceforth, no longer pan-dimension/general delivery of electrical services - i.e., everywhere.   And telecom as we know it, hurled back to analog - if that even, because the physical framework of the grid itself may be rendered fubar, and transmission fails altogether.

That would be a catastrophe.  heh  understatement.

You know ... it's funny.  Whenever this topic comes up, I am struck with this notion that - at least for humanity's saga - as conceit and hubris grows, fragility and peril that constructs is equally unknown.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean I'm looking at the NAM FOUS grid over BOS with - 2 to -4 C at 800 mb level for 48 straight hours on a May 10 model cycle.

If we did ever plumb a sufficiently intense UVM core through that profile, it would bring fatties to the 1200' surfaces, and splashing cat paws to 800

( sorry warm enthusiasts - don't blame the facts )

Luckily those projections from the GFS 5 days ago don't look to be worth a shit, else we'd really be entertaining at least 1200' blue QPF paint.

On May 10-13th. In a May, yet again ..

But, seein as we are not getting any kind of dynamic system capable of doing that, the May sun will probably make the lower levels oblivious to that 'what if' plausibility.  

I also wonder if there's some convective instability with that cold mid level.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Torch Tiger said:

low dews on the gfs :facepalm:

gfs_apcpn_neus_64.png

I'm not trying to be contrarian here but it's pretty clear the GFS' QPF have been willfully overly prodigious at these longer termed aggregate sums.

I'm not sure if that is true among all guidance; even if so, I suspect the GFS is the cult leader. It's certainly the Osama Bin Laden against seasonal change to warm season, in general... So in doing so, it's gotta consummately over amplify mechanism that rain, while conjuring up warm canceling synoptics etc.

Re the former aspect... the GFS is always unbalanced with every wave space relative to all scales - I've noticed.   speaking to the general audience here.   It's not a hugely observable aspect but at a tedious, yet crucial scale, the model has more mass ending up in trough spatial dimensions, than it does in the coupled ridge.   Not sure how it gets to that distribution, but I suspect it is because it's mass relay is too fast - wind speeds; which comes back to lowering heights too aggressively ( again ... small but noticeable to autistic nerds LOL ) in its physical processing.

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...