OKpowdah Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 STORM CANCEL! Updated forecast for tomorrow: Sunny skies with 1-2 in/hr of cirrus on brisk northwesterly winds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomNH Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 STORM CANCEL! Updated forecast for tomorrow: Sunny skies with 1-2 in/hr of cirrus on brisk northwesterly winds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKpowdah Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I'm not surprised something cut back. I generally take the NAM QPF and chop it by 25% or so when it's the wettest op run. It's all about how early this thing starts to wrap up. If it takes too long then we're in trouble. This isn't just the usual NAM cutting back on QPF. It's a significant shift in the evolution of the storm lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I'm not surprised something cut back. I generally take the NAM QPF and chop it by 25% or so when it's the wettest op run. It's all about how early this thing starts to wrap up. If it takes too long then we're in trouble. Do you think my 3-6'' statewide is fair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 the 00z RUC initializes way too soon to receive the new radiosondes..the NAM does not. Typically, radiosonde data is done around 01 or 0130z. Makes perfect sense, thanks for explaining it. We went through this discussion but not with the RUC...NAM v GFS....even the NAM doesn't get the new data to some extent which may explain why it's having a miserable time in the fast flo while the GFS isn't as bad. The GFS is getting some data the NAM isn't due to the later start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 It's not cutting back QPF from previous runs...it's a completely different solution...in contrast to all the 12z and 18z runs from the globals and the mesoscale models. uhhh, it isn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 lol so you know his sleeping habits that well... To be honest when I post thoughts or a forecast I don't feel like spending 15 minutes responding to getting lambasted. Especially when at work I have other things to be doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 uhhh, it isn't? really dude? You know what I'm saying...it's not the typical QPF cut back at the cusp of an event...it's a new solution with a dramatic drop in QPF because the NAM is running the low way off the coast...in contrast with every other model solution we've seen today at 12z and 18z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tropopause_Fold Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 It's not cutting back QPF from previous runs...it's a completely different solution...in contrast to all the 12z and 18z runs from the globals and the mesoscale models. Thing is though we see this from time to time... Different guidance using different means to basically produce the same surface output. Stepping back from all the analysis...the end game is basically the same outside of that 12z nam run. with respect to qpf...low track and temps this looks basically on par with a lot of products. A general .25 to .5 has been pretty well advertised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsnowx53 Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 uhhh, it isn't? What he means is that it's not a typical "same evolution, just less QPF" kind of thing. The whole evolution of the storm completely changed, and that's what's causing the QPF to go down. It's not like the NAM just said "I'm gonna give less QPF!" It instead said "I'm going to evolve the storm extremely differently from my previous runs." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 uhhh, it isn't? It's been cutting back/ reshaping the QPF to fit the further east solutions for a couple of runs but nobody ever wants to hear that stuff. -- Here's the thing. If the NAM is right and the rest of the models bump east....pathetic. If the NAM just coughed up a lung and the rest hold the same old idea...pathetic. In either instance and I think it's probably more the latter NCEP really has to start looking at what IS happening. We've made excuses now for 12-15 months. Sometimes it's money, a lot of times it's terrible and sometimes it's right in spite of itself. I don't think it matters terrible which of the above is right....I just have a hard time believing this is about the pattern and not something else. Tonight might be the all time low where it "could" have been unable to get even an init right. OR, almost as bad, where models were totally unable to forecast even 6-12 hours out? -- OSU...2z RUC looking a smidge different at 5h, at init. Weaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaineJayhawk Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I'm just lol'ing at all the Eeyoring because the 00z NAM - which degreed mets have said looks suspicious - dropped a turd. Keep chucking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Thing is though we see this from time to time... Different guidance using different means to basically produce the same surface output. Stepping back from all the analysis...the end game is basically the same outside of that 12z nam run. with respect to qpf...low track and temps this looks basically on par with a lot of products. A general .25 to .5 has been pretty well advertised. it's east of just about all the model tracks I've seen...which is the major reason in the drop of QPF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 It's been cutting back/ reshaping the QPF to fit the further east solutions for a couple of runs but nobody ever wants to hear that stuff. -- Here's the thing. If the NAM is right and the rest of the models bump east....pathetic. If the NAM just coughed up a lung and the rest hold the same old idea...pathetic. In either instance and I think it's probably more the latter NCEP really has to start looking at what IS happening. We've made excuses now for 12-15 months. Sometimes it's money, a lot of times it's terrible and sometimes it's right in spite of itself. Tonight might be the all time low where it "could" have been unable to get even an init right. -- lol... It wasn't the typical qpf cut-back at the cusp of an event. It was a different solution...that's what I was getting at. No other model is running the low way off the southeast coast like the 00z NAM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomNH Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I'm just lol'ing at all the Eeyoring because the 00z NAM - which degreed mets have said looks suspicious - dropped a turd. Keep chucking. Euro and SREF both .5''+ for us...chuck away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKpowdah Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I'm in your sig! Woohoo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tropopause_Fold Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 it's east of just about all the model tracks I've seen...which is the major reason in the drop of QPF. Qpf looks pretty spot on with the ec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKpowdah Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Current pessure falls don't lend much reasoning against the diffuse low tonight unfortunately. We really need to see this come together as one entity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaineJayhawk Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Euro and SREF both .5''+ for us...chuck away. Long and deep, even in my sleep. Fiiyyaahh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKpowdah Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I'm just lol'ing at all the Eeyoring because the 00z NAM - which degreed mets have said looks suspicious - dropped a turd. Keep chucking. Sun tan lotion at the ready Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinch1989 Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Upton's WWA loves the NAM, but I'm still rooting against them lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Qpf looks pretty spot on with the ec What are we debating here? The 00z NAM does not look like the EC. The EC is tucked in toward the coast...just like the 12z GFS/NAM and 18z GFS/NAM were. Yes the QPF looks similar...but the major model outputs (500mb vort and surface low position) are considerably different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tropopause_Fold Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 What are we debating here? The 00z NAM does not look like the EC. The EC is tucked in toward the coast...just like the 12z GFS/NAM and 18z GFS/NAM were. Yes the QPF looks similar...but the major model outputs (500mb vort and surface low position) are considerably different. I'm saying it doesn't matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Matt Noyes' latest forecast.. funny comment at the beginning about schools already canceling http://www.necn.com/01/20/11/Tonights-forecast-Snow-heavy-at-times/landing_weather.html?blockID=395089&feedID=4699 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKpowdah Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Euro and SREF both .5''+ for us...chuck away. That's the way to go IMO for now. Will be interesting to see if there's something funky in the 00z data I sent to the DOT no changes. Giving you 5-8" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaineJayhawk Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Euro and SREF both .5''+ for us...chuck away. And, as you alluded to earlier, the QPF for the 00z NAM still gives .25 - .50" to all of SNE and Maine despite puking on itself. With expected ratios, not much to complain about unless you got sucked into the higher numbers of some of the wilder predictions. Bottom line - it's going to snow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I'm saying it doesn't matter yes it does...because if the other models go east with the surface low like the NAM...the QPF and snow amounts will drop off considerably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 lol... It wasn't the typical qpf cut-back at the cusp of an event. It was a different solution...that's what I was getting at. No other model is running the low way off the southeast coast like the 00z NAM I know, but it was slipping east slowly. regardless, probably a moot point. -- 0z ruc 3h vs 2z 1h ruc. It's weakening the s/w a little each run. 2z 1h ruc vs 0z 3h NAM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomNH Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 And, as you alluded to earlier, the QPF for the 00z NAM still gives .25 - .50" to all of SNE and Maine despite puking on itself. With expected ratios, not much to complain about unless you got sucked into the higher numbers of some of the wilder predictions. Bottom line - it's going to snow. Yep, even if we get the worst case scenario .3-.4'' of QPF, with the 15:1 ratios that everyone seems to be forecasting, it's still a 4-6'' storm. Chuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Kevin L on Fox just said he is downgrading some of his amounts. Didn't say specifics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.