Desnowlover Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Mt Holly made a good point in their AFD about surface lows not liking to track over snow covered land (because of poor WAA ahead - at least I assume that's their reasoning). That would seem to agree with your anecdote. Thank you for explaining the surface low i read that earlier this evening and wanted to know why! Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkrangers Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 NAM is coming in more amped through 54. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 through 60hrs on the nam the southeast low is weaker and about 50 miles further east. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslotted Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 NAM is coming in more amped through 54. Looks juicer at 54 than 12 or 18z as well, but east... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 It is very interesting. Even during the blizzard, way out on the Forks, there was little to no mixing, and it was sleet, rather than rain, that mixed in. And the low was right on top of them! The low I think was just so strong it was pulling the thermal gradient in very tight to the center, if that was a 996mb low its likely they'd have seen rain with parts of NYC seeing sleet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 this should be better for coastal areas as i see it now. The primary is weaker, the coastal low is weaker and further east at 63 hrs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 this should be better for coastal areas as i see it now. The primary is weaker, the coastal low is weaker and further east at 63 hrs I am looking on the NCEP at hr 60 and it looks disorganized, not what i like to see 3 days before the storm I was personally hoping for a cosatal hugger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslotted Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I am looking on the NCEP at hr 60 and it looks disorganized, not what i like to see 3 days before the storm I was personally hoping for a cosatal hugger Don't look at 66 then. I am not going to try and predict the remainder of the run, but it looks pretty ugly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grothar Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 the snow growth is very blah for i 95 south...you get up towards abe the omega in the snow growth region is nuts. I agree with you and earthlight. With the extreme Omega growth shown near ABE, with banding and frontogenic forcing, thundersnow with snow rates of 2-3 inches per hour is really possible. How does this compare to the Feb 1983 storm event ? As I said earlier- a winter storm warning for Memphis, Tn means heavy snow for us. This has been happening since the 1980's. The Memphis low rides the lower appalachian mts and then redevelopments off the mid atlantic coast. I have seen this time after time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atownwxwatcher Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 From the main forum from pro met am19psu Yeah, the northern stream amplification is clearly stronger on this run. The surface low off the SC coast is way weaker than the 18z GFS at 66, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I am looking on the NCEP at hr 60 and it looks disorganized, not what i like to see 3 days before the storm I was personally hoping for a cosatal hugger yea its also a lot slower it looks like. Im at hr 72 and the coastal is still at hse.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wannabehippie Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I like that. I want to make sure that coastal low is far enough out that it does not cause any mixing issues along the coast. this should be better for coastal areas as i see it now. The primary is weaker, the coastal low is weaker and further east at 63 hrs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 yea its also a lot slower it looks like. Im at hr 72 and the coastal is still at hse.... bring us some good news. is it over the banks or east of prior runs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwinter23 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 This is ugly at hr 75 with a primary over lake erie and a weak secondary hugging the coast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 It's ridiculously slow...the NAM has a terrible slow bias in this range, too. Dynamics look good, though..so it should catch up in a few frames. That primary is strong though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
am19psu Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 This is ugly at hr 75 with a primary over lake erie and a weak secondary hugging the coast I thought that was going to happen, but I haven't seen it at NCEP yet. The southern stream is so unimportant to this storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I like that. I want to make sure that coastal low is far enough out that it does not cause any mixing issues along the coast. yea but the problem is now, the primary is stronger than the coastal, meaning you get more southerly winds until the coastal takes over. The coastal on this run is developing way to slow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Analog96 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 The low I think was just so strong it was pulling the thermal gradient in very tight to the center, if that was a 996mb low its likely they'd have seen rain with parts of NYC seeing sleet. Very true! The stronger the low is, the closer you can be to the center and not worry too much about rain (and even if it does rain, it would be remembered as a mainly snow/frozen storm.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 It's ridiculously slow...the NAM has a terrible slow bias in this range, too. Dynamics look good, though..so it should catch up in a few frames. That primary is strong though. Its showing all of its usual biases, amping things up and overdoing the primary and as you mention being too slow...the NAM is often too slow even in its strong range...honestly given the GFS performance this year in the range we're currently in I'd still be more worried about a strung out storm missing then something too far inland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Like I thought it catches up at 81 hours and delivers the goods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwinter23 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Definitely a slow bias with the NAM, however, it is a slower evolution here because it is closed off at 500mb almost the whole way, related to the stronger primary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atownwxwatcher Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 78 NAM appears to be a coastal hugger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 still a good hit at hr 81 just delayed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radders Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Finally gets its act together at 81hrs..0 850s hugging the coast and moderate precipitation across the entire area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 through 81, everyone is .25-.5 so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopOfNJ Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Nice bombing coastal @ 84. Definately close to the coast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 84 hours is a huge hit for the NYC area...NE NJ..SW CT. Dynamics just explode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White_Mtn_Wx Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Bad trend moving toward the seasonal...late development means a major hit for NE and not so much for the MA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zir0b Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 NAM looks like a glorified southwest flow event. Do not want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wannabehippie Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 That is NG in my book.. I hate mixing situations. I would prefer either an all rain situation or all snow. The mixing situation makes driving impossible, and digging out extremely hard. With all snow it isn't as bad. yea but the problem is now, the primary is stronger than the coastal, meaning you get more southerly winds until the coastal takes over. The coastal on this run is developing way to slow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.