OSUmetstud

It's not a storm without crazy ampd NAM runs. 

Just now, rochesterdave said:

Could dynamic cooling help? 

Yes for sure. If a similar representation happens I'd think it would be snow. I think the rdps is overdoing the effect of downsloping off the Apps. 

5 minutes ago, wolfie09 said:

Tt shows snow but 850s are +0C..Both the algorithm and the model sucks, wouldn't worry about it to much lol

Its orange on wxbell. And the 850 t on the sound is above freezing. I like the rdps a great deal as a model but this is far outside its normal range. I like to use it more like the NAM...mostly only within 48 h. 

15 minutes ago, vortmax said:

That's heavy-ass snow. You can see the sleet just north of the Frzr layer.

It's sleet over buffalo. I posted about this earlier. 

4 minutes ago, Thinksnow18 said:

It might be why the deformation zone is over WNY is that’s where the best lift will be and copious amounts of Atlantic moisture which could be sneaking in Atlantic air

I think its probably overcooked. The mountain downslope process is a real thing. But that crazy inflow is not just at 850 it's present at 700 and even at 500. So the local temperature change should be offset a great deal through all that inflow converting to adiabatic lift. 

I think the random ip showing up in buffalo on the rdps near the end of the run is the result of downsloping off the Apps/Alleghany front. It's a weird feature and a bit unexpected but physically possible. 

6 hours ago, ORH_wxman said:

This looks more like a La Nina than any of the other previous ones we've had since 2011.

 

The pdo is the lowest since 1955 lol. Very chilly pac overall. 

I think you'd argue that's a pretty good Nina look. 

2 minutes ago, Wannabehippie said:

First pass was 932MB second pass is 943. ERC causing the pressure to go up or did they miss the area of lowest pressure?

Looks real. 941mb estimated on the latest dropsonde. Pressure rise of 12mb. 

other folks having the same discussions lol. 

Damn thing looks like shit compared to earlier. What a shame. 

Raw T down to 5.5 now lol.

Just now, jpeters3 said:

That's quite the argument you put forward to support a tongue and cheek line. 

For the record, I want it to have been cat 5.

I believe it was a cat 5 yes. The only evidence we are ever going to have is the satellite degradation in the past few hours before recon and the pressure. Because there's nothing else. So either they think that's enough or they don't in best track. And that's fine. I'm making a case. You don't have to like what I'm presenting. But you actually suggested there's no evidence. That's not true either. You just don't think the evidence im presenting is strong enough. 

Just now, jpeters3 said:

Could it have been cat 5? Yes.  But is there obvious evidence pointing to cat 5 intensity? No.  Ad-hoc arguments about pressure falls don't constitute obvious evidence. 

We all know it was a cat 5 was a tongue in cheek line, you're taking it too seriously lol. 

2 minutes ago, jpeters3 said:

This is not enough evidence to warrant a cat 5 upgrade, and not enough to say "we all know it was cat 5."  We don't, and the objective evidence suggests to the contrary. 

What would be enough evidence?  ADT number near or above 140 kt + flight-level winds high enough + SFMR >> 140 kt.  We didn't get that.  No cat 5.  Sorry.  You can wishcast all you want, but that doesn't change things.

Obviously NHC experts agree.

Well this is your opinion and that's fine. The degradation in satellite presentation is literally an objective measure. It's almost fallen a full T number in the past 5 hours. 

They could still upgrade in best track. 

Just now, jpeters3 said:

All you did was repost a twitter post where someone is also hand waving.  Eyeballing the wind-pressure relationship in this plot (which shows substantial scatter for a given pressure), an argument could be made for anywhere between 130-130 kt. 

so ****ing what? 

All intensity estimates are subjective. It's total gaslighting to suggest the pressure drop of 15mb from yesterday along with a degraded satellite intensity over the past 3-5 hours isn't at least some evidence that it was stronger a few hours ago before the plane arrived. 

1 minute ago, jpeters3 said:

You are objectively out to lunch.  SFMR has a known high bias and readings were inconsistent with flight level winds.  Dropsonde probably hit a gust/meso-vortex.  There is no double wind max.  And Pressure vs wind is not linear.  Sorry.

929mb on the sonde when the damn thing has dropped almost a full T number in objective dvorak in the past 5 hours lol. 

I know it aint much but there's something here:

223300 1425N 05051W 6958 03062 9910 +109 +100 013066 070 068 005 00
223330 1425N 05049W 6953 03048 9887 +109 +102 012072 073 070 004 00
223400 1425N 05047W 6957 03024 9850 +124 +093 012074 076 072 003 00
223430 1425N 05045W 6950 03004 9817 +124 +091 012081 082 074 006 00
223500 1425N 05043W 6935 02973 9736 +153 +086 010091 094 066 029 00
223530 1425N 05041W 6951 02900 9693 +134 +103 011112 119 111 077 00
223600 1425N 05039W 6978 02772 9607 +119 +133 359107 117 121 071 01
223630 1425N 05037W 6984 02647 9423 +183 +135 345067 096 134 035 00

Raw T has dropped to 5.8 now. It was 6.7 just a few hours ago. The IR sat looks obviously degraded and it looks like a hurricane in the midst of an ERC. 

1 minute ago, jpeters3 said:

Literally no evidence to suggest that this made cat 5 intensity.  ADT peaked at 130 kt (consistent with NHC CI).  Pressure is more typical of cat 4. And no, they are not going to upgrade it in a post storm analysis with 0 evidence.

I should add, ADT was remarkably consistent with what the recon found yesterday.

This is just objectively not true. 

Multiple SFMR readings of Cat 5 surface winds via recon yesterday

Dropsonde yesterday supported Cat 5 intensity

The satellite intensity has obviously degraded over the last few hours before recon entered

The pressure dropped 15 mb since yesterday's recon (~929 mb) and now there's a double wind max, suggesting that intensity peaked before they entered. 

Just now, WxWatcher007 said:

WE do...but will the NHC say it  

It might be a 5 now. But it was stronger a few hours before the ERC started. Maybe they'll find it on the next pass. 

Just now, WxWatcher007 said:

I don't think the NHC will, not right now at least. That might be a postseason analysis question. That said, they still need to sample the other quadrants of the eyewall. 

We all know it was 5 earlier lol. 

4 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

That's the flight to sample the environment, while NOAA2 will sample the center. Not sure how many passes they will get given the distance from their takeoff location. 

Thanks. I was wondering why they didn't drop in and do a center pass. 

1 minute ago, Windspeed said:

7 minutes ago, OSUmetstud said:

It's just flashes. The GLM is an optical instrument. Doesn't know what type of lightning. 

I'm not even sure why I typed CGs ( i.e cloud-to-ground). I wasn't even thinking CGs when I made the post. But, yes, just GLM remote sensing data.

Lol yeah. All good. We do some lightning forecast for an energy client in Ontario so I know a little about the differences. Yeah the CG stuff I believe is detected by the land based network. The GLM is better at night because of this. Less interference from the sun. 

https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/text/URNT15-NOAA.shtml

Can always go old school at the look at the HDOB file. It looks likes there two NOAA planes on the way.