Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,586
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Friday, January 21st Storm Discussion


Baroclinic Zone

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 910
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It's the nam. Could be a total model fiction. I'm not sure how it managed to pull off two reasonable forecasts with such wild swings at 5h...im guessing the slowing/negative flow just made for positional differences ne to sw versus the miss/hit scenario swings we see now.

Ride the others...

Look at that pimple of a s/w. Makes all the difference in the world on this run.

nam_500_054m.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 its scraping the outer cape and islands.

I think this is a middle of the road advisory event for most and possibly low end warning for se mass the cape and islands.

1-3 nw

2-4 majority

3-6 cape and islands

couple inches of powder then cold settles in, should make for a nice weekend, looking forward to it.

With good ratios that's easily 1-2 feet on cape cod ;)

It's a decent hit for the cape a solid 4-8 or 5-10. It's phils turn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The negative tilt is trying to pull this thing in further to the west but since we don't have much digging going on the turn is good enough for eastern sections. All we need is just a bit more digging. Besides that though with the insane ratios we will have we don't need 1''+ QPF amounts to generate potentially widespread warning criteria snowfall...0.50-0.75'' QPF would do the job quite well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed.

In shocking news the nam handles the vortmax differently this run as it swings across ky. Weaker more positively aligned. That little s/w early in the run rockets around and helps to flatten the flow.

The result is either much later or much less digging than the 6z. Very good continuity run to run which is beyond impressive

everyone knows how you feel about the NAM..no need to shove it down our throats day after day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its almost certainly convective feedback that produces it. It doesn't appear until 48h near where the low is trying to develop off the coast.

I think so too but I'd get labeled a weenie for saying it cause people think I'm pulling for more snow imby. I still think this think can tick 20-30 miles closer to the coast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its almost certainly convective feedback that produces it. It doesn't appear until 48h near where the low is trying to develop off the coast.

Seems like it would be a mod hit to me without that blip that kinda steals the energy and pulls the sfc a big further east than it might otherwise be. If the 5h through 42 were close to the real solution, this would be a mod hit 6-8 imo for much of the region.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think so too but I'd get labeled a weenie for saying it cause people think I'm pulling for more snow imby. I still think this think can tick 20-30 miles closer to the coast.

There's no reason why that isn't reasonable to say at this point.

It could end up being too far for more than a 2-4 " snowfall, but I could definitely see this coming back a bit which would be enough for low end warning type stuff. The trend this winter has been to be more potent with northern stream as we get closer. Doesn't mean it will stick on this storm though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

everyone knows how you feel about the NAM..no need to shove it down our throats day after day.

Funny because if it were still showing the major hit it'd be getting rammed down my throat every fifth post by someone from ct or tt.

--

Will it did the same thing with the blizzard and was right. The vorticity appeared out of nowhere. Gradually it backed down up until the 6z during the event when it remodeled it under the convection...it was right. It may be convective processes triggering the spinup, or this might be a minor feature coming out of the deep southwest - it does show several...that becomes the sw that triggers the low.

The gfs had a similar breakoff vorticie just north a few hundred miles.

Regardless it's the nam beyond 42 at 5h....we can be sure it's in error. Sorry Osu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny because if it were still showing the major hit it'd be getting rammed down my throat every fifth post by someone from ct or tt.

--

Will it did the same thing with the blizzard and was right. The vorticity appeared out of nowhere. Gradually it backed down up until the 6z during the event when it remodeled it under the convection...it was right. It may be convective processes triggering the spinup, or this might be a minor feature coming out of the deep southwest - it does show several...that becomes the sw that triggers the low.

The gfs had a similar breakoff vorticie just north a few hundred miles.

Regardless it's the nam beyond 42 at 5h....we can be sure it's in error. Sorry Osu.

Who from CT?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope we get at least a few inches for Friday but overall the trend seems to be more subdued. There is something about the models wanting to spin up big storms this season, some will be big hits and I guess some will not.

If 12z does not show more sig nw trend though id be prepared to use the broom and not the shovel Friday

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny because if it were still showing the major hit it'd be getting rammed down my throat every fifth post by someone from ct or tt.

--

Will it did the same thing with the blizzard and was right. The vorticity appeared out of nowhere. Gradually it backed down up until the 6z during the event when it remodeled it under the convection...it was right. It may be convective processes triggering the spinup, or this might be a minor feature coming out of the deep southwest - it does show several...that becomes the sw that triggers the low.

The gfs had a similar breakoff vorticie just north a few hundred miles.

Regardless it's the nam beyond 42 at 5h....we can be sure it's in error. Sorry Osu.

The blizzard and this event are two very different setups. We were making comparisons to 12/9/05 early on before the blizzard and knew the mesoscale models would likely have a better handle on it...it wasn't just the NAM, it was the SREFs and the MM5 too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny because if it were still showing the major hit it'd be getting rammed down my throat every fifth post by someone from ct or tt.

--

Will it did the same thing with the blizzard and was right. The vorticity appeared out of nowhere. Gradually it backed down up until the 6z during the event when it remodeled it under the convection...it was right. It may be convective processes triggering the spinup, or this might be a minor feature coming out of the deep southwest - it does show several...that becomes the sw that triggers the low.

The gfs had a similar breakoff vorticie just north a few hundred miles.

Regardless it's the nam beyond 42 at 5h....we can be sure it's in error. Sorry Osu.

Because someone else does it...you need to do it too?

You had a simple disagreement with someone....no need to drag the "awesome continuity" tongue in cheek remark into many of your posts over the last two days. I'd rather not have every threat discussion devolve into an argument about the lack of merits or merits of the NAM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While convective feedback can be the real thing, it does have somewhat of a microcane appearance on the zoomed in sectors. I'm not trying to pick it apart because I want a weenie solution, but just noting it looks a little funny on the mslp plots. It could be right so who knows.

post-33-0-11079400-1295447753.gif

No one here would think that coming from you.

Good analysis all. At least an advisory event on the way with no threat of mixing and fluff potential - be happy. :snowman:

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...