Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About nrhardin

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location:
    Louisville, CO
  1. Mountain West- Winter

    That would be excellent for snowpack, and the plains drought. I'd love it, too. Regardless it looks pretty cold for the next couple of weeks.
  2. Mountain West- Winter

    I'm pretty new to the area as well, and I'm sure others have better perspectives. In general what you'd like to see for good accumulations along the Front Range would be favorable jet position, but even more so easterly flow. Ideally the easterly flow would be deep (surface to 500mb) and with good fetch, but in this storm it's pretty shallow (not much above 700 mb). This is anticyclonic upslope (i.e. due to clockwise flow around an area of high pressure to our north) as opposed to cyclonic upslope, which would be due to a low to the south of the Denver metro. I think in general anticyclonic upslope doesn't "perform" as well as cyclonic. Of course we're also dealing with an extremely dry, arctic airmass. Either way I'm looking forward to seeing some snow!
  3. Mountain West- Winter

    I've always despised the NAM QPF, especially close to an event. Regardless of my feelings, the NAM can be said to be an outlier for the Front Range. Not saying it can't be right, but it's on its own. I think the NWS is calling it correctly. A conservative forecast, and the opportunity to bump up totals if needed. I hope the GFS is onto something with some higher totals, though.
  4. Mountain West- Winter

    Looked like the mean was just shy of 5", with most members there or less. I'd take 5" and run at this point. 18z NAM wasn't too shabby either.
  5. Mountain West- Winter

    I'm liking the trend of the trough digging a little harder and sticking around longer. Curious -- what's the actual QPF for those cities?
  6. The Big One - Forecast & Discussion

    Same thing done by RAH for the same reasons. It seems good in theory but it's just too difficult with all of the different disturbances and resultant ptype and geographical differences. You put out a 3 day winter storm warning and people feel compelled to close businesses or cancel school even though it isn't warranted.
  7. Burns' Big Banter Bonanza

    Have you considered that this may relate to the uncertainty facing the Triangle and points east? Snow is snow is snow. Soundings show that the triad is likely to remain all snow....maybe a tiny sleet mixing in for a brief period. Compare that to the rest of the CWA which is a much more difficult forecast.
  8. Burns' Big Banter Bonanza

    They're choosing to handle the watches/advisories as separate events instead of one big event as other offices. This is due mainly to the fact that the wave tonight and tomorrow end up hitting the southern portion of the CWA more than the northern half. I wouldn't sweat the WSW structure. You will have your WSW, as will the entire CWA by later tonight.
  9. The Big One - Forecast & Discussion

    Something interesting about this and different than the previous storm is the predicted high ratios due to excellent omega (lift) occurring in the favored snow growth zone. Compare this to the previous storm where the lift and optimal DGZ were not overlapping so we got the little crystals instead of nice aggregates. I do think such a high ratio per the bufkit data is unlikely, however.
  10. January Banter

    The thought was to keep warning/advisory level accumulations while allowing the saturation issue to play out. Local research suggests between .1 and .2 inches (.15 being middle ground obviously) to saturate an airmass like this. The forecasters are also aware this is not always the case, but again a conservative approach was taken until things become a bit more clear. I don't think anyone would complain if the afternoon update reflects higher accumulations in warranted, while the advisory/warning map stays the same. As a positive there was a report from GSO that the runway ground temp is around 24/25 degrees, so as soon as it starts falling it starts sticking. This is reflected in webcams from areas around Forsyth County where it has started snowing. Also, as many have pointed out, it looks like a dew point depression of around 10 degrees or even more is adequate for moisture to reach the surface. Hopefully the dry layer (which starts around 850mb) will saturate easily.
  11. January Banter

    Look at the 750/800 mb levels. Not a warm nose above freezing, but temps are not as cold as you'd want for cold smoke type powder and there is a bit of an inversion. Another important part of high ratio snow is lower wind speeds...which we are in good shape with.
  12. January Banter

    I haven't heard a ton of talk concerning ratios today. The column is really that cold, and there is a warm nose which is near 1.5C on forecast soundings. I think a 10:1 is the way to play it conservatively. Still is a solid 3-6" snow across Wake County.
  13. 1/28 - 1/30 Storm Thread II

    I'm sure this will throw Brick and others into a frenzy, but a little discussion at RAH about a few of the high res models coming in a little later/drier than the GFS/NAM/Euro. I don't personally think it's concerning as of now given their drier nature, but think a later timing would be preferable. I agree with Allan's call of 3-6 around the Triangle though. Probably 3 for me, 6 for Brick.
  14. 1/28 - 1/30 Storm Thread II

    Barring any wild changes in the models expect WSW to go up a bit further west across the RAH CWA with another row of WWA extending towards the Triad. The WWA more for impact than anything. There may also be a period of sleet for the SE counties tomorrow evening due to a pronounced warm nose. This shouldn't last more than a couple of hours and should move over to all snow shortly after dark.
  15. 1/28 - 1/30 Storm Thread II

    While this is true, there is also growing consensus around the 0.5" mark. Not too shabby and a nice warning criteria event. Regarding the RAH press release...they have conveyed their thoughts well probabilistically in terms of accumulations. The middle scenario is expected, but the lower/higher accumulations are possible. Based on probabilistic output, a higher chance exists for more accumulation in the Triangle rather than lower. This is reflected in the highest probabilities of snow greater than a foot not being along the I-95 corridor, but along the highway 1 corridor. I'm in no way saying that outcome is likely, just that the skew of the ensembles suggests this.