OceanStWx

That URL Grinchy fungal foes sounds like what happens when you get one of those sticky 70 degree Christmas Days and you haven't installed yet.

I could argue up to 112 mph if @dendrite's coops are well built and get swept away. https://www.spc.noaa.gov/efscale/1.html

Not your classic sounding for supercellular tornadoes for sure. BUT if you keep an eye on that 0-3 km shear value, if we can keep it near 30 kt it may be enough for QLCS brief tornadoes. That's really going to be most of our tornado cases anyway. We don't get the long, looping hodographs unless it's 6/1/11 and you have hot dogs to sell.

I mean the RAP forecast FZL for like FIT is near 16,000 ft. So very warm, but just looking at the shape of CAPE, there is enough there in the growth zone. Kind of like what we had Sunday up here. It was a lower FZL, but it was mostly big drops with pennies and dimes mixed in.

This is Maple Hollow erasure.

It still give a salute when I drive through Sturbridge on 84 after 6/1/11. You can still see the scar in the tree growth on top of that hill to the west of the highway.

I'm off, but now I'm kinda itching to put myself up for OT.

Oldie but a goodie.

For those about to rock.

X and I were just looking through that. Sure seems like SPC needs to hop on expanding that.

I saw that view looking a little north of west from my location, so she must've been north of me by a little bit.

Got some initiation off the backdoor and old outflows up here, cell near Denmark is going to be pushing 3" in one hour. About 3.25" is a 1000 year event for 60 minutes.

4 ply kind of day

Dinner wasn't the only thing marinating?

Humans definitely edit the grids over the top of things like the NBM, but it's increasingly becoming more dominated by NBM guidance as staffing gets worse and worse.

MVY

Congrats on the 49!

July morning of yore.

Not great, Bob. That's going to be my biggest loss with the NAM.

Clearing out some of the computing resources also potentially leads to more model runs. There are ways to get more data out of this.

It was like 2017ish. It was a bit of a Frankenstein "model". We really wanted some sort of probabilistic convective scale guidance, but it takes a lot of computing to run a large CAM ensemble. So somebody smarter than me decided to take what we already had running (ARW, HRRR, NSSL, etc) and turn them into a poor man's ensemble along with the 12 hour old versions of the same models. Pros: it provides some probability-like forecast parameters, it has a range of models/convective cores that can provide insight when biases are known. Cons: it is not a true ensemble, as you would prefer one core and the entire range of possibilities for that.

That's the theory of the case anyway. Instead of pouring resources into multiple models, we can focus all our energy on making the RRFS really good. Of course the FV3 core was really not great for convection and had to be scrapped. So now we're starting over with MPAS for a core. In an ideal world you would have the GFS/GEFS for longer range, RRFS/REFS for the inside 60 hours, and WoFS for storm scale, event driven cases.

I could have if I had been at work. As far as I know it is still 5 min. Temps are taken every min, and the high temp is the highest 5 min average. The only 2 min check I know on temps is to ensure they aren't more than 10 deg different on the 1 min obs (if they are it is set to missing). Winds are 2 min, so maybe that's the confusion.