Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

January 17-19th Plains/MW/Lakes Storm Potential


A-L-E-K

Recommended Posts

Looks crappy. We need a amplified storm system to develop in TX/OK/AR and neg tilt and track up through Indy to CLE and will be good for IA/WI/IL/MI folks.

I wouldn't bet on that. The CMC performs the worst amongst the global models with phasing waves--and that is why it is so amplified. Even then, the farthest south solution are positive/neutral tilt--so it would not be a bombing low but more frontal/advection driven precip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I wouldn't bet on that. The CMC performs the worst amongst the global models with phasing waves--and that is why it is so amplified. Even then, the farthest south solution are positive/neutral tilt--so it would not be a bombing low but more frontal/advection driven precip.

Yeah it was indicating that potential but it was more concentrated on frontal/advection driven precip which is why I see it was crap on the cold-sector.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, you're right.. but it just seems like that, we have to wait until hour 42 to know what will occur. Last storm is an example.

This I will agree with. Certain patterns are going to be difficult for the guidance to handle. Overall though, this happens every winter, but the models of course are the same if not a slight improvement (the general trend has been improvement for the last 50 years).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lack of phasing, also that would be all rain for the n/e

Yeah exactly, CMC doesn't phase at the 66-72 hr period and the first wave dives S towards the GOM. For now, I give the CMC a very low probability of verifying since it performs poorly with these phase events. Not really sure why, but it sucks at phasing/breakdown of waves--and typically when the CMC looks like the GFS did 2-3 runs ago after the GFS has made changes and the GFS looks similar to the ECMWF, the CMC is wrong. Not a rule, but it often works out that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah exactly, CMC doesn't phase at the 66-72 hr period and the first wave dives S towards the GOM. For now, I give the CMC a very low probability of verifying since it performs poorly with these phase events. Not really sure why, but it sucks at phasing/breakdown of waves--and typically when the CMC looks like the GFS did 2-3 runs ago after the GFS has made changes and the GFS looks similar to the ECMWF, the CMC is wrong. Not a rule, but it often works out that way.

I agree. Honestly I will not put to much stock into any solution atm. ..I think our little Clipper has potential tho.. Looks decent.weight_lift.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nam and Gfs have two different solutions.. nam is showing the solution that gfs showed at the 18z and 12z runs at hour 84..

The NAM has its outer boundary conditions initialized by the previous run GFS since the NAM runs so early. In other words, the 0Z NAM is initialized by the 18Z GFS at its boundaries. In this flow the NAM is pretty worthless this far out for that reason.

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...