Jump to content

Nomz

Members
  • Posts

    639
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Nomz

  1. I bet that western low deepens and the east low fills in
  2. It's a more classic setup. Cyclogenesis is pretty easy to infer from 500mb, and 500mb at f140 is easier to infer from f60.
  3. Still a whiff though, unless I'm looking at the wrong model run
  4. Full kuchera map. I'd rather be us now than us 10 hours ago.
  5. Talk about diffluence aloft out in front of that thing back to regularly scheduled programming
  6. bncho saying guys while stormtracker says folks says something about america tbh
  7. Their crashout would have been worse than ours last week
  8. After looking at f30 and consulting my ouija board: I have no idea
  9. RGEM west of the GFS but not as negative at end of run. More area to work with, but more work to do. Call it about even.
  10. I was more looking at the western extent of the northern vort. Looked a little bit closer to negative too imo. (Icon left gfs right)
  11. https://efisher828.github.io/weathernext/ 12 hours delayed with limited maps but this is the best i know of
  12. NAM @ h78 looks better, but remember its still the NAM at range. Although I will say most of the improvements were made at initialization, which makes me think that the drops are probably positive data.
  13. Feels like its favoring the AIFS solution. edit: take that back it looks more GFS-like
  14. The bit of vort near Winnipeg. Further west and more amped/slower have ended up with good solutions so far.
  15. "Everything I don't like is an outlier" not great analysis imo
  16. NAM at h30 looks better than the AIFS (i don't have pivotal+) and UK, and worse than GFS and ICON.
  17. Also fwiw, some subjective model reanalysis from 48 hours: https://forecastwatch.com/2026/01/27/major-u-s-snowstorm-forecast-accuracy-analysis-january-23-26/ Good to know everyone blew it for us
  18. I believe thats what Euro AIFS and AIGFS do, no? Use AI to adjust raw model outputs?
×
×
  • Create New...