Typhoon Tip

Threw you a 'like' here but I just hate sacking the EPS inside of D4's ... Even if the EPS goes on to fail in its outlook ( compromise, notwithstanding - ), there's not a whole helluva lot of precedence for that. Suppose it does capitulate the the GFS - it's already too late. I don't think I can recall it ever doing that at less than D4

so the GEFs is a couple mb's deeper per interval. Mean position indistinguishable from the previous cycle. The member consolidation is even tighter. Sufficed it is to say, this 18z Euro rendition is going to be rather interesting -

It's likely effected the NAM solutions more than any. I went over this earlier but paraphrasing ... tomorrow nights frontal wash is stalling out there between Bermuda and the GA coast by Sunday, and then this rolls up underneath - the NAM's hole-punched QPF layout in the 18z is a moisture starved system; it seems to be delayed in recovering the air mass post that front compared to the other guidance. I'd hunch that if it could sniff thermodynamic gradient availability, we'd have two meso models with similar depth and rage And it may end up getting there yet.... just delayed - we'll see. But the sensitive scenario, overall, is also related to the intense compression and high speed. These factors make for tough modeling times translating mechanics through a field that is significantly absorbing/masking the S/W jets.

48 hours the RGEM is 998 ROA area... 60 hours, 982 in CC Bay. that's 16 mb/12 hrs. Bombgenesis not bad. 18z GFS comes in a tick deeper fwiw -

good hit of the smack, huh

Not likely, because it would mean less entertaining model solutions so probably that prevents the compromise -

Is that a new headline criteria? I'm not sure I've ever heard of an "Extreme Cold" watch or warning ...but it's got a region half the size of Texas in a watch.

oh I know what that is... Look east of the Carolinas at 42 hours. It's very proficient with convection out there and it's ( I think ) exposing what's been going on with this model all along. It's been having trouble locating a low level baroclinic field ( enough ) west of that axis, which it may be over-doing anyway

yeah what is that. I was inclined to think that was just tech glitchy but how and why.

Yeah, both Will and myself mentioned the NAM was trending since yesterday. This is incrementally another trend step - almost collapsing toward the "anti EPS" consensus. Man, this will be really satisfying watching the EPS capitulate

One way to look at this ... ... if the GEFs/GFS and the like were to be say 80% more correct in this battle, that would square the season. Because the EPS mean seem to win 80% of the argument on the last coverage.

yeeah.... it was funny and jocular 5 years ago - use someone elses name. It does become a problem when you keep singling one person out. Francis

it really is ... I mean, it can't manufacture any event at all, for like 300 hours ... I time span in which in maintains the greatest baroclinic gradient in the history of this planet nothing It's really rather remarkable -

Actually ... that's like anyone starting a thread 7 days out and having people that don't know how to read, immediately interpret it as though it's a storm projection - when it's merely discussing the table setting. There's no problem with starting threads 5-7 days ahead of a "period of interest" to discuss why. "Look to this period of time for x-y-z to emerge because - " If it's a declared a high confidence event thread, that's a different coverage and purpose.

oooh yes we did c'mon Kev think back

Yeah shit. man, seeing the Euro cluster this way, it does shake my confidence. I had been warning all along that this would be a shorter term correction nightmare. Spent all that time talking about the compression handling ... recall " < 72 hours" ? But I admit to thinking we might be coalescing the consensus short of 96 hours earlier. Seeing this though... I don't know. It could be one or the other wins, or some percentage of either in a split of the goal posts. I was not sold ( still not ) on the heftier impact scenarios tho. That same compression should really theoretically cap this thing's potential. I just didn't think that would be because we get flurried -

That's how you know we're gonna get thwacked - We did an analysis back in UML and found that there is a positive correlation between dissemination delays, vs subsequent verification of registered impacts from an event that's in play. Not sure that's still the case ... and back in the day, 1990s, modeling was still not a huge sample size yet ... so probably mostly for fun. But to this day, whenever we don't get to see a model run because of a comm's related issue, I cannot help but feel better about our chances. haha

The 12z ICON evolution offers an outstanding compromise, either because it's doing a good job, or dumb luck - either way, that solution doesn't look terrible if you throw everything into a blender and pour a cup of forecast

Maybe their strategy is a coin flip between the NAM and the Euro LOL

It's times like these I wish CPC still had the 'Model Diagnostic Discussion' product. I found that very useful back in the day. Every so often, a guidance would go astray. Invariably, you go read the discussion, which disseminated pretty soon after the model release actually ..., and it would read like this: "WV IMAGERY SUGGESTS THE NAM INITIALIZED BETWEEN 10 AND 15 KTS TOO LOW WITH THE WIND MAX VELOCITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE WAVE SPACE SET TO IMPACT THE UPPER MA AND NE REGIONS ... RECOMMEND NOT USING IT IN LIEU OF ..." ...x y z that do not appear to contain this error...etc. something like that. This smacks as missing something in the grid but who knows -

trend is even more coherently demonstrated comparing the 78 from 00z to this 12z's 66 That really won't take 6 cycles to be right with the pack... That much correction taking place again... twice tops would do the trick

Left is 72 hours from 00z last night. Right is 60 hours from 12z this morning. Same interval demoing a clear trend... The NAM prooobably does this incrementally catching up routine for the next 6 or 8 cycles.

I suggest your analysis late last night was pretty spot on. When the 500 mb isotachs have less "kink" inflection, the low is pancaked. This NAM run is both a tick more inflected, and also just has a stronger core wind max and PV field in the core. These two factors are the "finally seeing" identifiers. So this incrementally moved toward the consensus, albeit only a small move. This will probably do this on every cycle through tomorrow night ...at which time it then suddenly has a run that has 24" falling in 3 hours -LOL It makes sense when we're running a wave space through a compression that's so extreme it's sort of on the edge of total suppression. But this is a strong wave space, so if the compression gives it any window and the cyclone response becomes a rather abrupt correction/emergence

I could see you flipping to snow when rates are high, and then light cold rain... back and forth for a couple hours, then the low gets abeam of your latitude and the cyclogenic feedback related dynamic height falls... more backing llv flow, etc etc, while still having mechanics aloft and suddenly, you burst heavy snow with wind for 3 hours then it's over. just to the reader ... we need to keep in mind that that this f'er is going to be hauling ass. I could almost visualize the radar looks less like a rotating region of returns, and more like the whole thing is rolling backward - the cyclostrophic response and the forward speed of the low pressure are nearly the same speeds.

I was just taking a closer look at the 06z RDPS ... At 69 hrs, it has the 0C 850 mb isotherm S of even Scott... with a 992 mb low passing through climo needle slot lat/lon for Pike snow. Yet it has the mix line NW of Boston at that time. I get it that it's 925 mb is probably doing the trick there, but that validity comes into question for me. There's a +PP N of this system, in general, and once the pressure well gets going SW of the region, and lowers further as the low makes it's closest approach ... despite the higher resolution of the RGEM that total synoptic circumstance will tend to back the flow more. Combining with vertical fixing in the cold sector, that's isothermal in the sfc to 850 ..probably -1C .. I could see that busting that mix line too far NW ... 30 or so mile say... if a 06z RGEM were the final solution. Which it's not. Still, there's plenty in that handling/model run to pick apart.