weatherwiz

Tonight may even end up a few degrees warmer

Was sitting outside enjoying the night and got all bit up by mosquitos

AWT

AWT

The RRFS is decent too, just a bit later with timing

I think we'll see widespread storms...should see a solid line evolve ahead of the front. Only question is whether damaging wind gust potential is rather isolated or more scattered

Ninja'd was just commenting on the NAM/mlvl lapse rates. The NAM is definitely pretty intriguing. Would actually see a pretty solid line drift south and it occurrs during peak heating

The NAM is actually pretty interesting for Wednesday. Would suggest a threat for scattered damaging wind gusts, particularly south of the Pike. The NAM has a large area of steeper mid-level lapse rates overhead, shunting south during the day (hence south of the Pike favored). Not sure I totally buy this though...the NAM seems to have a tendency for having these areas of steeper lapse rates...but a big player in this is whether the airmass over the OV is convectively overturned tomorrow night into Wednesday morning. Shear is pretty decent along with height falls and looks like we get enough heating to drive up the llvl lapse rates

Yeah I would not be shocked to see some heat advisories tossed out this afternoon

Great point on this...strength of the flow certainly does factor in. Also, in this case as least that boundary is probably so shallow and weak that its just totally mixing out

Well I'm very curious to see how well NBMv5 performs. 7z NBM for BDL has 99 for a high tomorrow (though highest 3-hr temp is 94) with a low of 73. MAV is 92/67 MET is 91/68

Maybe a few rogue strong storms around later Tuesday. We'll see convection with the front on Wednesday but anything severe would be isolated and relatively brief. Would be more intriguing if lapse rates were a bit more respectable.

ehhh I'm more looking at there's a difference between drought and just abnormally dry. But drought can certainly be relative to a location (particularly a region). I just think the word drought is just being hyped up and tossed around like crazy. No doubt many places have been quite dry and have had some local impacts, but those impacts haven't been dire to the point where there is critical concern (sure we've seen some restrictions at times and recommendations on water usage) but save the word drought for if/when things are truly dire.

The word drought and New England should never be used in the same sentence.

Oh sick I had no clue either. That is awesome. That should even help reduce range folding issues in the CT Valley. Looks like the 0.3° tilt samples just below 5K in the Springfield area which is a good ~1.5k feet lower than what the 0.5° tilt samples.

Coming down pretty good out there.

We're moving into a regime where average temperatures and at times quite above average will win out. Any periods of below average will be the product of fronts moving through...this could net 3-4 days of below average temps because it may take a bit to rebuild the greater warmth but the cycle we've been in is coming to an end.

back to clouded over and dark and having to put a light on. Need to get the clapper with how many times I have to turn on/off the light because of this crap

Warm sectoring here. Clouds breaking with a beautiful murky sky blue sky

Perhaps even some strong storms around, particularly western areas

maybe this Christmas we'll be ripping severe weather but if we're swallowed by the Walker cell we may not even get any fronts

This is a great point - you would have to figure it is going to take some time for vendors to make the necessary changes and adjustments needed and I would have to imagine this is not going to be an easy task and this is going to require a ton of OT hours. Now, it's also possible many vendors have already been preparing for this as this has been known for a while but I guess the question is how much work could have been completed in preparation for this?

Wouldn't be surprised to see some small hailers tomorrow

Another big source for error too comes from rounding. We only touched upon this briefly but it's an interesting concept to think about - but thinking out loud here, I guess you can consider something like rounding human error. At first glance, something like rounding may not seem like a huge deal but when you're dealing with the computation of tens of thousands (maybe even in the hundredths of thousands or millions?) of equations, errors due to rounding are going to add up quickly and this could very well be a large source for error when you start getting out to say 3 days. You could also argue that modeling is rather accurate out to 15-16 days because when you're getting that far out in time what are your two options really? Modelling and climatology. I never knew this until this was discussed briefly as well in my class, but the reason the GFS is ran to 384 hours is because that is about the cut-off of when modeling has an advantage over climatology. After that time climatology tends to outweigh modelling. Interesting stuff

I know you have stated this over the years and it's something I believe in as well, but introduce quantum computing and improve model initialization schemes and we will see forecast accuracy improve drastically - and not just accuracy but we probably see less wavering. But who knows...maybe this is a nice theory lol