Typhoon Tip

OH... well yeah. I mean we've all been buckin' for you to be asleep for the entire duration of this thing so it TOtally makes sense. lol -

Well ...yeah. The shallower trajectory - I mean in conceptual physical sense, shrink the Y-coordinate, the X-tends to increase ...i.e., speeds up.

Fwiw - ...this new NAM solution is shortening the wave spacing between the eastern Lakes S/W in the nearer term, wrt to the S/W responsible for the 7th. It also appears to be bringing the latter eastward on a shallower trajectory - These are not encouraging signs for those wanting to see amplitude. But,... NAM outside of 48 hours. We are still just now in process of modulating the SPV over the NE Pac...and so it's still not completely in the realized/physical soundings yet, ...so these may be less important observations at this particular time.

I'd like to see more short wave ridging rollin' up out ahead of that trough nadir, but the vort track its self is climo on point. Someone mentioned the scant QPF NW of the low - I'd be willing suggest not having that ridge rollout is part of that problem, because we end up with a weaker wrap around elevate warm conveyor ...the one up at 700- 600 mb/trowal

My own take aways from the overnight ... late start this morning - 1 .. the 00z GEFs along with the operational version, obviously made huge leap toward the previous Euro. While the Euro operational solution ( typical frustration) slacked SE while shedding some total wave space potency. I believe this is the early phases of consensus work. It doesn't mean the final solution exists between the 00z respective positions/attributes, per se. It may end up turning out that way. But the 06z GEFs is nearly ideal in terms of climate signal, with the mean of the cluster both deeper more nucleated, but also routing quintessentially for targeting NYC W-NE 'burbs, CT, NW RI, interior MA, S NH and D.E.M. 2 .. the governing S/W mechanics at 06z this morning, are still embedded, but just beginning to establish identity here: ...That 'splitting' has to get underway ... and actually BE representative in the initialization/population of the model grids. I have long been trying to emphasize that there is a kind of 'temporal boundary,' the other side of which exist a more focused truth. Prior to that, the solutions were teetering as to how much mechanics get pulled out and ejected down stream as the S/W we've been tracking.... vs, how much is conserved/ retrogrades with the aspects that goes west under the EPO domain space: ... This has been a unusual 'genesis of threat assessment" scenario. More typically, these S/W origins take place from other events ...way upstream over the breadth of the Pacific...even traceable back to Japan/ EAMT field ejection. Sometimes coming over Kamchatka and NE Siberia ..etc; thus, the way they've behaved/trended in the flow lends to predictive advantages. In this situation, the S/W did not exist, until that split evolution, a process that was always scheduled to take place today. It's why some of us have been hitting Wednesday as the real consensus maker solution spread ( most likely ...). But I feel that these runs today are going to begin seeing the result/ingesting some of the post visualization actually in the materialized sounding grid... I mean, one advantage of this is that almost immediately upon the sever and eject, the S/W is entered the physical/balloon soundings ... so, it will be interesting to see if/how/what comes of that. I still believe this is a candidate for potential short term corrections - example Boxing Day storm, 2010 - not as an analog, but to exemplify concept... I do think it is interesting, however, the 00z GFS/NAM ...American cluster et al, seemed to beat that out, and prior to said bifurcation of that SPV as annotated above. Meanwhile, the Euro broke continuity with it's weaker brush by solution... 3 ..Once we get on the post side of the above evolution, for those into NAM solutions ... be leery of NW biases. The NAM does this from time to time with coastal/near coastal cyclogenesis, routing/deepening lows too far NW. I don't think the 06z solution makes as much sense, as the mid trop forcing is S of the its 06z low. The right exit region of the mid level torpedo wind max is C-S NJ to C-Cod. We'll have to monitor that - the lead shallow CAA will probably lay down a sfc -800mb thermal packing, and between 72 to particularly 84 hours out ( duh! ) the NAM is less likely resolving that particularity - the detonation of quasi-Miller B will probably take place where UVM establishes over/near that lvl frontal slope, because that is where inflow jets turn skyward. Once that happens, the low won't 'jump' NW to NYC... 4 .. I'm not certain the Euro can't fall victim to the uncertainty over how much gets ejected out of a SPV disintegration that hasn't erstwhile even taken place. I am not really sold on the 00z modulation, no more so than I was buying the previous euphoric solutions. Conclusion, I think there is still a better consensus out there ... prooobably materializing during today, but particularly tonight's run may be more critical. Less changing/modulations, run-to-run, will likely begin at that time/ become more trustworthy.

That’s not entirely true tho; the 84 hour position on those models vary by almost 300 nautical miles with the Nam further back Southwest. Plus the NAMs total curvature field is broader with the same velocity imbedded as GFS was, when it was in that NAM position. The NAM is propagating more mechanical power. Additional to those other params the NAM’s ability to exceed the deepening rate of that GFS solution is that it also has more time to do it.

Perfect climate spot on that particular frame … really

Mmm. GFS and NAM models employ different physical parameterization for things like cloud physics … convective processes; this is why the Nam blew. all the other models away on that 2005 December 10 event. … plus with a Nam running a negatively tilting Vmax with 120 mph wind core up over the gulf stream that models going to absolutely MESO-beta scale bomb that at historic RI rates - if that were a metric kept track of.

Yeeeah … that GFS looks like a transition solution to me.

Meh … first we capitulate, future cycles begin to slow down - maybe not a lot but at least a little. Looking at the NAM …. I’m noticing better ridge response over western North America after the S/W ejection east of the Rockies. That’s always been a crucial sensitivity in this whole thing …driving the translation speed of the trough exit off the east coast is anchored in that ridge amplitude

Welp …just saw the NAM Y’all undersold that. The extrapolation off that end frame would approach the upper physical bound.

Water condensing as supercooled particles … perhaps turbulence slowing phase change, then suspension in UVM core slows particle motion … Medusas solid, then rimes additional supercooled layers that quickly lock- viola. Stones. Must have been a sick theta-e conveyor flowing into a very upright elevated frontal slope with evac fan jet - I bet - over NH

What’s the ridge doing behind the short wave -

I’ve been dancing with the Boxing Day storm in 2010. Disappeared for two days and came all the way back in like two cycles to wallop everyone excep me heh. No but it too came off the PAC rather blindly in fast flow leaving offices little time to go all the way to blizzard warnings. Actually check that on bl but it was a rush job.

Stick to Thursday night ... that way, he'll be all snuggles and tuck into bed by 8:51 pm and misses the whole thing by the time he wakes up

Oh ... I see. yeah - good questions. The operational version is a "souped up" ensemble member ...It has incorporated the best theoretical application of Meteorological physical equations -it's called the 'operational version'. Most reliance is there. The ensemble means have less integrated total tech manifolds, and/or employ more 'experimental' physical equations. They are thus considered, 'perturbed' version members. Individually, they are less likely to best the operational model ...particularly in shorter duration lead ( < 72 hours)... where as, the extended complete mean ( all members/ n-terms), offers stability - a kind of normalization that the operational falls victim due to chaos feed-backs cumulatively effecting accuracy way out in time. That's sometimes why you might hear[ responsible minded ] contributors ( lol ) refer to relying upon the ensemble mean in the extended, which by convention is anything out side of 5 days ...Relative to the pattern at hand, sometimes that is shorter or longer by a day in either direction. I've seen patterns where operational versions nail things down pretty tight on D6 .. but I've also seen operational version have trouble as close as D3. The respective ensemble means tend to perform better in lesser confidence circumstances. The last 5 years -worth of winters (imho ...) have not been particularly good operational version years ... probably owing to the compressed, fast flows. Models don't tend to do as well in long X-coordinate, short Y coordinate flow types, which seems to be dominating the winter hemispheres as of late.

No one should be "trusting" anything. The models are varying like they should, and usually do...at this range. Now sure what else needs explaining? Maybe we should start threads that are science concept, then, have a side-car thread linked to it that is an emotional catch-basin/support group. LOL. J/k but yeah

Well, the one Greg and I were just mentioning was earlier in the month, though.

Probably ? Lol yeah no - 1987. It was a flat wave and NWS put up a winter storm watch at 4pm for that same overnight... I awoke at 3am to the sound of thunder. The sky glowing butterscotch ...another flash. Wind and snow occasional lightning... It only last 4 or 5 hours, but longer SE.... We got 9" out in Acton, but I recall some lollypops to 15 around NE RI and the SW burbs of Boston. I remember that previous afternoon, ... cleveland was reporting thunder snow, and TWC mets were all giddy. It was a great! I mean...come home from school on a boring brown Novemeber typical Tuesday... I wanna say 11th or so...maybe 13th ... Turn on TWC to that... and just then, the TV beeps. Not sure if this still happens on regular network television but back in that era, tickers scrolled for weather alerts. While I was watching the coverage of N Ohio, the beeps fired off and, "...THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN TAUNTON MASSACHUSETTS HAS ISSUED A WINTER STORM WATCH FOR WORCESTER, MIDDLESEX, SUFFOLK .... 4 TO 6 INCHES OF SNOW.." It was a flat open wave with a 45 vmax like a torpedo. It sniffed the Jersey shore and the PP falls were immediate and insane, as was the leaf explosion on satellite/radar expansion.

Yup ... I've been mentioning this too on multiple occasions, how sensitive this thing is to that. The PNA mode change - is it exerting a ridge? Or is it more 'relaxation' in/of the -PNA dominance? We seem to be on the fence as to which. The S/W in and of its self is very powerful. Some of these runs have 150 to 170 mph 300 mb wind maxes. Buck-20 at 500 mb. Here's the the thing ... folks should dig up November 86 for a flat wave NJ model bomb that laid 15" over SE zones. God it's like wow -

Plus ... regardless of which ens mean I've seen, the spread 'smear' has always been highlighting over the western envelope, which often precedes correction vectors/future guidance. Best example of that was the April '97 season ending blueberry beauty with whipcream on top. D6 lead had the low out near Nova Scotia, but the ( primitive by today's standards - ) MRF ens mean showed that smear back toward the Cape. Gee - wonder if it corrected west, huh. Personally? I feel Scott's concern for tuck is still very much on the table. But, I also feel that a bomb just too far SE could be too. I don't think placement and magnitude are going to really coalesce until after the SPV split up there, and the models sample what really is delivered. The western ridge is still wild-card - subtle variances therein have impacts on the former.

Not to indict anyone but heh ... I almost get the feeling there's some that almost want it to ? Guess folks got their agenda - Just wanna remind ( not you per se but I feel like this message isn't getting across ) ... This ordeal was packaged originally as unclear on scale of magnitude. And it was also noted - at least by me and probably a few others ... - that it would probably be Wednesday-ish before this coalesced around the 'gonna happen x-y-z way' vibe, at which point divvy up peoples allotted proportions... Lol anyway... we'll see.

It really could not be more definitive and glaring as a mid range test. Euro vs GFS .... the old nemesis. It's funny how seldom these models just like ever agree. I mean, they use the same physics, right ? Doesn't the force of gravity still point down in both AI engines?? Again, I think this is a unique situation... ( I don't think this is registering as I'm not getting any replies? ) It's okay...I'll let it lie at this this point. But even in the over amped versions, I'd be cautious until we get on the other side of that vortex split. This entire increased threat assessment as a thread, began as a very coherent mode change in the total hemispheric circulation footprint. The numerical version is remarkably concertedly in agreement, and both the graphic version of that in the EPS/GEFs/GEPs ... indicate losing negatie anomalies in the S/W ...replacing with positive by weeks end. These are not trivial alterations to the larger circulation manifold, and this is typically when system tend to occur. At a more specific scope. The change from negative to positive PNA, lends to more amplitude and increasing curve flow surfaces. Thus, the emergence of this systems becomes interesting...

Short summary on everything I've written ... ... this is a real candidate for short lead time correction. ...Get this to 72 hours lead and it may rather abruptly wait to coalesce in guidance then. Again... after 30 hours from now, the post SPV split will be sampling in real-time. Said split as of 12z initialization has not even begun. We really need to get on the other side of this: