Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,601
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

Jan 20-22 Threat Potential Part 2


am19psu

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 992
  • Created
  • Last Reply

You do know the EURO had a similar solution?

The EURO has been consistent over the last several days showing a less amplified solution, do we really think it's going to fail big time? The Canadian of couse was way overdone, imo this isn't a good trend at all...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do know the EURO had a similar solution?

Plus I do believe we have a better sampling of the northern stream.

The Euro's weak solution was for a completely different reason. It essentially had much of the southern wave held back across the intermountain W and it was unable to both advect GOM into the low levels and incite rapid development of the upper level cold front/dynamic tropopause towards the surface after phasing. The NAM here has a full phase and still fails. The northern stream trough looks disheveled too. Can't tell if that is the NAM being junky or something the 0Z RAOB data caught. We will see here very soon with the other guidance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The EURO has been consistent over the last several days showing a less amplified solution, do we really think it's going to fail big time? The Canadian of couse was way overdone, imo this isn't a good trend at all...

Yes, it could fail. It has not been supreme this winter so far IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at the NAM surface at 54 hours on the ewall there are two low centers, the NAM seems to make the SE most one dominant after 54 hours, I'm thinking that might be a mistake and the NW low might be the more dominant low or that simply the initial double low center is resulting in the SE track.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at the NAM surface at 54 hours on the ewall there are two low centers, the NAM seems to make the SE most one dominant after 54 hours, I'm thinking that might be a mistake and the NW low might be the more dominant low or that simply the initial double low center is resulting in the SE track.

Good point! I noticed the two lows and wondered about that. But as I'm not a met, I don't comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This run does show a more favorable solution for an amplified northern stream based off the looks of NW Canada. PV is weaker and displaced further north. But the stronger upstream s/w energy balances that out in this run I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<br />If you look at the NAM surface at 54 hours on the ewall there are two low centers, the NAM seems to make the SE most one dominant after 54 hours, I'm thinking that might be a mistake and the NW low might be the more dominant low or that simply the initial double low center is resulting in the SE track.<br />
<br /><br /><br /><br />I definitely hear what you're saying... Initially, it's actually very tough to predict where the low might form based on the 500 chart.. But I noticed at hour 63 there is a tight couplet between a maximum of anticyclonic vorticity and cyclonic vorticity.. And the NAM placed it in between that couplet which makes sense.. Id expect the low to develop in a region of greatest cyclonic vorticity advection
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...