mitchnick Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I thought we were in the .75-1.00 I checked the map and i see we are, you cannot always be right Mitch . I was just talking snow portion http://raleighwx.americanwx.com/models/gfsensemble/00zgfsensemblep24060.gif GFS has rain for us beforehand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 You are correct Damn i wrote that first can't i be correct for once . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 U all see this http://cheget.msrc.sunysb.edu/mm5rt_data/2011012500/images_d1/500vor.42.0000.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frostbite_falls Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I just multiply mm x .4 to get inches, even though its actually .39**** Ummm....1 millimeter = 0.039 370 078 74 inch check http://www.onlineconversion.com/length_common.htm if you have doubts...15 mm = .59 inches; x .4 would be 6 inches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I was just talking snow portion http://raleighwx.americanwx.com/models/gfsensemble/00zgfsensemblep24060.gif GFS has rain for us beforehand Wow my bad it did not even occur to me to check that, i guess you are always right . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozz Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I somehow doubt that we get the 6:1 ratios that BI mentioned earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Ummm....1 millimeter = 0.039 370 078 74 inch check http://www.onlinecon...ngth_common.htm if you have doubts...15 mm = .59 inches; x .4 would be 6 inches I know I have to move the decimal spot I'm talking quick math in the old bean 12mm x .4 = .48" roughly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 U all see this http://cheget.msrc.s...vor.42.0000.gif That looks pretty nice... but it reopens at 48 in C NC http://cheget.msrc.s...vor.48.0000.gif Wait... is it actually a really tiny closed h5? I can't tell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 btw i called this storm on jan 5 so im going to have my lawyer contact psuhoffman next week looks like a growing chance but since everyone's going there i'll go with the most likely date in nina yrs 1/28 - 2.2" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Great post from Earthlight, figured i would post it here in case no one saw it. I'll tell you what. I initially doubted this storm tremendously given the height pattern and upper air blocking breakdown, but it's becoming clear that this could very well mean business if tonight's model guidance even has a semblance of a clue. I know there were plenty of people calling last weeks storm "mundane" (which it did end up being for most people), but this is the exact opposite of that should it come to fruition. The upper level shortwave is absolutely loaded with tons of vorticity--there's a very favorable baroclinic zone which the surface low's have been developing on all year. It's no coincidence the banding has liked to develop in the same areas. With the cyclone rapidly maturing and the favorable positions of the closed H7/H8/H925 lows which we have seen modeled (with a few bumps and jogs west and east here and there), there is some good support developing for more heavy deformation banding to develop underneath the Cold Conveyor Belt. I would actually favor two areas of deformation that could legitimately make this a big snowstorm. One would be as the surface low initially develops off the coast--probably over West Virgina and in the immediate burbs of DC/BWI. Another should develop as the surface low undergoes rapid intensification along the aforementioned baroclinic zone. This is the big classic "comma-head" development the guidance is trying to key in on this evening. We can see it clearly on the NAM banding graphics which show the 800-600mb frontogenesis. This is a very useful tool for trying to pinpoint where the model guidance is actually trying to put the banding..not where the QPF shows it's heaviest. Regardless the NAM...in agreement with most other models (RGEM/MM5/etc) has the banding developing first near DC (click here for the DC banding image)...and then the big band developing overhead. That image is below. Trying to pinpoint the area this band will sit over is nearly impossible at this range...but it's safe to say that areas like Western LI...Central/Northern NJ..SE NY...SW CT and especially into Southern New England should be on high alert this point...for the potential for another one of those "classic" frontogenically forced bands which have the potential to dump prolific snow amounts in short periods of time. 51 hr banding over PHL (54 hrs is below) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I somehow doubt that we get the 6:1 ratios that BI mentioned earlier. When he mentioned that the storm looked much warmer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 That looks pretty nice... but it reopens at 48 in C NC http://cheget.msrc.s...vor.48.0000.gif actually, if you look at the top of the little box that has L5422, it looks like there's a part of a circle, which is the closed center of a small vort, but I may be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I somehow doubt that we get the 6:1 ratios that BI mentioned earlier. I said 6-1 early on wrt the 18Z guidance and if the upper low took the farther SE track--and that I would like a farther NW track of the upper low. You weenies never remember the details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frostbite_falls Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I know I have to move the decimal spot I'm talking quick math in the old bean 12mm x .4 = .48" roughly I figured--just keeping you honest Funny that I busted your chops at the same time Ravensrule called you infallible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmlwx Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 actually, if you look at the top of the little box that has L5422, it looks like there's a part of a circle, which is the closed center of a small vort, but I may be wrong I think you're right on that one. I can't imagine what else that would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I said 6-1 early on wrt the 18Z guidance and if the upper low took the farther SE track--and that I would like a farther NW track of the upper low. You weenies never remember the details. Most of us do, he is just a MAJOR weenie ignore him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I said 6-1 early on wrt the 18Z guidance and if the upper low took the farther SE track--and that I would like a farther NW track of the upper low. You weenies never remember the details. to be fair there isnt much reason to delve deep into ratios over a day out with guidance still shifting colder (at least for now). 6:1 is kind of absurd as well.. maybe to start but not an avg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I figured--just keeping you honest Funny that I busted your chops at the same time Ravensrule called you infallible... trust me, I fook up all the time ask my wife and kids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 That looks pretty nice... but it reopens at 48 in C NC http://cheget.msrc.s...vor.48.0000.gif Wait... is it actually a really tiny closed h5? I can't tell Be careful with looking at contours since different maps may use different plotting. For instance--one map may use different contour intervals or values. Also--if the upper low to the north is even a tad farther S--that will "open" the closed contour and make it seem weaker when in reality it is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 998 Low sitting 25-30 miles east of my favorite summer spot...Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel man I love crossing that bridge, even for $12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Here's what Earthlight was talking about for us at 48 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 to be fair there isnt much reason to delve deep into ratios over a day out with guidance still shifting colder (at least for now). 6:1 is kind of absurd as well.. maybe to start but not an avg. 6-1 is not absurd at all depending on the thermal profile and a number of other factors. Yes to start for DC--and it could very well remain that to areas just SE on the dividing line of significantly higher ratios. Unfortunately a huge number of factors come into play regarding snow ratios since it is accumulated snow/liquid water. One could have extremely high ratios aloft but then a shallow melting layer which compacts wet snow into a slush giving relatively low snow ratios, for instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 FWIW... DT will have his final call out 730 AM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcwx Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I would be interested to see some first(or second) guess maps from the mets(or others) in here if anyone feels up to it. Probably wait until 12z tomorrow though I would assume. Either way its looking better and better to finally get the snowless monkey off our backs. However, we have seen crazier things this winter so I am not all in yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 oh boy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 oh boy... When you start posting the MM5 i know you are desperate for snow . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitchnick Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 When you start posting the MM5 i know you are desperate for snow . I don't know how much better it could get for us at this stage of the game that is pretty, freakin' incredible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternUSWX Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Jesus.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 btw i called this storm on jan 5 so im going to have my lawyer contact psuhoffman you were a day off, no way that counts lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I don't know how much better it could get for us at this stage of the game that is pretty, freakin' incredible That image is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.