Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

January 11-12 Snowstorm Disco -II


Baroclinic Zone

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Yeah Fairfield has had the band most of the time. I think just north in Easton or Trumbull all the way to Danbury, that's the spot to be. I don't know about 30" but it'll be close.

Probably going to get a final near 20 here in Fairfield. Newtown/Ridgefield has a shot of at least 26-28

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You gotta love the NAM. No one should speak ill of it for the rest of the winter. I sure won't :wub:

Still pouring out snow here at least 1" per hour

The problem is/was ...and this goes for a lot of Mets as well, they are on autopilot with their assumptions about the models when the reality is, one needs to pick and choose what situations what tool is going to be better for. You don't send a plumber to a seamstress convention -

4 days ago I hammered out all the reasons why the NAM would be superior for this type of meso-beta scaled scenario, leveraging in not just model type but in situ environmental conditions too. Then, ensuing days and threads went by - I didn't sense that folks either understood what I was talking about, or ignored perhaps. I don't know. But no one has any excuse as far as I am concerned because it was written on the wall back then and is verifying rather nicely.

I do, however, think that while the NAM will have embarrassed the GFS's SE low track (up until the last minute, too) the QPF on the NAM may bust a little high. That is okay, because the other parameters are nailed so tightly. We'll have to see how that goes in the end.

Ayer, snow now up to the top of the tire wells of my car. Bluish tint to the air in snow mist and snow. 1/3 mil vis. 27F. S/S+

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is/was ...and this goes for a lot of Mets as well, they are on autopilot with their assumptions about the models when the reality is, one needs to pick and choose what situations what tool is going to be better for. You don't send a plumber to a seamstress convention -

4 days ago I hammered out all the reasons why the NAM would be superior for this type of meso-beta scaled scenario, leveraging in not just model type but in situ environmental conditions too. Then, ensuing days and threads went by - I didn't sense that folks either understood what I was talking about, or ignored perhaps. I don't know. But no one has any excuse as far as I am concerned because it was written on the wall back then and is verifying rather nicely.

I do, however, think that while the NAM will have embarrassed the GFS's SE low track (up until the last minute, too) the QPF on the NAM may bust a little high. That is okay, because the other parameters are nailed so tightly. We'll have to see how that goes in the end.

Ayer, snow now up to the top of the tire wells of my car. Bluish tint to the air in snow mist and snow. 1/3 mil vis. 27F. S/S+

Do you remember your post a few days ago that said this storm wasn't coming due to the fast flow?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is/was ...and this goes for a lot of Mets as well, they are on autopilot with their assumptions about the models when the reality is, one needs to pick and choose what situations what tool is going to be better for. You don't send a plumber to a seamstress convention -

4 days ago I hammered out all the reasons why the NAM would be superior for this type of meso-beta scaled scenario, leveraging in not just model type but in situ environmental conditions too. Then, ensuing days and threads went by - I didn't sense that folks either understood what I was talking about, or ignored perhaps. I don't know. But no one has any excuse as far as I am concerned because it was written on the wall back then and is verifying rather nicely.

I do, however, think that while the NAM will have embarrassed the GFS's SE low track (up until the last minute, too) the QPF on the NAM may bust a little high. That is okay, because the other parameters are nailed so tightly. We'll have to see how that goes in the end.

Ayer, snow now up to the top of the tire wells of my car. Bluish tint to the air in snow mist and snow. 1/3 mil vis. 27F. S/S+

:weenie:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is/was ...and this goes for a lot of Mets as well, they are on autopilot with their assumptions about the models when the reality is, one needs to pick and choose what situations what tool is going to be better for. You don't send a plumber to a seamstress convention -

4 days ago I hammered out all the reasons why the NAM would be superior for this type of meso-beta scaled scenario, leveraging in not just model type but in situ environmental conditions too. Then, ensuing days and threads went by - I didn't sense that folks either understood what I was talking about, or ignored perhaps. I don't know. But no one has any excuse as far as I am concerned because it was written on the wall back then and is verifying rather nicely.

I do, however, think that while the NAM will have embarrassed the GFS's SE low track (up until the last minute, too) the QPF on the NAM may bust a little high. That is okay, because the other parameters are nailed so tightly. We'll have to see how that goes in the end.

Ayer, snow now up to the top of the tire wells of my car. Bluish tint to the air in snow mist and snow. 1/3 mil vis. 27F. S/S+

The man of the hour! Congrats to you. You were less ignored than you think. Great work. The NAM may bust on some of the QPF runs but boy, a lot of CT is going to verify it. We're getting crushed.

18", near 30" on the ground now

That's about what I expected for the hills. Insane.

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...