Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,589
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

NYC Jan 11-12 Miller B Thread


am19psu

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 995
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'm just hoping to get my 6" of snow, I'm not going to be greedy and ask for anymore, .50" of QPF will do. Even the gfs would allow me to get 6" at least. This should be a nice storm for most of us, nothing major, but a good hit nonetheless.

That's what we have to keep in mind! The DRIEST model is a 5-8" snowstorm. Years ago, 5-8" would have us dancing in the streets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest stormchaser

Looking at mm5 h5 and slp at hour 30 and hearing someone say that it looks like GFS? What?

No way.

Not what i said.... So before you jump to that reread what i said. I said it looks like the solution looks closer to the GFS then the NAM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys:

Where the banding sets up is absolutely key to these setups. I know for a fact that I was under higher (in some runs much higher) QPF than Earthlight was just before the 12/26 storm, but he ended up with 8-10" more snow than I did. Montauk had slightly less QPF than me, but they ended up with 5" vs me with 20". Dynamic systems are extremely reliant on the location and setups of heavy snow bands, which can set themselves up pretty much anywhere where models show the general area of heavy precip. I think it's more important to pay attention to that, whether the exact output is 0.70" vs 1.40", etc. Look at the 700mb lift charts, the location and extent of the 700 and 850 low cutoffs, and where the generally most optimal areas of lift/growth/frontogenesis are. That's where the best bands set up, and those areas will cash in. Model QPF, even on the NAM is smoothed out and doesn't pick up on very small scale features like this. What we're seeing now is that areas from at least the Garden State Parkway and perhaps even back west of I-287 east are "in the game" for experiencing these features and localized jackpot totals that many might not see otherwise just looking at the raw QPF number.

As for the GFS=:lmao:

Shorter range models become much useful at this stage and by tomorrow it's about time for nowcasting. Unless there's a massive lurch in one direction by a group of models, no one should be concerned about being "out of the game". 95% of us still are and will be tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys:

Where the banding sets up is absolutely key to these setups. I know for a fact that I was under higher (in some runs much higher) QPF than Earthlight was just before the 12/26 storm, but he ended up with 8-10" more snow than I did. Montauk had slightly less QPF than me, but they ended up with 5" vs me with 20". Dynamic systems are extremely reliant on the location and setups of heavy snow bands, which can set themselves up pretty much anywhere where models show the general area of heavy precip. I think it's more important to pay attention to that, whether the exact output is 0.70" vs 1.40", etc. Look at the 700mb lift charts, the location and extent of the 700 and 850 low cutoffs, and where the generally most optimal areas of lift/growth/frontogenesis are. That's where the best bands set up, and those areas will cash in. Model QPF, even on the NAM is smoothed out and doesn't pick up on very small scale features like this. What we're seeing now is that areas from at least the Garden State Parkway and perhaps even back west of I-287 east are "in the game" for experiencing these features and localized jackpot totals that many might not see otherwise just looking at the raw QPF number.

As for the GFS=:lmao:

Shorter range models become much useful at this stage and by tomorrow it's about time for nowcasting. Unless there's a massive lurch in one direction by a group of models, no one should be concerned about being "out of the game". 95% of us still are and will be tomorrow.

Did you notice that the GFS, once we got inside 48 hours, continuously got drier for the 12/26 storm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly.

MM5 is no where near GFS.

That's not such a bad thing if it was like the gfs or close to it though. It's not like the gfs would be a big bust especially for the city on east. If the gfs only showed 1-3", then yeah it'd be bad but .50 QPF sounds pretty good to me. We might also get some higher ratios like 1:11 or 1:12 which would help us out even more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...