Ji Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 LOL..i got a warning for giving euro qpf. I thought Philly people had thick skin..guess i was wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Everyone gets hung up on where the models initialized the surface low... when it still remains the upper levels that matter. This is partially true, but the model depiction of the amplification in the height field with the globals has been pretty true the last two runs--moreover, in this rapid feedback case of a coastal, being off even a few hpa early in such a compact low can make a huge difference. 06/12z NAM is a great example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldstar Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Now that many have committed suicide before the coastal low has even made it to Hatteras... Time to be reincarnated and track this unfolding storm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winterwarlock Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I don't understand this snowfall map from Mt. Holly. If this were to verify, the entire Warning area from Trenton on northward and west of 287 should be downgraded to advisories. I think that area easily sees 7-10" even without the heaviest banding staying just to the east. I only got 12 inches in the last storm so Im not expecting to receive close to 10 inches with a storm far less potent in setup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 they only say that when the models cuts back on their snow totals. Its amazing how unobjective people are. I have heard so much GFS bashing it boggles my mind. Not saying it is going to be right but the way the GFS has been talked about on this board, you would think it is a terrible model that only rarely gets things right Even HPC said to throw out the GFS and the NAM as they are too weak and too far east vs current observations. Were less than 12hrs from the start and its time to use actual observations in comparison with the models to determine how accurate they are. At the current time, mets have said they are not very accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foggy Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Flurries in Feasterville and NE Philly.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlas Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 As you get closer and closer to the event the models should get better and better, throwing them out is ridiculous. Theres an obvious east trend today, but things can still change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soadforecaster Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 new ruc moves the precip slightly west Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phlwx Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Miller B's rarely come together as the models depict. This was very much a better N & E of the city system. The mesomodels are probably overdoing things and the globals are probably a bit too weak with the intensification rate. Split the difference, hold to a 4-8 type forecast for Philly, 6-10/8-12 coastal Jersey north of AC and you'll be fine. The NWS forecast is arguably a very good...and safe call. Who cares if they're off by an inch or two.. It's clear the NAM has been awful with this storm on a number of levels. If you didn't see that with the difference between 6z and 12z I can't help you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quakertown needs snow Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 no problem thanks tom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echo Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Radar really blossoming southern PA E MD and E VA, looking better and better! What radar are you looking at? I don't see any blossoming at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder Road Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 As you get closer and closer to the event the models should get better and better, throwing them out is ridiculous. Theres an obvious east trend today, but things can still change I have to disagree with this. If you check the placement of the Low on the NAM for 6z Wed., it is nearly identical at 0z and 12z. 6z was obviously a hiccup. Meanwhile, the GFS has stayed the same (its consistency since Sunday is actually rather remarkable if you ask me) with flattening out the Low. I wouldn't worry about the GFS. It just won't win. Meanwhile, the RGEM has trended significantly farther west since this time yesterday. And people are citing the HRRR, but it only goes out 15 hours. Even now it's only out to 7z. Although I will admit I don't like it wrapping up faster than the other models. Yes, the EURO is farther east, and there's really no way to sugarcoat that. But that's the only model that's actually "trended" east IMO (if you consider one run a trend) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder Road Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Miller B's rarely come together as the models depict. This was very much a better N & E of the city system. The mesomodels are probably overdoing things and the globals are probably a bit too weak with the intensification rate. Split the difference, hold to a 4-8 type forecast for Philly, 6-10/8-12 coastal Jersey north of AC and you'll be fine. The NWS forecast is arguably a very good...and safe call. Who cares if they're off by an inch or two.. It's clear the NAM has been awful with this storm on a number of levels. If you didn't see that with the difference between 6z and 12z I can't help you... actually it seems like it performed the best wrt track and intensity. Its QPF should never be takenm verbatim, but it seems like most other models actually trended towards it. For a really tricky set-up, I think it performed rather well (if you ignore the 1" QPF runs) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 HPC said in their discussion to throw out the 12z GFS and NAM. Mt. Holly in their AFD that the low looks to be developing faster and further west than forecasted....and all of the high res have come in stronger and further west than last night. At some point someone here needs to acknowledge the fact that were all in great shape to see warning criteria snowfall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njrealtor84 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Where are the models/forecasters expecting the coastal low to be when the transfer occurs? What would need to happen for it to occur sooner than expected? I understand this probably wont happen given how close we are, but I am curious. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiburon Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 It has some areas forecasted to get less than 6" in the warned area and it has other areas barely making the threashold. I guess 6" would still be a warning criteria event but it certainly wouldn't feel like one. Warning criteria is specifically defined by CWA. Each county has a pre-defined amount of snow in 12 hrs and 24 hours that constitutes WSW criteria. Mt. Holly may get some egg on their face, I really appreciate all the work they do and I know they work hard, but just like WE get burnt on model hugging, so too will THEY. Ok, enough. You do realize that rainshadow (Tony) and OSU2 (Eric) along with Walt Drag of Mt. Holly post here regularly, right? Those guys are practically legends and they've forgotten more about forecasting winter weather events and weather in general than all of us will probably ever know. So let's start showing the pros the respect they damn well deserve and stop calling "bust" when a single flake hasn't fallen yet. Why don't we give these guys some time outs already? I don't think it's ever time to "throw the models out", and I've never understood why people say that frequently. Because as you see, the initialization frequently doesn't match up with real time obs, not to mention the fact that I'd much rather go with actual observation of weather (the way they used to do it) over a computer's depiction of what may happen, especially given the time frame. If model X says there's a 1012mb low 50 miles off Wilmington NC right now, and real time obs say the low is actually on the coastline and 1008 mb--that's a significant error, and willl affect future frames of modeling. Also, real time obs give information that models that update every 3, 6, or 12 hours simply can't. Watch the radar, look at obs, and wait as the event unfolds. they only say that when the models cuts back on their snow totals. Its amazing how unobjective people are. I have heard so much GFS bashing it boggles my mind. Not saying it is going to be right but the way the GFS has been talked about on this board, you would think it is a terrible model that only rarely gets things right Because it usually is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
easternsnowman Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 It's time to watch the radar and ignore the euro which is very bad within this timeframe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phlwx Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 actually it seems like it performed the best wrt track and intensity. Its QPF should never be takenm verbatim, but it seems like most other models actually trended towards it. For a really tricky set-up, I think it performed rather well (if you ignore the 1" QPF runs) The problem is most don't ignore them. With that said, it's been alternating between fast development and slow development on various runs. The track has been steady but the qpf has been very unreliable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Ok, enough. You do realize that rainshadow (Tony) and OSU2 (Eric) along with Walt Drag of Mt. Holly post here regularly, right? Eric isn't at Mt. Holly. He works for the FAA at PHL Airport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiburon Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Eric isn't at Mt. Holly. He works for the FAA at PHL Airport. Sorry, Ray. I just get bent at the bashing. I actually did know that. (sheepish) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goombatommy Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Sorry, Ray. I just get bent at the bashing. I actually did know that. (sheepish) Mistakes happen, but you make some very valid points. They are legends on this board. They take their time out to post their thoughts, forecasts, etc. They could easily clean off their hands and be done with this board. Show them the proper respect please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder Road Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 It's time to watch the radar and ignore the euro which is very bad within this timeframe. I wouldn't say "very bad" but I've heard it tends to dry up QPF in the home stretch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Because it usually is. Not sure if you are saying that the GFS is good or bad here.... but its #2 to the EC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmosk Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 It's time to watch the radar and ignore the euro which is very bad within this timeframe. Could someone explain to me how any model that's bad at a certain point in time can correct itself and become accurate at a time later on? I'd think that once it had gotten inaccurate it'd only stay inaccurate or grow worse, but this statement seems to imply that the Euro can go from bad modeling in the <1 day range to good modeling in the several-day range! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The problem is most don't ignore them. With that said, it's been alternating between fast development and slow development on various runs. The track has been steady but the qpf has been very unreliable. One must understand this is one of the most non-linear developing storms I have ever seen. ORH_wxman brought up 12/9/05 as similar system. This has such a huge dynamic tropoause and there will be folding--and the compact nature of this storm and non-linear development will result in erratic tracks both in the models--but in reality as well. Nobody knows where this will go exactly--and convection will be a key driver in development. Bad analogy here--but hurricanes do quite similar things with track. Weird wobbles, etc. Non-linear beasts like this are very challenging to track. NAM has actually been one of the better models and was the first to suggest this kind of rapid development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSky Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 My thinking hasn't changed for the upper bucks county area with this storm. Fearless forecast is 4-5" snow on top of snow on top of snow, and cold through the extended with more nickel and dime chances and maybe more than that down the road. Turning into a very good winter enthusiasts month and we deserve it because January's have dissapointed for a good number of years. Seriously, since January 1996 how many good januarys have there been? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldstar Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 "Mt. Holly may get some egg on their face, I really appreciate all the work they do and I know they work hard, but just like WE get burnt on model hugging, so too will THEY.ts already?" Ok, enough. You do realize that rainshadow (Tony) and OSU2 (Eric) along with Walt Drag of Mt. Holly post here regularly, right? Those guys are practically legends and they've forgotten more about forecasting winter weather events and weather in general than all of us will probably ever know. So let's start showing the pros the respect they damn well deserve and stop calling "bust" when a single flake hasn't fallen yet. I was referring to them busting low, not a bust for the storm. Seems like you want to target and call out a lot of people all at once, as you can see from the my above quote, I was not being rude at all, just making an observation on present conditions and those modeled, and my interpretation. I don't understand why there is such an inflammatory response from people like you, it is quite trollish you know. The surface low and intensity are clearly stronger, and further west, I certainly can't understand how you can call me out especially over an hour after the post, my comments were also in reply to the MM5 and other high rez mesoscale models, which have all indicated a stronger and closer to the coast evolution with this system. Kindly PM me if you have a personal problem with what I have stated. "Mt. Holly may get some egg on their face, I really appreciate all the work they do and I know they work hard, but just like WE get burnt on model hugging, so too will THEY.ts already?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 thanks tom. euro for that storm looks like an ice storm up your way...prob snow quickly to ice then rain for phl...shoots a primary to ky then develops a coastal right along the delaware beach and scoots it northeast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harbourton Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 If you look at the water vapor pic there is no moisture feed from the Gulf or Altantic. This storm must generate QPF from rapid deepening to pull moisture off Atlantic, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penndotguy Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 We just got our update. up to 3" likely,. the sad part is they have been spot on the past 2 yrs. Oh well we are ready for what ever falls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.