SnowGoose69
-
Posts
16,198 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Blogs
Forums
American Weather
Media Demo
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by SnowGoose69
-
I don't think so because I believe it snow maps count sleet as snow so it probably thinks surface temps are over 32 or something
- 3,762 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- heavy snow
- heavy rain
- (and 3 more)
-
One note with this event is looking at the forecast soundings in advance of it there is not an excessive amount of mid-level dry air so this sucker will precipitate fast vs having a 2/2003 virga like period.
- 3,762 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- heavy snow
- heavy rain
- (and 3 more)
-
The RGEM is basically a 30 mile difference from the NAM and ICON. Everything pushes east just a tad earlier.
- 3,762 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- heavy snow
- heavy rain
- (and 3 more)
-
That track would be okay in a true Miller A but this is sort of a hybrid with the surface low maturing later and further north which is why the 700-850 low tracks are further north and west. If this developed 100 miles south we could tug the surface low in tighter up here and have no issue
-
NYC itself and nearby generally needs a system to be stacked from the surface to 500 to see a rain changing to snow event. Otherwise the system simply will be exiting too quickly to northeast or east. The Christmas 2002 event was missed by just about all models. The GFS was the only one which showed it consistently but at the time the GFS was 2 months old as far as its rebrand and merge with the AVN/MRF and NCEP/NWS offices were very skeptical of its solution. The 00Z ETA bit on the idea on 12/25 but the 06-12Z runs came out and moved away from it. At the point the Upton office dropped the WSW they had issued for NYC earlier that morning around 2am
-
Probably 3-4pm. As always though in a setup like this with a nearly north moving system with a strong high over Canada the start time could be a few hours earlier than it looks at this range
-
Yeah the NAM QPF depictions that run were very disjointed and ugly
-
Also a different setup. I believe it was a Miller B as was Nemo. I don’t recall a case with this good of a 50/50 and high with a semi Miller A type setup where places west of Suffolk county saw long duration changeover and then went back to snow
-
The 700/850 lows may not be stacked though so they could be further north of the surface low. I would still think sleet or mixing is more likely over SE NJ or central or eastern LI. Taking it west of there in this setup really seems tough
- 3,762 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- heavy snow
- heavy rain
- (and 3 more)
-
Yes. Or go to rain or sleet and stay as rain or sleet. The flip back just doesn’t occur practically ever. December 2002 was a case where it did that but the setup wasn’t anywhere near this good or really close overall in the pattern
-
The key with the NAM as I said yesterday is consistency. If the next two runs show almost the same solution as the 06z you can trust it’s onto something. If it waffles 75 miles southeast again this run you can more or less ignore the NAM til inside 36. The NAM sometimes gets these things right at 60 but the dead giveaway of that is run to run consistency which is very rare by the NAM at that range otherwise.
- 3,762 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- heavy snow
- heavy rain
- (and 3 more)
-
That’s probably the only thing that matters at this stage. I don’t see anything substantial shifting with the block or the high. If the shortwave is stronger than expected it could be able to cut more north. I’m still wary here because historically with this sort of pattern in place at 500/surface we’ve never seen a storm like this cause the metro to go snow-Sleet or rain-back go snow. Never in the last 40 years
- 3,762 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- heavy snow
- heavy rain
- (and 3 more)
-
With lighter winds I would think this event could be 15:1 area wide but it’ll probably end up 10:1 everywhere. I guess inland maybe they get 12:1 due to frictional effects maybe giving them less wind
-
I think it’s just the snow maps algorithm. The model would indicate Long Island sees way more snow than that
- 3,762 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- heavy snow
- heavy rain
- (and 3 more)
-
ECMWF west again. Beginning to think a period of accumulating snow, even at the coast is possible after 19Z or so. I'm talking maybe an inch but no doubt the 5 boroughs could see the ground get covered which I highly doubted 12-18 hours ago
-
The HRRR seems to be getting more amped and juiced with each passing run
-
It nailed the 2/8/94 event and was ignored lol because it was out for 4 weeks at the time
-
It never wavered. Normally the NAM waffles a ton in the 48-84 range. When it doesn't beware...see tomorrow's event where the Euro sort of just caved. The NAM has never really budged on that.
-
That was before the 2nd upgrade. The Jan 2013 upgraded caused suppression issues at times for the Euro. They upgraded it again in late 2016 I think and since then its tended to have over amplification issues from 90-120
- 3,762 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- heavy snow
- heavy rain
- (and 3 more)
-
One thing is for sure. The Euro just caved on tomorrow's event to the NAM
-
Euro is now much wetter tomorrow. It definitely blew this one it seems.
-
Given the -NAO and high in place it would be a fairly significant bust if this ended up primarily rain near the coast or the average snow total amongst EWR/NYC/JFK/LGA was not at least 5-7 inches.
- 3,762 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- heavy snow
- heavy rain
- (and 3 more)
-
The Op Euro has had major overamped biases at this range now for several years. I believe we could see a run today whether its this one, the 18 or the 00 tonight be insanely far NW (I'm talking where most of the 95 corridor is primarily rain). Its ensembles though will probably be SE of whatever it does on that same Op run
-
The snow totals would likely be much higher in places just east of that cutoff if the UKIE verified. Islip for example wouldn't see 0
