earthlight Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Well, that was what I was hoping to see when I woke up. That being said, we have to be very careful. The NAM has done this before and it hooks everybody in, raises our hopes, etc. There is some support here for this solution, though, given it's idea of slightly better moisture and weaker primary low and earlier forming coastal We need to see some global support, or at least general idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phlwx Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Hello people, but the southern disturbance has nothing to do with the storm Tuesday night- Wed. The vort gets sheered out. Stop talking, as if the increasing moisture will affect the Tuesday storm. The southern disturbance is a big player in this storm. If it doesn't sheer out completely you have a better chance of a snowstorm in NYC as it prevents the ULL from dragging mid level warmth up the coast as the coastal will intensify more quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joey Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 The southern disturbance has everything to do with it. If it doesn't sheer out completely you have a better chance of a snowstorm in NYC as it prevents the ULL from dragging mid level warmth up the coast. Huh? The NAM shears this thing out, and we still have a nice snow storm. So, not really following. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder Road Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 If you re -read my posts - I said keep all options open and keep it on the table - didn't say it was going to verify............Heck Upton is even saying 1 " qpf is possible sorry I wasn't calling you out specifically. certainly it's a potential option but the people screaming that they "knew" this would end up being another HECS for NYC are out of their minds! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chubbs Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 RGEM at 24 also trending stronger with southern stream. Similar to NAM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phlwx Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Huh? The NAM shears this thing out, and we still have a nice snow storm. So, not really following. It doesn't shear completely apart and thus the low maintains a distinct identity through the Southeast and off the coast. You don't want it to fall apart otherwise it will not pull in the upper level vort from the west, allowing the ohio valley system to dominate. The 0z NAM sheared it more than the 12z...which is why the OV system was more dominant and the coastal fired up far too late. The Gulf low is absolutely critical and you need it to hold together a reasonable amount in order to help in the development of a NYC snowstorm. The low, by holding together, is stronger and helps to entrench somewhat colder air along the coastal plain and prevents the OV system from pulling milder air up the coast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joey Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 It doesn't shear completely apart and thus the low maintains a distinct identity through the Southeast and off the coast. You don't want it to fall apart otherwise it will not pull in the upper level vort from the west, allowing the ohio valley system to dominate. ok, can you explain this in detail. Not completely following. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tornadojay Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 NAM BUFKIT Numbers from White Plains, NY..... 25 inches... not that I believe that will happen.. just fyi.... 110112/0400Z 64 07010KT 30.6F SNOW 9:1| 0.4|| 0.4 0.047|| 0.05 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/0500Z 65 06010KT 31.1F SNOW 13:1| 0.5|| 1.0 0.039|| 0.09 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/0600Z 66 04011KT 31.5F SNOW 15:1| 1.5|| 2.4 0.098|| 0.19 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 ----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+--- 110112/0700Z 67 03013KT 31.1F SNOW 14:1| 2.6|| 5.1 0.181|| 0.37 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/0800Z 68 02015KT 30.2F SNOW 16:1| 2.0|| 7.1 0.126|| 0.49 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/0900Z 69 01016KT 29.8F SNOW 18:1| 3.4||10.4 0.189|| 0.68 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/1000Z 70 36017KT 29.7F SNOW 22:1| 4.1||14.5 0.189|| 0.87 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/1100Z 71 34019KT 29.7F SNOW 27:1| 3.3||17.8 0.122|| 0.99 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/1200Z 72 33020KT 29.8F SNOW 28:1| 2.4||20.2 0.087|| 1.08 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date/hour FHr Wind SfcT Ptype SRat|Snow||TotSN QPF ||TotQPF Sleet||TotPL FZRA||TotZR S%| I%| L% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 110112/1300Z 73 33019KT 29.8F SNOW 29:1| 2.4||22.6 0.083|| 1.16 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/1400Z 74 32018KT 29.3F SNOW 22:1| 1.1||23.8 0.051|| 1.21 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/1500Z 75 31017KT 29.3F SNOW 18:1| 0.6||24.3 0.031|| 1.24 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/1600Z 76 31017KT 30.0F SNOW 16:1| 0.3||24.6 0.020|| 1.26 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/1700Z 77 31016KT 30.7F SNOW 15:1| 0.2||24.9 0.016|| 1.28 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/1800Z 78 30015KT 30.7F SNOW 13:1| 0.2||25.0 0.012|| 1.29 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 ----------------------------------------------+----++-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+--- 110112/1900Z 79 30015KT 30.9F SNOW 12:1| 0.1||25.2 0.012|| 1.30 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/2000Z 80 30014KT 31.1F SNOW 12:1| 0.1||25.3 0.008|| 1.31 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/2100Z 81 30014KT 31.1F SNOW 13:1| 0.1||25.4 0.008|| 1.32 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/2200Z 82 30014KT 31.1F SNOW 17:1| 0.1||25.5 0.008|| 1.33 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110112/2300Z 83 30014KT 31.3F SNOW 19:1| 0.1||25.7 0.008|| 1.33 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 110113/0000Z 84 31014KT 31.1F SNOW 20:1| 0.1||25.7 0.004|| 1.34 0.00|| 0.00 0.00|| 0.00 100| 0| 0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 ...maybe some folks are skeptical about having 2 historical storms in one winter so close together BUT extremes have been common for the last couple of years - in all seasons in the U.S including the mid- atlantic - northeast That is correct. Closely-bunched KU snowstorms (less than 20 days apart): 1/18-21/1961 and 2/2-5/1961 2/8-10/1969 and 2/22-28/1969 1/19-21/1978 and 2/5-7/1978 1/21-23/1987 and 1/25-26/1987 2/4-7/2010 and 2/9-11/2010 2/9-11/2010 and 2/25-27/2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blizzardo Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 sorry I wasn't calling you out specifically. certainly it's a potential option but the people screaming that they "knew" this would end up being another HECS for NYC are out of their minds! I didn't see anyone saying that they "knew" this is going to be a HECS for NYC. I mentioned that it is a possibility and it surely is on the table at this point... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 nam buffkit is 17.5 for phl, on 1.01 qpf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chubbs Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 That is correct. Closely-bunched KU snowstorms (less than 20 days apart): 1/18-21/1961 and 2/2-5/1961 2/8-10/1969 and 2/22-28/1969 1/19-21/1978 and 2/5-7/1978 1/21-23/1987 and 1/25-26/1987 2/4-7/2010 and 2/9-11/2010 2/9-11/2010 and 2/25-27/2010 Four last year. This would be six in a winter in a half! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phlwx Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 nam buffkit is 17.5 for phl, on 1.01 qpf Gotta love BUFKIT...always uberaggressive with ratios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossi Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 nam buffkit is 17.5 for phl, on 1.01 qpf Tombo - what is BLM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Tombo - what is BLM? they dont have blm but they do have sandy hook which mixes with some rain, 15.8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 NAM has thundersnow for JFK and Islip at around 9z Weds with massive 12+ amounts. However, the twin forks get cooked-Montauk is mostly rain on the east wind as the low parks almost directly overhead. The NAM is good for central LI on west for very heavy snow amounts, but the changeover worry is still there for S NJ and eastern LI. There would be a drastic change in conditions as you go east of the William Floyd Pkwy if the NAM is right-from raging blizzard to driving rain event. Second # from the right is the snow amount in the 3 hour period preceding it. Last # is visibility. JFK 63 01/12 03Z 32 31 78 12 0.02 0.00 535 547 -4.5 -25.9 1015 100 -SN 000OVC202 0.3 2.5 66 01/12 06Z 32 32 40 13 0.26 0.00 536 543 -4.7 -24.2 1009 100 SN 000OVC213 2.8 0.2 69 01/12 09Z 32 31 17 22 0.50 0.04 534 535 -5.6 -24.0 1001 100 TSSN 000OVC221 4.9 0.3 72 01/12 12Z 31 29 326 26 0.42 0.00 527 526 -7.5 -25.9 998 100 SN 000OVC162 4.2 0.4 75 01/12 15Z 31 29 288 21 0.13 0.00 525 525 -7.2 -27.2 1000 100 -SN 000OVC141 1.3 0.7 78 01/12 18Z 32 30 283 20 0.05 0.00 524 524 -8.3 -28.3 999 100 -SN 000OVC148 0.5 1.4 81 01/12 21Z 32 30 288 18 0.01 0.00 524 525 -8.1 -29.1 1000 100 -SN 000OVC174 0.1 5.2 Islip 66 01/12 06Z 32 32 62 15 0.15 0.00 538 545 -2.8 -23.3 1008 100 SN 000OVC223 1.6 0.3 69 01/12 09Z 32 31 34 19 0.67 0.04 536 537 -5.1 -23.1 1001 100 TSSN 000OVC240 6.8 0.3 72 01/12 12Z 32 31 3 22 0.51 0.00 532 527 -6.1 -25.0 994 100 SN 000OVC126 5.1 0.3 75 01/12 15Z 30 29 298 23 0.37 0.00 527 524 -6.6 -27.3 996 100 SN 000OVC168 3.7 0.5 78 01/12 18Z 30 28 293 19 0.08 0.00 525 523 -7.5 -28.6 997 100 -SN 000OVC079 0.8 1.2 81 01/12 21Z 30 28 296 17 0.04 0.00 525 524 -8.4 -28.9 999 100 -SN 000OVC140 0.4 1.4 84 01/13 00Z 31 29 304 16 0.04 0.00 525 527 -7.8 -29.2 1002 100 -SN 000OVC183 0.4 1.7 Montauk 66 01/12 06Z 35 33 86 20 0.03 0.00 536 545 -3.2 -24.1 1011 99 -SN 001OVC243 0.2 12.0 69 01/12 09Z 35 34 70 32 0.27 0.00 541 541 0.3 -20.8 1000 100 +RA 000OVC261 0.2 0.3 72 01/12 12Z 36 35 75 36 0.44 0.00 534 529 -1.4 -24.1 993 100 RA 001OVC116 1.0 1.7 75 01/12 15Z 38 37 46 13 0.12 0.00 533 523 -2.3 -25.7 987 96 -RA 004BKN048 0.1 10.3 78 01/12 18Z 33 32 285 25 0.08 0.00 528 521 -5.2 -27.2 991 96 -SN 002BKN095 0.8 4.9 81 01/12 21Z 32 30 288 25 0.07 0.00 526 521 -6.6 -28.5 994 100 -SN 001OVC100 0.8 0.6 84 01/13 00Z 30 28 300 24 0.05 0.00 525 524 -7.2 -29.6 998 100 -SN 000OVC128 0.5 1.8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet-Phase Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I thought the models keyed in on the GOM feed ok, its the timing and location of the transfer and coastal development thats our key PHL-NYC. But it is juicy Yep, you can see the subtropical flow pushing northward toward the GOM Low. To get higher QPFs, you'd want to see this continue to get fed into it. This was very prevalent in the 1996 and PDII (Miller As) storms and what lead to the eventual adjusted snowfall totals as the models adjusted to it. Should be interesting to see the other global models at 12Z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saturn510 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Tombo - what is BLM? Airport code for Monmouth /Allaire airport in monmouth county NJ ... Near Belmar and Howell area Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Airport code for Monmouth /Allaire airport in monmouth county NJ ... Near Belmar and Howell area I lol'ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Disappointed at the lack of a mother of god post for the NAM. Somebody usually covers me if I can't do it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edge Weather Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 John, probably just that we are afraid to trust the NAM. Let's hope the GFS looks good too. Disappointed at the lack of a mother of god post for the NAM. Somebody usually covers me if I can't do it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phlwx Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Tiny differences on the GFS so far through 42 at the surface. A touch colder at 850 in the OV but other than that, pretty similar so far. Edit: first signs of a low pop at hour 45...no surface isobar low on the 0z through 57. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossi Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Tiny differences on the GFS so far through 42 at the surface. A touch colder at 850 in the OV but other than that, pretty similar so far. Edit: first signs of a low pop at hour 45...no surface isobar low on the 0z through 57. AS comapred to the NAM or 6z GFS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voyager Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 nam buffkit is 17.5 for phl, on 1.01 qpf ABE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phlwx Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 AS comapred to the NAM or 6z GFS? compared to 0z GFS. I don't compare 12 to 6 because the 12/0's have "fresher" upper info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 ABE? 13.7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wxoutlooksblog Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Tiny differences on the GFS so far through 42 at the surface. A touch colder at 850 in the OV but other than that, pretty similar so far. Edit: first signs of a low pop at hour 45...no surface isobar low on the 0z through 57. When a storm is drawing moisture out of the Gulf and then off the Atlantic for the length of time this storm does the qpf amounts that the models have been cranking out up until now were likely to be underdone. WX/PT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 the gfs looks exactly the same as 6z through 51, so who knows if the nam is right or not. It does look like the northern stream may be a little quicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jefflaw77 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 When a storm is drawing moisture out of the Gulf and then off the Atlantic for the length of time this storm does the qpf amounts that the models have been cranking out up until now were likely to be underdone. WX/PT It's always great when one of the best come out and give their feed back.... I'll never forget WX/PT's posts back just days before the blizzard of 96 on the AOL weather boards... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 the gfs looks exactly the same as 6z through 51, so who knows if the nam is right or not. It does look like the northern stream may be a little quicker. yeah out to 57 hrs i dont see how phl gets anywhere close to 17n inches of snow like the nam has....thats not saying no snow...but the gfs does not look like the nam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.