Jump to content

brooklynwx99

Meteorologist
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,960

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by brooklynwx99

  1. brooklynwx99
    yeah, the 22-24th is a solid timeframe with established cold air, low heights over SE Canada, and some -NAO/-EPO. can see how you'd get something ejecting out of the west into cold air
  2. brooklynwx99
    when you're forecasting past a week out, using ensembles and focusing on the broader pattern to point out timeframes of interest is generally the way to go. this will be taught in every forecasting classroom on the planet. now that we're a few days later on, we can see that there are two distinct waves rather than a single trough (which, by the way, some OP runs had) this is the way long range forecasting is... the data change sometimes. it doesn't make the process any less valid
  3. brooklynwx99
    why are you like this, dude
  4. brooklynwx99
    yeah that can certainly happen... i think early Feb looks pretty good, though, as the favorable tropical forcing should stick around for a bit based on hovmollers
  5. brooklynwx99
    it seems like the opposite is likely to occur given the tropical forcing and subsequent jet extension all of the ensembles are seeing
  6. brooklynwx99
    we continue to see legit CPAC and WHEM convection show up late month with legit subsidence over the MC, which should help us out. this coincides with impressive WWBs west of the dateline
  7. brooklynwx99
    the GFS has the TPV farther east and the ridge comes over the top, allowing the ULL to dig more compared to the ICON
  8. brooklynwx99
    can’t remember the last time we’ve seen subsidence like this over the MC… straight up P8 forcing late month
  9. brooklynwx99
    this system is honestly annoying the crap out of me at this point and I'd rather just get to the 18th, which has had a better chance all along
  10. brooklynwx99
    lol
  11. brooklynwx99
    this somehow produces like 3-6” of snow. how do you even make this up
  12. brooklynwx99
    always has to be something
  13. brooklynwx99
    usually when you have a vort of that intensity at that latitude it’s a nuke. truly incredible
  14. brooklynwx99
    PVA axis is more N-S
  15. brooklynwx99
    it’s gonna do it again
  16. brooklynwx99
    i mean, tick it more amped and you curl the PVA back west. it’s close
  17. brooklynwx99
    it really unreal how this isn’t a MECS at first glance. that vort is insane
  18. brooklynwx99
    yeah, stronger and more neg tilted
  19. brooklynwx99
    yeah, not as exotic as 12z but still a bomb
  20. brooklynwx99
    absolutely, allows that NS piece over the Lakes to come in at a good angle... that's why the GFS is as amped as it is
  21. brooklynwx99
    the +PNA ridge in and of itself argues for a coastal... that's 2.5 sigma over ID, nearly ideal
  22. brooklynwx99
    this is really as large of an amped shift as you'll see on the EPS at this range
  23. brooklynwx99
    the main differences between the GFS and the ECMWF are that the kicker on the ECMWF is more defined, hurting amplification, and the TPV is also closer to the trough. we'll see how those features trend overall, though, they are actually pretty similar from a synoptic standpoint now
  24. brooklynwx99
    the main differences between the GFS and the ECMWF are that the kicker on the ECMWF is more defined, hurting amplification, and the TPV is also closer to the trough. we'll see how those features trend overall, though, they are actually pretty similar from a synoptic standpoint now
  25. brooklynwx99
    the main differences between the GFS and the ECMWF are that the kicker on the ECMWF is more defined, hurting amplification, and the TPV is also closer to the trough. we'll see how those features trend overall, though, they are actually pretty similar from a synoptic standpoint now
×
×
  • Create New...