baroclinic_instability Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 jeeze you sound like you have a degree in meteorology or something. pfft. lol. jk. IMO it kinda varies from year to year. Some years it is the king and then other years it isnt much better than the gfs. Verification wise it is the King, and it has a pretty kick-butt ensemble. The model is more "advanced" and runs more advanced forms of the dynamical equations, more advanced parametrizations, has a better data assimilation and statistical analysis, and runs on a higher resolution spectral wave "grid" (all global models are spectral wave instead of grid point). However, it should be better because it has much more funding from its member states, and of course it requires a paid membership from others. The GFS, on the other hand, is free to everyone. Considering it is relatively "inferior" in a lot of ways, it is amazing that it is as good as it is. It is also getting a lot better verification wise, and they (NCEP) still have plans to implement a lot of new features including a more advanced data assimilation (hybrid variational analysis of some sort) system that will improve on the current 3DVAR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilly84 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 here is my question and it may sound dumb, but is it maybe just the people who input the data could be, not necessarily smarter, but maybe different input methods? I don't know a lot about how all that is done to be honest. I know that humans input the data and that is about as much as I know. May sound stupid, but hey im not afraid to admit when I have no clue about something. Part of the reason I have posted here for nearly 4 years. To learn and take part in the animosity that takes place during a storm lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 here is my question and it may sound dumb, but is it maybe just the people who input the data could be, not necessarily smarter, but maybe different input methods? I don't know a lot about how all that is done to be honest. I know that humans input the data and that is about as much as I know. May sound stupid, but hey im not afraid to admit when I have no clue about something. Part of the reason I have posted here for nearly 4 years. To learn and take part in the animosity that takes place during a storm lol I don't fully know what you are asking here (in bold). I will say numerical models are 100% computational with no human interaction. In the simplest and most basic form, numerical models ingest weather observations and data, perform a statistical analysis on the data, form an analysis field, and then use that analysis field to integrate the discretized "primitive equations" (http://en.wikipedia....tokes_equations) through time which include variations of the "Navier-Stokes equations for fluid flow. That is the simple and most basic explanation of a numerical model. They are so much more complex, however, it is hard to believe. Numerical models are so amazing and most folks really have no idea. The strides made within the last 50 years since meteorologists started modeling is spectacular. As for ECMWF, they have a very singular goal, and that is global modeling/medium-long range forecasting. The entire staff and the computational resources to run the models are dedicated fully to the ECMWF model and ensemble suite. NCEP, on the other hand, runs the GFS four times per day, the 21 member SREF 4 times per day, the NAM 4 times per day, high resolution variants of the WRF-NMM/ARW, and more. Computational resources are limited, and all money and funding is capped by the government. They get no outside funding. Don't worry about your understanding of models. Most meteorologists don't even have a clue how they work. I was lucky and fortunate enough to do research in numerical modeling and data assimilation as an undergrad, and it was amazingly humbling. The mathematics, numerical programming, statistics, etc. are mind-blowing, and it is an amazing feat of human ingenuity that they work as well as they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilly84 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Okay. I had read on here a while back where someone was speaking of the data being input by people. some models are and other aren't? But thanks for the explanation. Gotta say this, it seems like you may possibly be the most knowledgable met on this forum. A+ on all of your analysis you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowlover2 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 6z NAM QPF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 03Z SREF albeit probably not the model of choice this far out is decently juicy and tracks the low across Ohio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Okay. I had read on here a while back where someone was speaking of the data being input by people. some models are and other aren't? But thanks for the explanation. Gotta say this, it seems like you may possibly be the most knowledgable met on this forum. A+ on all of your analysis you do. No problem. And I wish I was the most knowledgeable, but there are a ton of amazing mets on here who have taught me a lot. I have learned a lot since I joined American. We all can learn, right? Final OT post, but some decent information in this thread if you want to learn more about modeling. Also check out the link I posed in the last post. http://www.americanw...emble-guidance/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilly84 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 No problem. And I wish I was the most knowledgeable, but there are a ton of amazing mets on here who have taught me a lot. I have learned a lot since I joined American. We all can learn, right? Final OT post, but some decent information in this thread if you want to learn more about modeling. Also check out the link I posed in the last post. http://www.americanw...emble-guidance/ No doubt there is a ton. I like nearly all that post on this side. Anyways ill check those links. Back to the weather.. 6z nam looks like its going to bring a good swath through OH.. qpf increases with every run of the models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 06Z GFS continues to very slowly correct itself in the upper level height field. More ridging with the northern stream through 36. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilly84 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Looks like its still gonna be weak on moisture the further east it comes... yep still moisture starved.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prinsburg_wx Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 06Z GFS continues to very slowly correct itself in the upper level height field. More ridging with the northern stream through 36. i'm riding the 06z rgem...has heavier qpf pushing into w mn at 48 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 12Z NAM trending stronger with the system through the Ohio valley, looks like its actually deepening it as it gets into Ohio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kab2791 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 12Z NAM trending stronger with the system through the Ohio valley, looks like its actually deepening it as it gets into Ohio. Yep, we're clearly in the deformation band past hr 84 judging by the sim radar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawkeye_wx Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Stronger 12z NAM actually lowers my snow to 3-4 inches, but definitely ups the widespread decent snow across the Ohio valley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWXwx Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I'm liking the NAM's track for myself. It looks good for all IL, IN, and OH posters. Now if we can get it to moisten up a little, we'd really be in business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KokomoWX Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I poo-pooed on this all week but am finally liking how things are looking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone77 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Looks like a long duration light snow event for northern Illinois. Probably a general 1-3 inches. Nothing too exciting but it will be nice to get a little cover back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 1. Great path...check 2. enough moisture...check 3. cold air in place.....CHECK 4. nighttime snow...CHECK(better accumulations) 5. Potential to over perform....CHECK looks good. GFS now stronger and has .25-.30 qpf for me..NAM had .30. looking like a 3-5 inch event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawkeye_wx Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 12z GFS remains weaker and drier from eastern Iowa through the Ohio Valley. This run is actually a step backward for eastern Iowa after a few runs of gradually increasing qpf. NAM gives me about 4 inches, GFS <2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I poo-pooed on this all week but am finally liking how things are looking. lol, nice mini 5-6" bullseye over LAF. Lock it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilly84 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Moneyman or storm around to cover the euro? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moneyman Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 What's up. I'll do a pbp in a bit for the euro, busy setting up this fantasy baseball league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilly84 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 through 48, the pv is a little stronger pushing hgts down along the ec alittle...the northern stream looks a little less amplified Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago Storm Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 12z ECMWF ends up fairly similar to the 0z run except for the fact it's a tad weaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoMo Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 12z ECMWF ends up fairly similar to the 0z run except for the fact it's a tad weaker. so only 0.17 here ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago Storm Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 so only 0.17 here ? It's drier in all areas. Raw output coming in now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilly84 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 12z ECMWF ends up fairly similar to the 0z run except for the fact it's a tad weaker. Northern branch is weaker. Step in the wrong direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moneyman Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Out to 96 so far. HR 24: LT precip in most of Neb. HR 30: LT-MOD precip in C/SW Neb. LT precip in rest of Neb. HR 36: LT-MOD precip in same areas as 30. LT precip in SE Neb. HR 42: LT-MOD precip in E. Neb. LT precip in IA/MN/S. MO. HR 48: LT-MOD precip in S. Neb, most of Kansas. LT precip in IA/MN/most of Kansas/Neb, and W. MO. HR 54: LT-MOD precip in E. Neb., E. Kansas, W. IA. LT precip in MN/IA//KA/W and NW MO. HR 60: LT-MOD precip in W. IA. Extreme NW Mizz. and extreme E. Neb. LT precip in MN/IA/W. WI/MO. HR 66: LT-MOD precip in W. MO. LT precip in MN/IA/WI/IL/E. NEB/E. KS HR 72: LT-MOD precip in NE/E MO (near STL due NE from there) LT precip in MN/IA/WI/IL/IN/TN/OH. HR 78: LT-MOD precip in E. IND/S and SW Ohio, N. Kentucky. LT precip in MN/IA/WI/ILL/MO/SW MI. HR 84: LT-MOD precip in most of Ohio. LT precip in E. MN/E. IA/WI/IL/IN/MI/Ken. HR 90: LT-MOD precip in NE Ohio. LT precip in E. WI/MI/E. IND/OH/Ken. HR 96: LT precip in OH. Big east coast storm. Sub 990 about 50 miles off shore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago Storm Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 so only 0.17 here ? It's drier in all areas. Raw output coming in now. 0.22" for JLN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moneyman Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Chi, how much here? Thanks in advanced. HR 102: LT precip in E. OH. NE/BOS areas getting pounded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.