Jump to content

larrye

Members
  • Posts

    253
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by larrye

  1. 3 minutes ago, nycwinter said:

    the euro does not  have the credibility it once had..it is just as erratic as the other models..

    Just because its solution isn't what you want?

    Face it, even the Euro has had an eastern solution the entire week with the highest totals on LI and in NE the further east you go. This may be a realistic trend, or it may be an anomaly or a wobble. We'll find out later. But even in prior runs, this wasn't really looking like much of a NYC and points N&W storm.

  2. 2 minutes ago, NJwx85 said:

    As others have said, battle going on internally because of the double barrel lows.

    Need the energy to consolidate into one large storm.

    If that happens we will end up with something similar to what the 00z NAM had.

    If this doesn't happen and we get an elongated duel surface low than the 12"+ amounts will be delegated to Suffolk County, North and East and the wind threat will be much lower.

    Wouldn't that depend upon where the energy consolidates?

  3. 31 minutes ago, Joe4alb said:

    My father passed away this morning, and he was the inspiration that got me into weather. We used to sit and chat about every storm for hours. This storm is him saying goodbye. :cry:

    Really sorry to hear - my condolences to you and your family. Just lost my Mom 6 months ago so know what you're going through.

    • Like 5
    • Sad 1
  4. 17 minutes ago, Jt17 said:

    It's hard to say - this is a very cold storm. We're used to mixing at the coast, etc. with our big storms. That ain't it this time.

    Respect your opinion, you probably know more than I do about this stuff. But 39" in western suffolk? Knowing that the NAM usually overstates QPF? It would have to get under some pretty good banding for several hours and I don't know if the intense banding will get far enough west for that. I guess we'll see. But I would prefer to use the 10-1 ratio maps and add a bit to increase the ratios if appropriate for temps ... then stating that higher amounts can be expected underneath areas where banding sets up.

    • Like 1
  5. 2 minutes ago, Jt17 said:

     

    These 2 posts came in, right after the other. Posting 10-1 is just as silly as Kuchera. The ratios will be different all over the map and in a storm this cold almost universally better than 10-1. In parts about Kuchera shows, in others slightly better and others slightly worse. And I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure Kuchera accounts for wind diminishing the effects of ratios. Can people stop acting like they know better than the physics and algorithms of these models?

    Come on ... some of those amounts on the Kuchera maps you know are not gonna happen.

    • Like 1
  6. 1 hour ago, USCG RS said:

    Models are tools, not what the eventual outcome of the weather will be.

    So if the H5 is gorgeous and the sfc is horrific, I am going to forecast with the H5 in mind and let the sfc play catch up (if it ever does)

    How often does the H5 in mind with no surface back up turn out to be valid vs. a bust?

  7. 8 minutes ago, MANDA said:

    This would be a very welcome and appreciated snow event for this forum if expectations were not set so high early in the week with some of the very intense and epic solutions the Euro and EPS were showing and at times CMC and GFS back 5-7 days out.  Given the winter so far if this forum gets something close to the 12Z Euro take it and run!

    I dunno. To me, I saw this coming all week long. I didn't look at the Kuchera maps. The GFS was never consistently at or inside the benchmark that I recall. And while the Euro was better, from what I recall, it also was either a bit east at times or was developing the storm too late.  I didn't know how much would fall, but I pretty much was thinking that it was looking like this was a NE and eastern LI storm with lower amounts as you go west and not much north and west of NYC. I didn't think we'd see 35" near NYC.

  8. 12 minutes ago, Jt17 said:

    It's not even about what's going to be depicted on this run or the next, what he's trying to say is if H5 literally looked like that in real time as the storm happened, the output would be for more snow than the model runs are spitting out.

    Forgive me ... but why would the model put down surface output that didn't reflect what it sees at the upper levels? There must be something that is causing that.

  9. 11 minutes ago, USCG RS said:

    No, the H5s are depicted beautifully. The surface is depicted a bit poorly. In my opinion. 

    I always go by H5 over sfc when looking at models. This H5 -to me- screams KU

    I'll ask you the same question I asked someone else earlier. What good is a favorable H5 if the surface doesn't reflect it? Are you also saying that perhaps the surface features on the next run will better reflect the H5?

  10. 11 minutes ago, Volcanic Winter said:

    There are stages of interactions that lead to the surface depiction. If one of the earlier and more crucial stages is showing a more favorable look than before above the surface, going forward it could lead to more significant changes downstream even if the current run doesn't show it yet. 

    Atleast that would be my ELI5 understanding. 

    In other words, the "facts" are that the 12z GFS did come west just a little bit more, but its track is still east and given the strength, its depiction of the point at which the deepening occurs, and the 12z depiction of the surface features, it has not converged with the Euro's solution and depicts a less intense solution ... ALTHOUGH, the upper air features on the 12z GFS do indicate some improvement and if that continues, MIGHT be the harbinger of a more favorable surface change on the 18z or 00z. 

    • Like 2
  11. 30 minutes ago, Snowlover11 said:

    you got to look at more than just the surface.

    Well, let me ask you a dumb question then. What good is an improvement at the upper levels if there isn't any corresponding improvement at the surface? Doesn't the surface ultimately reflect the QPF? Seriously, set me straight.

  12. 31 minutes ago, HeadInTheClouds said:

    These models are so so bad. Ukie gives a major snowstorm to NYC after giving them nothing at 12z. So bad. GFS is still lost in Newfoundland and 18z Nam was a total embarrassment. Good Lord. 

    Actually, even though the 00z NAM came back west, if I remember correctly ... it called out about 10" on LI and even less in NYC proper. And the NAM usually overstates QPF. Not exactly in agreement with with the UK and the Euro. 

  13. 44 minutes ago, KeithB said:

    100% agree.

    Anyone who says the snow threat is dead and it has no chance is a fool. Does it look good, no. But, if you take the average model guidance, and shift it say 75 to 100 miles west, there would still be a major event. Averaged guidance 84 hours out is off by that amount or more a pretty reasonable % of the time. Maybe 15%? I can't say what the exact % is, but it is nowhere in the vicinity of 0%. We have just recently had a storm that moved that distance west from 84 hour guidance. So it's far from impossible. So to say there is no chance is just people doing their usual pessimistic bs, or this is their first rodeo and do not understand how these storms go/ can go

    The way I see it, it's foolhardy to declare it either way at this point.

    • Like 3
  14. 16 minutes ago, jm1220 said:

    This won't be a situation where the QPF is overdone. The moisture coming into this storm will be absurd if the capture/partial stall really does happen. I definitely see 30" happening somewhere in a scenario like that. Of course if it's progressive and doesn't happen that'll be overstated.

    The question is where? To my "novice" eye, it looks way out east on LI or in NE.

×
×
  • Create New...