qg_omega

23 minutes ago, NJwx85 said:

I’m blaming the time difference and because we have no recon and the storm is weakening.

I would be shocked if you see conditions as bad as Sandy

This thread is dead considering

6 minutes ago, NJwx85 said:

But I should end up well within 200 miles and in the NE quadrant 

I doubt you experience wind and surge worse than Sandy, main threats to Hawaii is rain from fresh water flooding

https://abc7ny.com/weather/man-dies-after-being-struck-by-lightning-at-long-island-park/3995410/
 

Some of the loudest thunder I ever heard last night, some scary close strikes

Looks like decent storm about to hit bridge

pouring

This storm will knock down SST significantly, I would be shocked if this is overcome by the persistent southerly flow for next week.  

1 hour ago, powderfreak said:

Not sure how it gets hotter, we are pushing what's possible at this point.

Agreed

Incredible dew points with this heat my Davis read 80 yesterday's with a Max heat index of 115

There was an mcs last night?

20 bucks no NYC station records SW, South, SE, E, NE winds over 50mph

4 hours ago, psv88 said:

$20 bet that no NYC ASOS records a wind gust over 50 mph. Any takers? 

Your going to lose this on NW winds CAA

58 minutes ago, psv88 said:

I meant last night. Was pretty wild. Very good thunder and lightning. Loudest thunder since i moved to Commack in March 2015. nearly 4" of rain and howling winds. 

amazing how localized it was but I guess thats convection for ya

49 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

Based on Maria's 11 am position (18.4°N, 66.5°W) over northern Puerto Rico almost between Arecibo and San Juan, there is little change in the probability of landfall based on the historic data set and the data set adjusted for the current synoptic pattern. It appears that Maria will likely find a weakness in the ridging to its north-northeast somewhere in the vicinity of 72.5°W-73.5°W.

This scenario is consistent with the 9/28 0z run of the ECMWF. The ECMWF has displayed consistently superior performance throughout the duration of Maria's lifetime so far. By 72 hours, no model has come close to its performance. For purposes of comparison, the GFS has an error that is twice as large as the ECMWF. The lower-verifying GFS, not the ECMWF, has periodically flirted with landfall scenarios on a number of runs over the past two days.

By the time Maria reaches the weakness, it will likely turn northward and then come under the increasing influence of Jose's still expansive circulation. Most of the overnight guidance resulted in Jose's circulation shrinking especially beyond 72 hours, but not enough to allow Maria to escape its influence. Therefore, if the guidance is right, Maria should then turn northeastward and away from the U.S. Coast.

Based on the overall spread in the EPS and GEFS combined with the adjusted data set (1-in-3 probability of landfall), there still remains some possibility of landfall on the mainland U.S. My thinking of a 30% probability may be a bit generous, but there haven't been sufficiently large changes in the guidance for me to change that idea.

Possible factors that could increase Maria's landfall prospects include:

1. More expansive ridging to Maria's north that results in its tracking farther west than currently modeled
2. More persistent ridging  to Maria's that results in a delayed turn to the north toward the influence of Jose's circulation
3. More rapid weakening and/or departure of Jose than currently modeled
4. Slower forward motion for Maria than anticipated over the next 72 hours

Disagree, we want Maria to speed up to increase chances of a US landfall.  Jose is not a big issue, ideally we want Jose to move as far SW as possible to grab Maria and sling it NW.  The faster Maria moves the better chance it has at impacting the US ahead of a massive trough foretasted over the area by next weekend. 

3 minutes ago, OSUmetstud said:

These probabilities seem incredibly unrealistic 

terrible

8 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Not looking good for verification.

LOL