Jump to content

OceanStWx

Meteorologist
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,221

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by OceanStWx

  1. OceanStWx
    I see Ekster already got to the snow grids for tomorrow night, because it looks like we have a solid advisory-level for most in there now.
  2. OceanStWx
    We get the entire 12/00z ECMWF runs at 80 km. No 06/18z. So really even for ECMWF stuff the internet has better resolution, more runs, and similar available fields.
  3. OceanStWx
    Well to a lot of the NWS if it isn't in the AWIPS toolbox then it's not in the toolbox at all. But so much good data is available online now that I'm not sure how one does a forecast without the internet. In fact, if I'm long term now I don't really even use AWIPS beyond analyzing the current upper air pattern. Everything else I use is online (ensemble sensitivity, EPS/GEFS, ensemble situational awareness tool, CIPS, etc).
  4. OceanStWx
    If you get approved for CWOP then your obs will come directly into AWIPS and our obs grids and BOX won't be able to ignore northeast CT anymore.
  5. OceanStWx
    I think the "worst" reviews" it's had so far have been from SPC and NHC. The NHC doesn't love the significant right of track bias but understands that it can correct for that so gave it a passing grade. Similar with SPC and the low CAPE bias (due to overmixing the boundary layer).
  6. OceanStWx
    For a while we were the only two who cared to consult the EPS for a forecast, but we've indoctrinated the kids now and even some of the short timers.
  7. OceanStWx
    Technically it's in its test phase. If there are no hiccups between now and February it will replace v15. So far the evaluations have been favorable from each region and SPC/NHC/WPC. But you never know what kinds of problems could crop up, and it only takes one issue to fail the test.
  8. OceanStWx
    When you step up into the professional multi-license (so you can view on several computers at once in an office setting) it starts to get pricey. Some WFOs are being denied the funds to open up a subscription, so I consider us lucky to have a 4 license subscription at GYX. It's crazy though, if we didn't I would also be asking Ginx for screenshots of the EPS. Spent all our money on the radar page and have nothing left to bandwidth and model data. I kid. Mostly.
  9. OceanStWx
    There's always room to adjust up later.
  10. OceanStWx
    I do work the event tomorrow...
  11. OceanStWx
    Around 13,000 ft over FFL there is a nice KDP signal for dendritic growth (KDP between 0.2 and 0.8). Not surprised it's coming down good in that area.
  12. OceanStWx
    Depends on the algorithm used to create the clown map. Some do all precip below 32 degrees as 10:1 snow. Even sleet in a Kuchera map is not going to be perfect. You would need temps aloft pushing 5C to get Kuchera down to a 2:1 sleet ratio.
  13. OceanStWx
    Actually because most of the lot was natural waste area that couldn't be cleared it's a lot of overgrown crap. I'm trying to slowly reclaim some of it by planting native species and do things like blueberry for the kids to pick. But those first couple of years are key to getting the roots to take hold. I could use a nice pattern that retains my pack during the heart of winter. Torches followed by brutal cold ain't going to help the shallow root systems.
  14. OceanStWx
    Can't wait until I'm yelling at my own kid to get off my lawn. Actually I'm having more trouble insulating my new plants with the lack of snow cover.
  15. OceanStWx
    I've been spending a lot of time on the lawn, so yeah hands (and feet) off!
  16. OceanStWx
    Banana hammocks as far as the eye can see.
  17. OceanStWx
    I've seen a few evaluations for the v16 now. On the whole it performs better than the GFS for a lot of things. Primarily you'll probably hear about its 500 mb Z scores. So far it's running a solid 3rd (behind Euro/Ukie) and a definite improvement over V15. It also improved the medium range cold bias. It does however have a significant right of track bias on TCs, and still overmixes the boundary layer and produces lower CAPE than ideal.
  18. OceanStWx
    I get to light the fuse and run on Thursday afternoon, so it won't be my problem. Ensemble sensitivity shows a tough pattern. It could be interpreted as both a position error (mainly due to timing) or a strength error (in the vicinity of CHH). Gut feeling is that if you lower the pressure significantly near CHH, you lock the cold across the interior.
  19. OceanStWx
    I was actually curious if you had a specific call you were joking about. Our snowfall stats look great to start the year at GYX, but I would argue strongly that both "big" events were actually pretty shitty forecasts on our part.
  20. OceanStWx
    Deja vu of what? Picking apart a GFS point sounding at 33 F at this range is a fool's errand, regardless of whether or not the pattern supports a cooler scenario. Tossing the GFS thermal field but only to go colder is too simplistic, that's why I posted.
  21. OceanStWx
    Never mind that the GFS bias is still too cold in the low levels in the medium/long range.
  22. OceanStWx
    Chris yes, and also 1998 is a great example of the rippling waves along a pre-set background environment favorable for ice. The primary remained near the Ohio Valley but shortwave energy propagating east along the surface front kept the baggy low pressure near Cape Cod. Never really got into heavy precip rates, and made it one very efficient event.
  23. OceanStWx
    I feel like this is typically the biggest difference between an ice storm and the nuisance events we usually get. In the ice storm scenario we sustain the forcing to produce precip, not just the cold sticking around. Most often though the mid level warm front ends up in CYUL while we are left with drizzle and low clouds just north of the surface warm front. The QPF is going to stick with the mid level forcing, despite what the models may show.
  24. OceanStWx
  25. OceanStWx
    Therein lies the problem. PoP from models are created from QPF. The more QPF the higher the PoP (to a certain extent, it's not like you need 5 inches to get 100% PoP). So even if a model is spitting out a lot of 0.01" amounts, that will translate to a low PoP. And if you blend a bunch of models with 0.01" in different locations, the PoP can go even lower. So you manually need to increase the values. That's usually the failure point in the forecasts.
×
×
  • Create New...