Typhoon Tip

The bold is debatable. 2ndly, no - I am not condescending - as in 'elitist' ? No, not in any way shape or form of my personal being and interaction with my varied spheres of life. I am in fact effacing by nature ... My colloquy is defined by open ended statements and questions to facilitate a persons thoughts, because I am genuinely interested in what they have to say. There is always going to be a segment of any group that hears things through some sort of petty filtration - and there's nothing that can really be done about that. I merely advanced some advice about fast flow weather regimes and model accuracy - from a position of actual education and experience in the subject matter - that does not make one condescending - sorry. When I first mentioned the model limitations in fast flow stuff, the advise was dismissively met - Society has found its way into a mess where no one is allowed to be right - everyone is a pro that deserves that respect, by trophy and participation logic.

There's an old adage ... I think it was Samuel Clemens, that goes like, 'never argue with a stupid person because they will bring you down to that level where they have far more experience'

Hey Scott.. does that product (MJO) run pretty regularly ? I'm curious if the wave coherence may materialize more to the N. The spread on the RMM is more about magnitude than position now - which is a change where I wonder if that "might" mean there is some wave 'inductance' ( I guess ..).

The fact you felt it necessary to personalize anything (bold) at all evinces you are... Stop being a teenager and start growing - 2ndly, I am educated formally in this discipline of Meteorology - you are not. Sorry - deal with it. You are incorrect in your mentality regarding day 5... There are numbers that prove this empirically. If this comes back in the next few runs, all it does is underscore the natively bad deterministic skills of models in this type of flow regime. The regimes provide different skill - that is fact. deal with it.

You could be angry ... or, you can learn from this - up to you... There are flow regimes where you can have reasonable confidence at D5 ... this was not one of those.

Perhaps not... But nah - there are flows conducive to better predictive skill - present era is/was definitely not one of those examples.

One of my favorite films, lol. I can kinda see the moment of frustration, though. Heh, it's kind of like a 5-year old flopping cause mom put the candy back. Just caution to the beleaguered warriors of hope vs sorrow: never trust a D5 guidance in a fast flow regime.

Closer? Sure, within the realm of possibilities. "A lot" - mm... The gist of 'finding something of a compromise' between the diametric 00z operational versions is paramount for me. The non GFS versions were a lot SE of the GFS, so having non-GFSers coming NW would be by definition closer, either way. Having said that, I don't see any Meteorological reason why they will come "a lot" - lol... This system is squeezing up through a couple of elephant assess: one being the vestigial Canadian PV ...the other is the a semi-permanent height surplus in the S. That doesn't offer a lot of correction wiggle room. Put it this way... the GFS needs to move SE a smaller amount to cause this to miss a lot.. .but the other runs have to move quite a bit to even get half way, and do so between those to larger synoptic aspects. It's fun to play the model fight tho - give you that.

I have no direct meteorological observations lending to the following statement - just model experience, alone: Newer runs of the GFS will continue the 06z and be trending ... while the other models seem to tick NW. GFS may even go 20% less at 12z, then another 20 at 18z ...then the 00z completes the overcompensating. Meanwhile, the Euro's been ticking NW. The GFS comes partially back tomorrow ...and what ultimately happens is something like S/SE zones get clipped by light. Everyone else? #BLNT That's just long years of operational/model experience telling me that... Usually, @< 96 hours the Euro won't approach absolute wrongness, nor will the GFS. It's really rather remarkable to have both operational runs be that diametric, such that they were on the 00z run. One is a upper moderate-lower major, the other is model .1 to .8" snow coverage - which is tantamount to model-noise dust and isn't even real. So it's like we have all or nothing on the 00z run comparison, for an event squarely < D5. Now that's a neat case. So, some sort of compromise tends to verify ... whether that is 60/40 ... 30/70 ... 55/45 ... etc, with either coming in first place. Right now that imaginary blend has more of flat bottle-rocket wave with a compressed light cold side affair across primarily CT-RI-E Ma up to maybe Logan. If the Euro is 'that' wrong, or the GFS is 'that' wrong - ...I also would almost give either some sympathy because we've found our selves yet again polluted with too much base-line velocity and hyper compression in the total hemisphere.

God I hope that 18 lolly in Boston while everyone else Zanax’s 11 nails it. Lol

I honestly thought the 18z version was a little bit of a shirk job for route 2 corridor and up. It was snowier ptype for more people but it was also less QPF bombing low or not; it was strengthening low but it was also tracking it slightly south of the previous tracks which were better for the interior

If anything I’d be worried about over assessing while it was over the Pacific You know I talked about this a month ago Ever since the Boxing Day storm seems like we can’t correct storms bigger when they come onshore; they’re always being proven to have been over-assimilated. As an aside …I wonder if that is done on purpose to protect against short term corrections toward life-threatening storms. “might” be why we’ve been noticing in general how storms keep getting corrected or normalize downwards when they’re passing from mid range to shorter terms in recent winters. I’m not 86 in the current one. I’m just sayin …be prepared for the Gfs to possibly been showing really good continuity based on bullshit assimilation

Mm... I'd like to see how the GFS does in a flow that is closer to normal wave/ambient jet velocities.

god.. if this happens it would destructive... lord

Quite the win for the GFS if this continues... Not only did it start locking into continuity much sooner, it did so way ahead of the others ... uh - assuming it verifies. But like I said earlier, this is going back many cycles now and the only aspect that is less than continuity, is the fact that it seems to be adding some 5% totality impact per cycles since that locking began. I mean, at this point? if it is wrong it's going be pretty damn embarrassing... At this point, we are talking about unwavering insistence really ... Not bad for what ? 108 hours -

Couple aspect to the GFS that are bucking long trend .. makes it sort of 1) ..that high as you noted; typically, those accelerate relative to model run, with a trend to move them off faster. This? Opposite. Okay - 2) ..overall systemic potency ( more so since 2010 in all guidance for some reason - I think they got the modeling equiv of COVID) tends to normalize as mid range gets near. Big events end up middling... middling, something smaller..etc. This is three runs in a row where the high is stalled or even back-massed, and that potency is going the other direction.

GFS looks like a do-over next weekend. heh

No, we don't.... But, it's like these factors got so bad... they're 'reaching around' - hahaha. No but we did discuss this week how the PV is biased on our side of the pole. It's very cold not too far away in Canada, and that changes the map a little - namely...this sort of perfectly timed scenario. Which is what that is... After late Monday finishes grid failure across the area ... just such a cold plume of air circuits through Ontario and it's bite gets just about to southern PA...but already by early Tuesday, this thing's mid level jets are ripping over that boundary... It's like walking by roulette and throwing 5 down on black what the hell, and having it hit.

Yeah I can see that, Ray - I think it may start out as a mid level drive with the boundary moving N slamming into polar air. For a time... earlier, there is then ascent/upglide aloft with the 500 mb wind being strongest on the polar side of the boundary, but as the totality evolves..the the low gets its act mechanically situated, and perhaps from me to you ( axial) up to Maine, we cash in - yeah...it's bit cutesy in detail - but the GFS overall has been impressive.

the more I look at this.. .it's sort of a weird rare scenario, of having a decent nascent polar air mass, with a mid let wind field running astride/N of the boundary; in fact..it's hard to single out main velocity tube there...it's like throwing vorticity shrapnel along the polar side. Anyway, the lengthens the time of maximization of QPF mechanics. ...uh, snows and or mixes and or rains for a long time - longer than the total velocity of the ambient atmosphere would suggest. ha. I mean, typically, we don't see it snow for 15 hours with things moving this fast. You know what this reminds me of? Not sure if you were around in 1994... but we started getting into these longish duration events that were also moving fast ( once Xmas was safely behind and ruined... heh). That circumstance was an oddball super synoptic set up where the NAO was so hugely positive it more in essence ...backed SW, and compressed the flow... Then disturbances ran up into the fast field and stretched out and by virtue of extension ...events lasted long. In a way, this is a strong +AO ...but it too is biased S and is compressing matters.

Omg ...let it go ... we were probably in greater part just talking past one another anyone - that's how this shit always goes down. lol

I am singularly impressed at the stunning continuity of the GFS runs ... Going back like 5 cycles, it's hard to really glean enough differences to mean a whole helluva lot. Comparing that to the Euro... well, all foreign operational runs I have seen for that matter, quite paltry - not sure ... Continuity is one of the forecasting bullet points. But this is obviously a total scenario and street cred ( lol ) that makes things a bit more textured than that. hmm.. This 12z run - does anyone have those frontogenic charts ?? Just looking at the 500 mb evolution, that looks like some decent embedded banding there. Also, this thing is trying to model ( GFS ) as an over-producer. That's some heavy QPF for a flat, open wave. Looks to me as though the GFS initiates a heck of a warm boundary with rich theta-e in the TV and really thrusts it rapidly to about a mid Jersey to CIN type latitude, and with that much 500 mb wind acceleration on the N side of that 90 hour position, you end up with quite the up glide into an exit-entrance mid level jet field.

It would seem to be the case - exactly ... What I am less sure about is whether the destructive interference of La Nina is what is preventing the wave from "as much" ( less anyway ...) strength in the N latitude there. But you know... when sending wave through a fluid medium ( for the general audience in saying this ...) the wave grows laterally as it moves forward. Wild imagination to say ... but, what if the wave got so intense it sort of "tunneled" through the inhibition, and then started showing up more propagating convection on the N side... It's all about dominating forces, and La Nina could lose out if wave got exceptional - conjecture.

Nope - No one is considering it enough - ... Particularly when it is papered - it's really more like reticence to accept change when it doesn't fit well-known and accepted [ institutional ] narratives. It's not me doing jack shit to promote anything - I frankly go after objectivity. I have been perfectly clear, all along, the HC expansion is modulating the previous model - Although, I pushed - admittedly - the fast velocity bias of the hemisphere as being related to that... To which I do believe that to be the case. We'll see.

The problem is... the momentum/flux of the MJO is distributed on the south side of the equator - publication states that clearly - So, that being said... the momentum is not moving N through the equatorial 'boundary' condition. I keep saying this, and it's seems to be conditionally being accepted - ... I'm willing to go with that, "IF" the wave grows and start actually propagating on the N side of the Equatorial climo - ... we'll see. Until that happens, less to negligible influence. Also, the wave is in destructive interference with La Nina, which may be 'why' it is having trouble propagating on the N side - not sure... But, the longer term climate statistical correlation, La Nina's and Phase 8 ... not so good.