Welcome to American Weather

Jim Marusak

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jim Marusak

  • Birthday 01/21/1974

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Four Letter Airport Code For Weather Obs (Such as KDCA)
  • Gender
  • Location:
    st paul, MN
  1. well, the last couple of days, we've been trending on getting cold enough on the backside of a system coming from BC that snow is seriously being talked about here, even in the twin cities metro. not saying it accumulates that much, as of this moment. but still, it looks like the first snowfall of the year. current projections say the magic 850T should be between -3C and -4C, and snow amounts look to be higher for areas west of US 61 than east of it, maybe even moving that boundary closer to I-35. time for snow talk peeps.
  2. theoretical thought on this.... given the pressure gradient in the vertical (omega component) in the troposphere (150hPa in ~1.6km, 500hPa in ~5.7km); in a global, synoptic, and even large mesoscale sense, I just can't imagine a scenario where this can realistically happen in the horizontal (u-v components). in the small mesoscale and microscale, I could see it as possible, with the thing remotely closest to it being a tornado. But even then, I don't think the pressure drop between the outer environment and inside the wall of the strongest vorticies is remotely close to that, if I remember correctly. and given the hydrostatic dynamic also assumed here, that means that vertically, this could only go so far before gravity took over and dampened the effectofanypressur e gradient force in the vertical. so, the only way, imho, in which what you are thinking about in theory can happen, is if you suspended hydrostatic balance.
  3. Even if that is the case, it is still ONE MORE THING Trump can do to crap on our governmental science agencies. one of the interesting appointments for the assistant heads of NOAA though is one of the main people behind the modeling and weather services at Panasonic. And remember, they have been making claims in being able to integrate more data, especially aircraft data, into their version of the GFS, which has accuracy claims much better then the current NOAA version of the GFS. So, depending how that relationship is, that may actually lead to much better data ingest into the current models, which may help our accuracy despite other problems. I would like to maybe see questions on how he may integrate that into the nationwide modeling effort. But will the senators ask about that?
  4. the other large weather companies would sue them into oblivion if they tried, if for no other reason then trying to create a monopoly, which would run into a rare enforcement of the Sherman Anti-Trust act.
  5. ok folks, it's official. the CEO of Accu-Weather Barry Myers has been officially nominated to run NOAA as of 10-11-2017. And I know this may be political, but as well, this pick, if confirmed, will affect the enterprise as we know it, and could affect everything from radar and model availability to the current warning system, basic forecast availability, and even employment and research within the enterprise. http://www.nature.com/news/weather-company-chief-executive-is-trump-s-pick-to-lead-climate-agency-1.22311?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews&sf121239396=1 so, in as professional a manner as possible (which I know may be hard to get sometimes), what's your thoughts on this?
  6. have to admit, i'm not totally up on the latest in high end military drone tech. But i'm not sure we have a drone in our arsenal or in existence that can actually mechanically take the turbulent stresses that major hurricanes near mountains can deliver. if we do, it must be like an x-class experimental plane or something like that.
  7. so, what type of clues are we looking at for the turn based off the 00Z raobs now available (SPC and elsewhere)?
  8. hate to say it, but if this storm goes any much further west than Tampa, you're not going to be talking about Miami damage anymore. you're talking almost worst case scenario for Tampa Bay, as their worst case has it landfall of a 4 or 5 just west/northwest of the city, bringing the storm surge right into the bay. I hope that doesn't happen, as that would paint a different narrative on Irma.
  9. guys and gals, not sure how relevant this is to the discussion, but we've had a couple of X-class and a couple of M-class solar flares over the last 36 hours (one of which was an X-9). I know this won't directly affect Irma itself. But we've been apparently been wavering between a G-2 and G-4 geomagnetic storm over the last few hours, and may do so for another 24-48 hours. this type of geomagnetic storm may affect satellites and their data, as well as some radio transmissions. hopefully this doesn't degrade any data we will be getting on Irma (and Jose and Katia) from up top for the next few days, when we need it the most.
  10. assuming that the track line is the centerline of Irma (no guarantee by any means, but for assumption's sake), the winds would be fairly strong off-shore until the end from the northeast. so it wouldn't be the worst case scenario by any means. but imho, if you're not sure about your safety, don't take a chance with this hurricane and depart.
  11. I have friends all along the i-95 side of Florida. The ones from the Space Coast to Jacksonville were there for last year's storm, so they have a better idea where to go. But one friend from HS recently moved to the PBI area in the last couple of months, working for Burns and McConnell. And I know he doesn't know where the major evac routes will be if these runs come close to reality (higher central pressure of course, but geographic path). I'm hoping he and his wife will know to get out of there in time.
  12. I'm not a modeling specialist, i'm more a forecaster, so please take this with a grain of salt. it can have some effect on the synoptic scale. but more than anything else, it has effects on things like strength and precipitation, things most affected by latent heat and heat balance (like the old LFM model, where you had a famous issue to cut the qpf by 1/2 because of an extra 2 in the latent heat equations) no argument. the big issue came about when they made the most recent changes to the GFS, as I understand things. They couldn't have the model perfectly coupled with the ocean in the atlantic apparently due to model stability and other issues. others in here know more about those changes than I do. But the discussion floating around is that this season, the changes have just not been good on the intensity side while on the track is hasn't been too bad. sort of a compromise done with this version which I hope they don't have to do with the next update.
  13. from what everyone is saying in here, we have a model issue. basically, the heat balance is off as it's going off of statistical normal ocean water temperatures, not what actually is going on. it's de-coupling the ocean. and when you de-couple the ocean like that, things tend to go towards the extremes more than what might be more typical as it doesn't take into potential account things like upwelling, anomalies in temperatures, or other issues.
  14. 900? heck no, way too low for an o/u bet. now if you set that o/u line at say 930 or 935 for an opening line, I think you might get some action on both sides.
  15. it's what i've been saying for the last few days when people ask me. the main inflection point for all the models was between the Leewards and the central Bahamas. so when we get to leewards and then the central Bahamas, that's when we'll start to worry and be able to pick our spots. until then, it has been a crap shoot at best.