WxLover Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 I'm talking about the low that pops there tomorrow and then moves out to sea, not the later storm. This wouldn't be our 50-50 low that we desperately need is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 This wouldn't be our 50-50 low that we desperately need is it? yes it is... but without a greenland block theres nothing to keep the 50/50 locked in so its really a timing issue....need the system to come in right behind the 50/50, and not lag the energy behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTrials Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 yes, but looks at the tilt. The euro is pos titled in its spot, while the nam is about to go neg tilt just a hair east. heights on euro way more amplified on the ec than the nam. The energy not being consolidated slows everything down and allows the north atlantic to go down hill and the HP to slide east before the storm can get there. NAM would be quicker for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowtrain Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Everyone's saying "Closer to the GFS" which did have a sharp cutoff. Ignore qpf this far out, just look at temp profiles and H5 placements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombo82685 Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 heights on euro way more amplified on the ec than the nam. The energy not being consolidated slows everything down and allows the north atlantic to go down hill and the HP to slide east before the storm can get there. NAM would be quicker for sure. lets see what the gfs does, no point arguing over what the 84hr nam shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTrials Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 lets see what the gfs does, no point arguing over what the 84hr nam shows. just discussing while we wait for goofus, not trying to "argue". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet-Phase Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 DT posted his thoughts a couple of hours ago. It's an interesting read. A small snippet: "In the 33 the snowstorm case studies in the KU book… now 36 cases and growing… 31 of the 33 all featured the cold arctic HIGH being located no further to the east than 75° W longitude in the 24 hours leading up to the beginning of the storm on the East coast. In this upcoming event "the arctic cold High pressure area is already at 75 degrees W longitude when the storm begins to develop on the East coast.the HIGH is already there." Thus, due no blocking, the HIGH slides east and allows the COLD are in place to escape faster and the result is a more inland track up the coast with snow changing to rain in a lot places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 DT posted his thoughts a couple of hours ago. It's an interesting read. A small snippet: "In the 33 the snowstorm case studies in the KU book… now 36 cases and growing… 31 of the 33 all featured the cold arctic HIGH being located no further to the east than 75° W longitude in the 24 hours leading up to the beginning of the storm on the East coast. In this upcoming event "the arctic cold High pressure area is already at 75 degrees W longitude when the storm begins to develop on the East coast.the HIGH is already there." Thus, due no blocking, the HIGH slides east and allows the COLD are in place to escape faster and the result is a more inland track up the coast with snow changing to rain in a lot places. Yup, I pretty agree 100% with that at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTrials Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Yup, I pretty agree 100% with that at this point. well, if it happens that way when this actually occurs and not 96 hours out, then yes, that is a problem, but the answer as to how long the high holds and how quick the storm builds in is far from being answered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noreaster07 Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 The NAM at 84 hrs means nothing in regards to its trough axis, its way out of range, it loves to be over amplified, especially far out and has sucked this year even within 24 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ababa Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Exactly....we don't know when the storm is going to get to the coast.....this storm is a race against time and faster is better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchel Volk Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Remember the NAM forecast for today's event, heavy rain from PHL to BOS at this range it is a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Still way too early to nail down a solution ATTM. The NAM was earlier than 84 hours with the storm last night/today wrapping it up to track through DC/Baltimore and making it rain well past NYC, so we all know its bias in that realm. Also, the GFS has a well known cold/SE bias as well in this timeframe. The bottom line is we need that high over Ontario/Quebec to stay in place and lock cold air in, and we need the storm to eject faster into that established cold air dome. If the low ejects out later, the high is escaping out past Newfoundland, and it becomes a lot easier for warm east winds to warm up coastal locations, and for the baroclinic zone to shift west for the low to track along it, hugging the coast. The faster the ejection, the better the chance we get the storm while the high is in place, and a more favorable solution. A later ejection, more chance of a slopfest to rain in the cities and major snow event inland. The high won't stay in a favorable area forever, particularly with a neutral to +NAO and no blocking, forcing a more progressive regime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 gfs is less wrapped up and further off shore with the SC/NC low...not sure what that means upstream...... edit: i mean less wrapped when its close to the coast at 500mb...it still bombs out over the waters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neblizzard Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 DT posted his thoughts a couple of hours ago. It's an interesting read. A small snippet: "In the 33 the snowstorm case studies in the KU book… now 36 cases and growing… 31 of the 33 all featured the cold arctic HIGH being located no further to the east than 75° W longitude in the 24 hours leading up to the beginning of the storm on the East coast. In this upcoming event "the arctic cold High pressure area is already at 75 degrees W longitude when the storm begins to develop on the East coast.the HIGH is already there." Thus, due no blocking, the HIGH slides east and allows the COLD are in place to escape faster and the result is a more inland track up the coast with snow changing to rain in a lot places. I've been saying this for days now, the pattern isn't favorable for major snowstorm along the I-95 corridor, of course inland is a different story.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NittanyWx Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Still way too early to nail down a solution ATTM. The NAM was earlier than 84 hours with the storm last night/today wrapping it up to track through DC/Baltimore and making it rain well past NYC, so we all know its bias in that realm. Also, the GFS has a well known cold/SE bias as well in this timeframe. The bottom line is we need that high over Ontario/Quebec to stay in place and lock cold air in, and we need the storm to eject faster into that established cold air dome. If the low ejects out later, the high is escaping out past Newfoundland, and it becomes a lot easier for warm east winds to warm up coastal locations, and for the baroclinic zone to shift west for the low to track along it, hugging the coast. At it's core, this is pretty much a race between a strengthening low and an eroding area of cold air. There is nothing preventing the high from escaping to the east (no block). Model biases aside, this is a major synoptic hurdle for a full fledged blizzard like many area hoping for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisNJ Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 After reading through the KU book for analogs, the only two remotely similar are 12-25 through 12-28 1969 and 2-17 through 2-19 1979. However, every storm is different but DT's quotes from above appear relevant as this is shaping up to be a "near-miss" per KU standards. But keep in mind, KU events largely incorporate population densities vs. snowfall in its scale. Should be a fun one to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTrials Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 At it's core, this is pretty much a race between a strengthening low and an eroding area of cold air. There is nothing preventing the high from escaping to the east (no block). Model biases aside, this is a major synoptic hurdle for a full fledged blizzard like many area hoping for. with all due respect, i believe there is a block. Ideal block? certainly not. But the nao is still slightly neg as there is 570 heights east of greenland that do wedge west, more on the colder solutions less on the warmer. The 50/50 and the ridging could team up with a perfect placed sw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTrials Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 through 66 hours gfs still on the fast track and has a closed 500 low over the upper midwest with consolidated H5 energy. I believe it will hold with its 12/18z type solution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ace0927 Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 After reading through the KU book for analogs, the only two remotely similar are 12-25 through 12-28 1969 and 2-17 through 2-19 1979. However, every storm is different but DT's quotes from above appear relevant as this is shaping up to be a "near-miss" per KU standards. But keep in mind, KU events largely incorporate population densities vs. snowfall in its scale. Should be a fun one to watch. feb 1979 is NOT an analog for this storm...and dec 1969 doesnt look good either... to be honest, none of the KU storms are analogs because of the position of the hP....none have it escaping east early in the storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTrials Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Amazing, the gfs is so fast and now is pretty much a Miller B Either this model is completely lost or its picked up something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 This run isn't even strong at all through 84. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chubbs Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 GFS looks similar to 12z/18z. High in good position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattinpa Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 GFS looks similar to 12z/18z. High in good position. At 84 hrs, it looks pretty weak, though. Does it get its act together after? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisNJ Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 feb 1979 is NOT an analog for this storm...and dec 1969 doesnt look good either... to be honest, none of the KU storms are analogs because of the position of the hP....none have it escaping east early in the storm. Re-read my post, never said analog. Basically the only two even remotely closely and I will reiterate that every storm and pattern has its differences. The bottom line, as DT said, is looking for surface lows which travel from the south to adjacent or on the Delmarva/NJ coast with high pressure escaping east. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 102.NYC gets clipped with a trough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisNJ Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 BTW, Hurricane is about to show what the difference is between Sleet and Freezing Rain..pertains to what someone earlier asked about in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ace0927 Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 At 84 hrs, it looks pretty weak, though. Does it get its act together after? nope- on ewall its out to 102 hrs and its way easy..very weak... i wonder if that second SW is acting as a kicker (as i mentioned last night) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LVblizzard Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 This is probably just the GFS progressive bias at work again...remember what it did with last week's s/w. The GFS never amplified it and instead gave everybody a light snowfall instead of a moderate/heavy one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattinpa Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 102.NYC gets clipped with a trough. We get a CCB band, so it's not a total loss. But amazing how far apart the Euro and GFS are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.