TUweathermanDD Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 the next panel is probably the boom one.. not sure the surface differences are that important tho really everything is a bit north of what i'd like but it is what it is Well we know how the 18z's and 6z's are sometimes with QPF. Also, I mean hr36 is pretty good, so I'll take .3-.4 but we know a good h5 on an off run usually catches up. 0z should be intriguing. Also, the surface does just suck, if its further south, which Jebman pointed out is possible lol, then there could be a nowcasting surprise. Ill see what 0z has to say once again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozz Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Ouch, 36 is a disappointment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Just a lil slower... step by step Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jebman Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 No I agree with you its move more nne than just east, but it is not consolidated at all, very broken up. I dont know, . Energy transfer already underway, baroclinic leaf developing and expanding, as SE coast low develops, we could see areas of snow dynamically develop over VA with snow breaking out overnight over parts of VA. New NAM runs may shed light on this, or not. Most likely I am just a snow weenie suffering from severe radar hallucinations, half mad from living in the DC snow hole after last year's Snowmageddon ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I don't get it. the H5 map is very nice, but the surface looks like sh*t, especially compared to 12z. i think the vorts that make it pop are a little slower.. the 500 low is gigantic too.. it's too far north overall but it's not giong to be optimal either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I don't get it tho..h5 is a bit better, but surface kinda looks the same and the western extent of the .25 line has moved east just a tiny bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I don't get it tho..h5 is a bit better, but surface kinda looks the same and the western extent of the .25 line has moved east just a tiny bit. i dont think 500 is necessarily better.. the southern vorts dig a bit more but the center of the 500 low is slower or slightly north of before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUweathermanDD Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I don't get it tho..h5 is a bit better, but surface kinda looks the same and the western extent of the .25 line has moved east just a tiny bit. I wouldn't get worried Randy. I'd say if the H5 is that good on the 0z and the surface reacts the same way, then get concerned. I'll take the positives out of it. Should be more QPF though. A step forward, albeit a small one because of surface reflections being a bit off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Omegas please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TowsonWeather Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 i dont think 500 is necessarily better.. the southern vorts dig a bit more but the center of the 500 low is slower or slightly north of before. Yeah, the last 48 hours have been a trade off imo. We are seeing more and more digging, but a slower-moving northern piece that subsequently takes longer to get the whole thing organized. The net result is about the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MN Transplant Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 i dont think 500 is necessarily better.. the southern vorts dig a bit more but the center of the 500 low is slower or slightly north of before. Yesterday it looked like the 700 was tracking over Cleveland. The intermediate runs shoved it a little south, maybe between Cleveland and Columbus, but this run is back north to Cleveland. Despite that, the NAM looks like it will give us about the same QPF as 12z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUweathermanDD Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Yeah, the last 48 hours have been a trade off imo. We are seeing more and more digging, but a slower-moving northern piece that subsequently takes longer to get the whole thing organized. The net result is about the same. True, if the northern piece is a bit faster, than the potential could be actualized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 NAM says we get 2-5 across the area with a nice period of moderate to heavy snow. I'll take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symblized Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Precip seems to exit quicker than 12z? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Yeah, the last 48 hours have been a trade off imo. We are seeing more and more digging, but a slower-moving northern piece that subsequently takes longer to get the whole thing organized. The net result is about the same. yeah i dont think there is enough change to think too much about it though timing is going to be critical as to whether you hit the low or high end of amounts thrown around so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 nearly identical to 12Z consistency baby, consistency more importantly, we're NOT loosing ground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 NAM says we get 2-5 across the area with a nice period of moderate to heavy snow. I'll take it. Yup and I will take it as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I hate those guys http://www.nco.ncep.noaa.gov/pmb/nwprod/analysis/namer/nam/18/images/nam_ref_042l.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 Lol nam is actually wetter for the western burbs of dc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symblized Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Precip seems to exit quicker than 12z? Nevermind, comparing wrong maps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUweathermanDD Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 nearly identical to 12Z consistency baby, consistency more importantly, we're NOT loosing ground Agreed mitchnick, and this leaves the door open for last minute improvements. If it holds or gets any better at 0z, I'm going to finally give it some credence. If the gfs took the nam track with its qpf, we'd do quite well. Btw eta spits out .35-.4 for you and I as well as Phin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Looks like there is a small period of flurries/light snow from 2-5 PM.. then it gets going overnight Tuesday and ends around 3-5 AM Wed Morning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Looks like there is a small period of flurries/light snow from 2-5 PM.. then it gets going overnight Tuesday and ends around 3-5 AM Wed Morning? schools and courts closed....yay!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozz Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Looks like a good advisory event here. I'll be thrilled if we get 4". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 DCA .31 iAd .26 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozz Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 DCA .31 iAd .26 BWI? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Agreed mitchnick, and this leaves the door open for last minute improvements. If it holds or gets any better at 0z, I'm going to finally give it some credence. If the gfs took the nam track with its qpf, we'd do quite well. Btw eta spits out .35-.4 for you and I as well as Phin. call me a weenie, but I like what I'm seeing on radar and pressures, etc. too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usedtobe Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I have no issues with any opinions in this forum. And I'm a big boy, I can take the derision regarding Accuwx. I'm just curious as to why some dislike them so much. I find it hard to fathom why some get so worked up over them. It's just another business trying to make money. And it doesn't seem to me that the reason for the dislike of them is purely because they hype forecasts. Well I was going to not post, I'll try to explain. One problem they have is over the years they ha and NHCand spun things when their potential storms have gone stray. That doesn't engender love within the met community. I've generally made it a practice to not criticize other mets as I'm very aware of how tough forecasting can be. I make an exception for a couple of mets at accuwx since they tend to slam others and I think some of their practices concerning forecasts are against the science. Dont get me wrong, there are guys there that I respect (Joe Lundberg is a prime example, Elliot Abrams is another) However, their corporate decision to make for specific snowfall forecasts days in advance really makes mets look bad as it gives the impression that there is skill at those time ranges when verification of the models indicate otherwise. . Chaos theory says that's not possible tp make specific forecast of snow on day 4 or 5 as small changes to the initial conditions can make a huge impact on what ends up occurring. Accuwx knows about chaos and its impact on forecasts but choose to pretend it does exist and the spin things when they are wrong. They do it for hits and to be able to say they were the first to forecast the event. They know the odds of them hitting the guess (and its a wild one) is not much more than random luck as none of the models have much skill at those time ranges even at the best of times and this pattern has been less well behaved than many. Snow often focused on the mesoscale (smaller scales) that the models have little skill forecasting much in advance of a day or two. Why shouldn't we criticize them when they are really putting out stuff that is not really credible and has no scientific backing. This is my last post on the subject as it's a waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caviman2201 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Just my $0.01, but the 18Z NAM has a 1016 850 forming to the east of JAX at 00Z, but THIS buoy is already recording 1013.5 and falling... Just sayin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinylfreak89 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 in advance, please excuse my poor drawings, my artistic skills are less than up to par, but I am trying to use this graphic to illustrate a point. basically I think the key here as to whether we get a significant snow (not ready to talk numbers just yet.... I think they fall in to place based on timing and placment of the shortwaves, though the stronger they are, the more the timing should fall in to line... its kind of a chicken/egg thing. anyway, normally I would use an h5 map to illustrate this but there is almost no reflection of the impulse over the deep south. I imagine thats because this impulse ran out pretty far ahead of its main upper level support... its a unique situation nontheless and we can owe it to the strong baroclinic zone off the SE coast that this is not a lakes cutter. Anyway, the black line indicates movement of the two features based on a good consensus of the 12z GFS/NAM/Euro/RGEM. The red line indicates a potential best case scenario that would give DC the same amounts as say central NJ. Note that this is NOT going to happen... I am in NO WAY forecasting this but rather a middle ground between the two... just where that middle ground exists, I don't know yet. The NAM is pretty much about 25 % away from the consensus, the ARW right in the middle at 50ish so probably a best case scenario is what the ARW shows, though with slightly less QPF overall...but the overall outcome, 4-8" would be the same. The black tick marks indicate timing in z so 11/18 would be today 18z and so on.... as you see to get the best case scenario we need 150 mile shift to the sW and an 8 hour shift in timing.... to get half of that, we need a 75 mile shift and 4 hour shift in timing....a very reasonable thing at this range....note that the better the timing is, the faster this will bomb and the heavier the precip will be because the factors that drive the timing of the event are related to the intensity mainly of the MW shortwave and the overall depth of the trough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.