baroclinic_instability Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I like the fact that while there are divergent solutions from the op models, the ensemble means of the EC, GGEM, and GFS are aactually fairly similar. Supports my comments above about a blend being a pretty good idea for now, as well as a pretty good solution for this area. Yeah I agree--the means are the better way to go here. From that one can gleam enough info from the operationals to determine what is likely to occur given the height field configuration of the ensemble mean (take out the smoothing)--at least enough to make a general forecast since the global ops all show widely varying solutions that cover all the bases of possibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiscaster Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I like the fact that an average of all guidance (GEFS, GFS, EC ens, EC, GGEM, GGEM ens) actually gives us a pretty good solution. Usually when all the major guidance is clustered around each other like this, a compromise solution ends up closer to reality. In this case a compromise works just fine. Even the warmer runs of the op GGEM and EC are not far from a major snowstorm. Taking a blend of the guidance at this time gives us a pretty good chance here. In past storms this was not true, we needed an outlier to win, or one extreme of the envelope of permutations. This time a blend of all guidance is a good result here. Hmmm, not saying I disagree that an average of all solutions would be decent here, but I feel that similar statements were uttered by others on at least a couple of the past storms! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Yeah I agree--the means are the better way to go here. From that one can gleam enough info from the operationals to determine what is likely to occur given the height field configuration of the ensemble mean (take out the smoothing)--at least enough to make a general forecast since the global ops all show widely varying solutions that cover all the bases. exactly, plus any forecast for this system at this point would and should be very general. "There is the threat of a storm along the coast, could be a significant precipitation maker, too early to tell the specifics of how much or what type" kind of stuff. Its funny that as much as some like to rant about how horrible the models are and how forecasting is not improving, it was not too long ago in the grand scheme of things that this storm would only now be first appearing on the last day of the old "5 day business planner" we used to wait for on the 20's at the old TWC. Just think, how reliable the 5th day was considered back then. Now, some are starting to expect specifics to be nailed down from a system 100 hours away still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MD Snow Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 so right now we basically have to hope someone on a boat in the north pacific doesnt fart the wrong way and mess everything up. exactly! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Hmmm, not saying I disagree that an average of all solutions would be decent here, but I feel that similar statements were uttered by others on at least a couple of the past storms! the only time I remember that was the storm last week, but I did not agree with that analysis then and said so. The problem with that was there were 2 strongly divergent camps developing, one that still held to a miller a coastal solution, and a camp that began to amplify the primary low going into Ohio. The issue for me was based on the H5 forecast from BOTH camps of models it was becoming clear that the primary into Ohio idea had more support and made more sense. It was true a blend or average of the 2 camps would have worked well for us, but that was a situation where evidence was becoming stacked in favor of one camp winning out over the other. I do not see that here yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I do not mean to be dismissive of that comment by swisscaster, its actually valid and a good point, but just to add onto my reasoning here, right now we have 3 main op runs that wind this low up and take it inland. The Euro, UKMET, and GGEM. While there is evidence to suggest an inland track is possible here, the nao is east based, 50/50 not ideal and a little north, high sliding east... there is also evidence to argue those solutions are a little overdone right now. Looking at past events, these models have had a tendancy to get the "idea" right, but overblow things a bit in the medium range. The euro has done this several times, most notably with the Dec 26th storm when it had several runs consecutavely that got heavy snow all the way to the eastern divide. It was right about the amplification of the storm but was way overdone and going negative too early. GGEM just had a smilar crap the bed moment this week with the storm yesterday. The UKMET has been so inconsistent this year and is known to have crazy amplification issues that I am not even going to do a case by case with that. My point here is that I feel there are things we can take from each solution. I think the GFS and NAM may be onto the idea that the blocking is building in a little better and thus the cold may stick a little more. This is a seasonal trend. I think the UKMET, GGEM, and ECMWF are the right idea on a low that is a little more amplified then the 18z GFS implies, however they are just a tad overdone at this point. The H5 track of all the models are very similar and that is something to hang our hat on right now. its a risky game, but taking what looks good from each solution and blending it together gives a pretty good idea of what is likely at this point. This is further supported by the fact that doing this ends with a result matched by the ensemble mean of all 3 major op models. Its not perfect, and this is still a lot of educated guessing going into it, but its better then just taking a run of one model and getting all worked up over every detail of it and what it may mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiscaster Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 the only time I remember that was the storm last week, but I did not agree with that analysis then and said so. The problem with that was there were 2 strongly divergent camps developing, one that still held to a miller a coastal solution, and a camp that began to amplify the primary low going into Ohio. The issue for me was based on the H5 forecast from BOTH camps of models it was becoming clear that the primary into Ohio idea had more support and made more sense. It was true a blend or average of the 2 camps would have worked well for us, but that was a situation where evidence was becoming stacked in favor of one camp winning out over the other. I do not see that here yet. Good explanation. An average of vastly different scenarios (synoptically) would not seem likely to verify. Seems like a variation of one of the "camps" is likely. I feel like this will be the case here too. And as much as I hate to say it, I think the Miller B blowing up NE of us will win again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 exactly, plus any forecast for this system at this point would and should be very general. "There is the threat of a storm along the coast, could be a significant precipitation maker, too early to tell the specifics of how much or what type" kind of stuff. Its funny that as much as some like to rant about how horrible the models are and how forecasting is not improving, it was not too long ago in the grand scheme of things that this storm would only now be first appearing on the last day of the old "5 day business planner" we used to wait for on the 20's at the old TWC. Just think, how reliable the 5th day was considered back then. Now, some are starting to expect specifics to be nailed down from a system 100 hours away still. Yeah exactly. The inevitable "THE MODELS SUCK!" comments are going to come out in these patterns. The models are doing fine. It is a nod to human ingenuity that these models can even suggest these threats 5-7 days in advance. Kudos to them; no kudos to the people who believe models suck if they can't nail down threats a week in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Chill Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 the only time I remember that was the storm last week, but I did not agree with that analysis then and said so. The problem with that was there were 2 strongly divergent camps developing, one that still held to a miller a coastal solution, and a camp that began to amplify the primary low going into Ohio. The issue for me was based on the H5 forecast from BOTH camps of models it was becoming clear that the primary into Ohio idea had more support and made more sense. It was true a blend or average of the 2 camps would have worked well for us, but that was a situation where evidence was becoming stacked in favor of one camp winning out over the other. I do not see that here yet. Vehemently agree. I was duped into siding with the more southern camp of of the H5 track with last nights non-storm. 5 days out I thought it was pretty much a lock that we were in for a 2-4 / 3-5 event. Only to watch those hopes be dashed but the evolution of the H5 track to slide north of our area. Was it pretty much a repeat of the last 3 teases? Absoultely and I can see why it is easy to jump to the conclusion that it is just going to happen again simply because it keeps happening over and over. However, the recent overall model guidance does not paint that picture at all. There are not 2 camps in this case. All signs point towards the H5 moving plenty south of DCA to pretty much rule out the eventual solution of another N tracking H5 Miller Whiffin B. The only thing that everyone should be whining about is thermal profile and track of the surface low and not saying history is going to repeat itself. It is almost a foregone conclusion that there will be at least a moderately prolific storm hitting us. It is going to precipitate more than the last 4 events combined. I'm a weenie too but I'm getting tired of all the negative posts about how this is going to evolve into another fringe Miller B bust. If you are going to be negative, whine, and complain, at least do it for the right reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdsofprey02 Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 fwiw, it puts a smile on my face at least. http://wxcaster.com/gis-gfs-snow-overlays.php3?STATIONID=LWX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Good explanation. An average of vastly different scenarios (synoptically) would not seem likely to verify. Seems like a variation of one of the "camps" is likely. I feel like this will be the case here too. And as much as I hate to say it, I think the Miller B blowing up NE of us will win again. And what model shows this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Chill Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 fwiw, it puts a smile on my face at least. http://wxcaster.com/...3?STATIONID=LWX I wil gladly take my 12-14 and not be jealous at all with PSU's 20+. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I wil gladly take my 12-14 and not be jealous at all with PSU's 20+. it is his storm so he should get to jackpot lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I wil gladly take my 12-14 and not be jealous at all with PSU's 20+. If somehow this trends south and I get 12 and you get 20 I will not complain either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Chill Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 it is his storm so he should get to jackpot lol Heck yea! It would be down right hysterical if the PSU storm verifies and PSU is in the jackpot. That's the kind of thing that makes legends. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baroclinic_instability Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Heck yea! It would be down right hysterical if the PSU storm verifies and PSU is in the jackpot. That's the kind of thing that makes legends. lol It would become the 2011 PSUHoffman/Ji Superstorm abbreviated PJ1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiscaster Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 And what model shows this? Look at the QPF signature of the GFS. Heaviest to the NE of DC. And the seasonal trend is to move it more NE the closer we get to the event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 18z GFS ensemble mean QPF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Look at the QPF signature of the GFS. Heaviest to the NE of DC. And the seasonal trend is to move it more NE the closer we get to the event. if the gfs was not currently an outlier it would be more reason for concern. but we've already seen plenty of flops. i'd like to pretend we are locking in now but i dont believe that's true. there is some room to breathe on other models for sure at least at 500, but no one can feel too safe right now unless they are being willfully ignorant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 This looks nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psuhoffman Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 if the gfs was not currently an outlier it would be more reason for concern. but we've already seen plenty of flops. i'd like to pretend we are locking in now but i dont believe that's true. there is some room to breathe on other models for sure at least at 500, but no one can feel too safe right now unless they are being willfully ignorant. somewhere between feeling safe and feeling like the sky is falling lies a good place to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiscaster Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 if the gfs was not currently an outlier it would be more reason for concern. but we've already seen plenty of flops. i'd like to pretend we are locking in now but i dont believe that's true. there is some room to breathe on other models for sure at least at 500, but no one can feel too safe right now unless they are being willfully ignorant. It may be an outlier for this event, but doesn't that signature smell like every other storm that screwed us this winter? Even look at that GFS ensemble mean that just got posted. So to say it is an outlier compared to the other models for this storm is true, but when it shows the seasonal trend, maybe it is the correct "outlier." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 It may be an outlier for this event, but doesn't that signature smell like every other storm that screwed us this winter? Even look at that GFS ensemble mean that just got posted. So to say it is an outlier compared to the other models for this storm is true, but when it shows the seasonal trend, maybe it is the correct "outlier." The18z GFS ensemble mean is good for everyone from RIC to BOS... stop with the negative nancy crap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 somewhere between feeling safe and feeling like the sky is falling lies a good place to be. probably for now. though im not the hugest fan of the big bomb idea because i dont like heavy rain in my backyard so i guess im biased there a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesnowsknows Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 It may be an outlier for this event, but doesn't that signature smell like every other storm that screwed us this winter? Even look at that GFS ensemble mean that just got posted. So to say it is an outlier compared to the other models for this storm is true, but when it shows the seasonal trend, maybe it is the correct "outlier." We get it, you think it's gonna be a screwjob. But at least wait until guidance starts to support it to draw that conclusion as likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesnowsknows Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 probably for now. though im not the hugest fan of the big bomb idea because i dont like heavy rain in my backyard so i guess im biased there a little. Do you think the emergence of blocking on the NAM and GFS may support all snow on a bomb? I wouldn't know if there is any validity in those schemes. Inform me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 The18z GFS ensemble mean is good for everyone from RIC to BOS... stop with the negative nancy crap until you are doing more than simply regurgitating model output you should probably not try to stifle debate. swisscaster has some slight point but not a huge one at this time. yeah there is a 'seasonal trend' etc. but on the bigger storms it has been pretty clear we were in trouble.. at most we'd run into 1/3 of any given guidance trying to give us snow for 12/26 and while the top-end was seemingly high midlvls were very tricky to pull off. that all has changed a bit for jan 11 / y-day when we started seeing many runs with some snow and such but we obviously had other issues at play that should have overridden much hope (especially yesterday) based on the surface maps. either way, some debate is good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.