CoastalWx Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 it spreads the vorticity everywhere leading to a garbage result even though the northern stream digs more and there's actually more ridging to the east of New England. There's a blob of convective precip forming on the NAM too. The HRRR had that. I wonder if that is fooking with things as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 it spreads the vorticity everywhere leading to a garbage result even though the northern stream digs more and there's actually more ridging to the east of New England. yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 It's def disorganized. It almost dryslots us by 15z. There's a few red flags with this system despite some of the positives...the vortmax core not quite getting underneath us has always been bothering me. Should still be a nice system and I'm sure a few surprises await, but I could see some struggle to get to amounts over 6 if we have a bit of a disorganized precip field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaineJayhawk Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Just did a quick trip into the OT section and found myself sticking up for Cheetah. Man, some of the guys in there really hate him. Seems like a decent bloke to me. Better to stay in here with family.lol OT is definitely not the cute part of AmWx. Heavy heavy snow, Pete ... hope you at least covered the plywood this time. Or delegated, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 BAAHH HAAABA special on this run. Toss it. Not even supported by the RUC at 3-6hrs. Look at the difference between the 6h ruc and 6h NAM. The 1z RUC and water vapor shows no signs at all of the shearing. Could it happen sure, but right now pending another model indicating the same thing toss it. If the NAM is the outlier at 0z how many will line up to say it's right on this time? BTW the HRRR changes more hour to hour than an old man pees in the night. Not impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Exactly why I've been nerovus about calling for much higher totals...but Kevin says I'm low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 There's a few red flags with this system despite some of the positives...the vortmax core not quite getting underneath us has always been bothering me. Should still be a nice system and I'm sure a few surprises await, but I could see some struggle to get to amounts over 6 if we have a bit of a disorganized precip field. Yeah we were talking about how the 700 low being north might rocket the dryslot in, but also..play games with precip developing. I don't know....it's pretty much nowcasting from here on out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomNH Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Toss it. Not even supported by the RUC at 3-6hrs. Look at the difference between the 6h ruc and 6h NAM. The 1z RUC and water vapor shows no signs at all of the shearing. Could it happen sure, but right now pending another model indicating the same thing toss it. If the NAM is the outlier at 0z how many will line up to say it's right on this time? BTW the HRRR changes more hour to hour than an old man pees in the night. Not impressed. Yeah, RUC doesn't string out the vorticity like the NAM at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HIPPYVALLEY Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 trying to convince my friend to go to Mount Snow tomorrow...what's the highest amount I can tempt him with without looking like an idiot? 8"? Judging by everything I'm seeing and reading here I would not feel real confident in Mt Snow area getting more than a few inches. 6" max imho. Get there early b/c it will be super fluff that will be skied off pretty early. Fun none the less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I'm 99% sure the NAM is wrong...the NAM is actually more amplified than the 18z GFS at 12 hours and 18 hours...yet the low somehow gets out east and shoves no little precip back toward New England. It's in contrast to the SREFs...which brought heavier precip further west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomNH Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I'm 99% sure the NAM is wrong...the NAM is actually more amplified than the 18z GFS at 12 hours and 18 hours...yet the low somehow gets out east and shoves no little precip back toward New England. It's in contrast to the SREFs...which brought heavier precip further west. I might be wrong, but it seems like the NAM develops the sfc low on a wayward piece of vorticity that shouldn't be there in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ski MRG Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 OT is definitely not the cute part of AmWx. Heavy heavy snow, Pete ... hope you at least covered the plywood this time. Or delegated, anyway. Eh, we've put a lot down already. Things are toatlly buried at 2k. I've got steel beams that are completely submerged. I know where they are but you'd never know to look, just a solid snowfield. Hoping to catch 7-8" between this and the Arctic frontal passage. I'm getting psyched for something big to roll up the coast next week. Hope it comes to pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadow Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 just let this storm pan out and hope for 6 inches anything more will be a Bonner LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leesun Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Could be convective feedback I might be wrong, but it seems like the NAM develops the sfc low on a wayward piece of vorticity that shouldn't be there in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I'm 99% sure the NAM is wrong...the NAM is actually more amplified than the 18z GFS at 12 hours and 18 hours...yet the low somehow gets out east and shoves no little precip back toward New England. It's in contrast to the SREFs...which brought heavier precip further west. It's in the back of my mind, but it does seem weird....agree. The one thing that bothers me, is if the mid level lows don't even bother closing off. I'm not basing this from the 00z run, but if we have all of our qpf just from isentropic lift on a ssw 850 jet, it may end pretty quickly around here..except maybe parts of cstl areas. You really want to see the mid level lows close off and try to establish even weak cyclonic circulation in these levels. Just some thoughts I have. I'm intrigued by this system either way. It could also really develop quickly once it gets its feet wet, and radar may explode after 10z tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattb65 Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I'm 99% sure the NAM is wrong...the NAM is actually more amplified than the 18z GFS at 12 hours and 18 hours...yet the low somehow gets out east and shoves no little precip back toward New England. It's in contrast to the SREFs...which brought heavier precip further west. Looked like thunderstorms in the atlantic when the low is deepening that steal the moisture might be the reason at hours 12 and 18, also not buying it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomNH Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Could be convective feedback I don't know, that's kind of what it seems like. Seems like it shreds the vorticity and then the sfc low develops on the piece of vorticity S of LI even though the trough is really digging. We obviously know the SREFs disagree, so if the RGEM and GFS look good, toss it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 It's in the back of my mind, but it does seem weird....agree. The one thing that bothers me, is if the mid level lows don't even bother closing off. I'm not basing this from the 00z run, but if we have all of our qpf just from isentropic lift on a ssw 850 jet, it may end pretty quickly around here..except maybe parts of cstl areas. You really want to see the mid level lows close off and try to establish even weak cyclonic circulation in these levels. Just some thoughts I have. I'm intrigued by this system either way. It could also really develop quickly once it gets its feet wet, and radar may explode after 10z tomorrow. What's bizarre is as the NAM went east the RUC/HRRR are still coming west, driving warm air well into SE MA. I'll get slammed if I bag on the NAM. Just because it changes every six hours doesn't mean it isn't right this time. Pending the rest of the runs. Looked like a thunderstorms in the atlantic when the low is deepening that steal the moisture might be the reason at hours 12 and 18, also not buying it. Most models were showing some pretty nasty precip developing offshore and moving up over SE MA. The models including the rapid refresh jobs show this but seem to be nudging east. So we have the NAM which is cold and east, versus the RUC/HRRR which are wetter but warmer. To some extent IMO there are signs in this rapid refreshers of this system crapping out too....just my 2 cents. Let's see what happens. I am yet again under some type of warning, so there's a good chance it's sunny in the am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomNH Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Even the NAM is probably a 4''+ storm for most thanks to the fluff factor. So it's pretty decent for a worst case scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Could be convective feedback IF IF, it's wrong, it's not convective feedback that's triggering it early. It stinks from the get go, the s/w is a piece of crap long before any convection is developing. It's different from the start. The RUC has a solid s/w, the NAM is a shredded, multi lobe piece of junk. Looking at the water vapor, honestly it's a little tough to argue with either. There's a bunch of little maxes in the mix, but the NAM seems to have failed to pick out the dominate one. EDIT: I'm about half betting we see the diagnostic report issues/deleted/missing data in the OH Valley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NECT Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Yikes - glad I don't have to make a public forecast on this one. It looks like it's close to getting ready to get organized and dry up at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ski MRG Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Radar off to the West doesn't look all that impressive at this point. Kind of blotchy and disorganized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NECT Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 trying to convince my friend to go to Mount Snow tomorrow...what's the highest amount I can tempt him with without looking like an idiot? 8"? Tell him 4-8", and dress really warm. It gonna be cold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoarfrostHubb Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I hope this doesn't get all shredded. And wtf is convective snow? BOTH THE GFS/NAM SHOW IDEAL SNOW GROWTH BY 6 AM. THERE ALSO IS A REALLY GOOD EPV SIGNATURE WHICH COULD LEAD TO THE POTENTIAL FOR CONVECTIVE SNOW. THESE SIGNATURES ARE FAVORABLE FOR 1 TO 2 INCH PER HOUR SNOW FALL RATES. (from the AFD from a couple hours ago) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I hope this doesn't get all shredded. And wtf is convective snow? BOTH THE GFS/NAM SHOW IDEAL SNOW GROWTH BY 6 AM. THERE ALSO IS A REALLY GOOD EPV SIGNATURE WHICH COULD LEAD TO THE POTENTIAL FOR CONVECTIVE SNOW. THESE SIGNATURES ARE FAVORABLE FOR 1 TO 2 INCH PER HOUR SNOW FALL RATES. (from the AFD from a couple hours ago) THundersnow!!!!! or period of extremely heavy snowfall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 What's bizarre is as the NAM went east the RUC/HRRR are still coming west, driving warm air well into SE MA. I'll get slammed if I bag on the NAM. Just because it changes every six hours doesn't mean it isn't right this time. Pending the rest of the runs. Most models were showing some pretty nasty precip developing offshore and moving up over SE MA. The models including the rapid refresh jobs show this but seem to be nudging east. So we have the NAM which is cold and east, versus the RUC/HRRR which are wetter but warmer. To some extent IMO there are signs in this rapid refreshers of this system crapping out too....just my 2 cents. Let's see what happens. I am yet again under some type of warning, so there's a good chance it's sunny in the am. Yeah, the 01z RUC is more amped than the 00z NAM...shows the sub-1000mb surface within 20 miles SSE of the east end of Long Island...consistent with earlier runs of the NAM, the GFS, and the ECMWF. It's amazing how different the vort is on the RUC and the NAM within 12 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Thing is water vapor is not all that impressive. I'd say hold the phone until the RGEM/GFS, but it is kind of a messy complex right now but there are two clearly dominate players one in the northern near Chicago, another one south. There are a whole bunch of dry streaks in the mix associated with other minor features. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Torchey Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Radar off to the West doesn't look all that impressive at this point. Kind of blotchy and disorganized. Who is this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoarfrostHubb Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 THundersnow!!!!! or period of extremely heavy snowfall Nice!!! of course it will probably happen when I am asleep... but I hope you get some (you got it last week, correct?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Glad I went 4"-8" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.