Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,607
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

Potential winter threats


tombo82685

Recommended Posts

Very, very interesting. As I have been saying for a few days now. Many things about this potential event have similarities to the previous one. Mainly how the models are wanting to develop the surface low out in the Gulf Stream as opposed to closer to the coast where in my humble opinion it is more likely to be, just as with the last event. I have seen many times in previous years how these patterns do tend to repeat. History does often repeat itself.

The pattern does indeed repeat. Hence the LRC. However, in the same breath...this storm that everyone is talking about isn't going to be a repeat of 28DEC10. More likely a repeat of 17NOV10.

stnplot_20101117.gif

500mb

dwm500_test_20101117.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Wow, at 120 hrs. this thing is digging WAY more. 500mb is MUCH better. This is like night and day in comparison to the last run.

The problems on the 18z lie in the lead vorticity over the Northeast pushing the baroclinic zone so far offshore..and the main shortwave that will get the redevelopment going lagging behind.

This run will probably give everybody some snow though..through the 132-156 period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hr 123 light snow for phl-nyc on the 18z gfs

hr 126 broad area of low pressure along the mason dixon line...light snow from phl-nyc

hr 135 it does not get its act together until late...does not give sne much of a storm...extends a inverted trough feature back towards maine/

edit hr 144 has a inverted trough for phl-north jersey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can see at 114 hours how the system becomes a bit disorganized. The first northern stream feature heading towards the OH Valley could trend stronger, and then the PV retrograde could amplify things dramatically..but as it is, it doesn't do much for us. I will take .25" liquid and a refresh snowpack any day, though.

http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~gadomski/AVN_18z/f114.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With all due respect (and im really not being sarcastic) you don't really have a right to be asking someone to qualify their statement. Maybe that, too, is "self evident."

I'm not due any special respect. But it's silly to talk about whether or not I have a right to say something. I'm just trying to encourage people to be more precise with their comments and assertions. There are a lot of myths about what constitutes a "red flag" and how best to interpret ensemble modeling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not due any special respect. But it's silly to talk about whether or not I have a right to say something. I'm just trying to encourage people to be more precise with their comments and assertions. There are a lot of myths about what constitutes a "red flag" and how best to interpret ensemble modeling.

Strongly agree...this is what I thought you were saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would be nice to freshen up the snow pack..then have the cold rush in.....like john said last night this is a very inersting situation....and somthing that will not be iron out until 48-72 hrs out

I'll take that a step further and say the potential is there for a big one here if we can get things more organized. As it is the GFS remains a disorganized mess with it's shortwave evolution and you're not going to get big snows like that unless you're in Maine. That being said, and I made a post about this a minute ago, the shortwave over OH has me excited if it can get more involved here. Also...if you loop through the H5 charts you can see how much the northern canada blocking which is retrograding from greenland/baffin island southwestward is really pressing on the pattern and forcing the PV southward. That's another wildcard in this type of situation.

http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~gadomski/AVN_18z/f114.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am saying it is BS because it can't figure out the aloft part yet. I think when it finally does, the end result will be much better for us. I could be wrong, but that is my take on what is going on here.

No problem, I wasn't calling you out...just letting you know that it's not BS. Verbatim it's very disorganized aloft and the surface low positioning and precipitation output does make sense. To put it simply, the GFS is shooting the first shortwave out to the northeast and the height field is de-amplfying as a result. The positive vorticity advection (PVA) from this vort heads northeast and the surface low redevelops to Western PA at 120 hours. Then, with that shortwave weakening, we are waiting for the enhanced lift over the Great Lakes to slide eastward and force coastal redevelopment..which doesn't occur until 138 hours. As a result you get a late developing system and a very disorganized cold conveyor belt...but we still get some enhanced snowfall as the shortwave passes to our south and southeast and then additional light to moderate stuff as the upper level system closes off near us at 150 hrs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's wrong with caring about how it looks for where you live? I mean obviously I'm not going to take a 168 hr prog from the GFS seriously but I don't see why that's so bad.

my point was that everyone thinks they live in some classic snow hole. they can't all be classics. so much is perception and the "classic snowhole imby" posts on these forums are extremely common from everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...