weatherwiz

If I was an observer at the airport and a tornado was headed towards the tower I'd stay until the very end and the last thing I would do is issue a SPECI and in the remarks say, "About to Die"

1 minute ago, dendrite said:

Gotta love flood watches in areas with D1 drought

we'll get a widespread 3-4" of rain and still see the drought monitor go up a level next update

the flood watches have flown 

2 minutes ago, Sey-Mour Snow said:

https://x.com/intelpointalert/status/2081796276396363946?s=46

Hoping there are no injuries or fatalities. That looks awful 

EDIT: well no fatalities, I see injuries reported  

ATW gusted to 45 knots. No report of funnel or TOR in the METAR but looks like it may have formed extremely close to the airport or passed by very close

yikes

50 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Feels nice to get these high dews back today 

Next week is going to be great when we pump in 70+ dews

1 minute ago, Brian5671 said:

3k nam shows what you're saying

ahh yeah I didn't check the 3km yet. Something like that is exactly what I am trying to envision happening. You can see too how that really hammers the lower Hudson down to around Newark...could be some serious flooding down that way. 

2 minutes ago, CT Rain said:

Strong dynamics for late July.

Seems like someone will get crushed to me. 

Someone for sure, but how widespread of an area? That's what I'm a bit iffy on. Could be the Berks that get smoked in this. 

1 minute ago, ineedsnow said:

congrats @weatherwiz

 

That's cute 

Love how the bullseye is right over me. That's how you know it isn't happening

But looks like the NAM wants to pump the fire hose Wednesday night. Still seems a quite a bit overdone 

ehhh this isn't looking that impressive for widespread significant rainfall totals. Greatest concern for several inches of rain is going to be the Hudson Valley into NJ tomorrow into the overnight but as the system continues sliding east its going to begin occluding. Also seems like there are two warm fronts with this...we get a diffuse warm front maybe into southern CT and dynamics are solid...so we're going to see rain but it should generally be light-to-moderate and a bit more on the spotty side with heavier rain tied into convection. The true warm front seems to get pinched off well south. 

There will be some wild gradients with totals...some spots will probably see 2-3-4" of rain (but really spread out over multiple days) and some spots may struggle to even get an inch. All in all, a nice good soaking rain for some, perfect because the ground can easily absorb it and limit any major concerns for flooding. Could be big flooding through Hudson Valley into NJ 

I wonder if we can muster up a sunrise surprise setup across Long Island or coastal CT/RI early Wednesday morning 

I think too alot of how this evolves is tied into how the convective scenario evolves today within the Great Lakes/Ohio Valley which remains quite complex 

2 hours ago, CoastalWx said:

3k Nam goes ham in western CT but end of its range doesn’t quite show what happens for everyone else. 
 

Think one jack is probably SWCT and maybe secondary ern/SE MA. 
 

It doesn’t end there, aftn stuff Thursday and maybe even Friday. So many get a good drink. 

Agreed on this. You can see that hinted at just looking at how the mlvls evolve. This is more like a cool season evolution than something we usually see in the warm season. Just looking at 700 RH you can see the idea of two jack zones and where

I don't know if I see much flooding potential outside of any typical flood-prone areas that flood if it precipitates for more than 5 minutes. A lot of this is drawn out over multiple days and ends up being more convective in nature. There will be a good slug of rain early on in the setup with the warm front or even triple point but this looks to occlude rather quickly. Any flooding risk probably confined to (if) any areas that are hit with several rounds of convection. 

love how this tiny spec of green gets right to where ineedsnow is  

47 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

I think there’s pretty good potential for a good 1-3” over a widespread area. Someone will get much more where it pivots. You have instability working in over high theta e converging on a warm front. 

Agreed

15 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Imagine moving to MT and thinking you're getting away from the heat

the heat will always find you 

Gotta be extremely careful here just rip and reading total QPF maps. It might be difficult to get widespread amounts as modeled. The axis of highest totals is going to be confined to where the warm front is located and this will be a narrow axis. Also potential for this to close off to our west which would introduce dry slot concerns. Going to be a quite a bit of convection though so there are going to be some areas that probably get smoked, but we may see some drastic differences in precip. amounts across the region when all said and done. There should be some concern though for some significant flash flooding but how widespread? 

6 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Wed is a big severe threat . At least SNE

Certainly looks like there will be some risk for strong-to-severe storms 

Doesn't really look like a washout to me this week. Looks to be more daytime heating driven scattered-to-numerous showers and thunderstorms. But Tuesday into Wednesday may have a solid line of very heavy rain and thunderstorms moving through at least part of the region. 

Tickle me I'm in fantasy land

Tensions are building. I foresee an all out brawl in here come December. Hell in a Cell style. Will be carnage everywhere 

21 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

'normal' is a result of all events mixed together.   Conceptually, even bone-heads ( well.. not Trump supporters) can see that the odds of any future event landing a result squarely on a number that is a mix of everything is thus remote.  That means that actually hitting an arbitrarily occurring value dead on whatever that normal value is, is no different than the Lotto.  Very low odds.  Basically ... everything that occurs in nature, perhaps well over 90% likelihood, is going to be ABnormal.  This is particularly true for decimals (to the right) of the whole number - the more of them ... the more likely you will not ever see a 'normal' daily high temperature.  The significance of the abnormality is what is really needed to be evaluated for that ... we can rely in large part on common sense.  If the normal is 82 and it is 104 that quite dope-slapping obviously more significant that 82.1. 

But it sounds like y'all could use a refresh, or perhaps a first time introduction to what is known in statistical science as 'Chi-Square test'.  A formula that produces a rational value, then interpretive as a method for determining if the frequency differs from expected result and by how much.

It looks like this ...  

                                                                                                         (  ...that outta clear things up )

 

 

 

Did a few assignments in my Quantitative Analysis class using R recently. Fun stuff...interesting programming language. 

We gots ourselves a TOR in Maine