Jump to content

brooklynwx99

Meteorologist
  • Posts

    6,233
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by brooklynwx99

  1. it seems like the opposite is likely to occur given the tropical forcing and subsequent jet extension all of the ensembles are seeing
  2. 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
  3. the GFS has the TPV farther east and the ridge comes over the top, allowing the ULL to dig more compared to the ICON
  4. can’t remember the last time we’ve seen subsidence like this over the MC… straight up P8 forcing late month
  5. 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
  6. this somehow produces like 3-6” of snow. how do you even make this up
  7. usually when you have a vort of that intensity at that latitude it’s a nuke. truly incredible
  8. i mean, tick it more amped and you curl the PVA back west. it’s close
  9. it really unreal how this isn’t a MECS at first glance. that vort is insane
  10. 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
  11. the +PNA ridge in and of itself argues for a coastal... that's 2.5 sigma over ID, nearly ideal
  12. this is really as large of an amped shift as you'll see on the EPS at this range
  13. 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
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. could have been better, but yeah, hard to ask for a better shift
  17. stop doing what? that is a significant move towards a more amplified solution... definitely much more than I thought was going to happen
×
×
  • Create New...