Jump to content

brooklynwx99

Meteorologist
  • Posts

    5,668
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by brooklynwx99

  1. EPS made a significant jump towards a more amped solution. PNA ridging better, leading to more favorable momentum of the NS piece as well as a slower, deeper initial trough
  2. GEFS is generally a lot more favorable. better amplification of the PNA ridge allows for the downstream trough axis to shift W and dig
  3. GEFS is generally a lot more favorable. better amplification of the PNA ridge allows for the downstream trough axis to shift W
  4. GEFS is a lot better than 00z... better alignment and amplification of the PNA ridge and it results in a much deeper trough this will certainly result in a more favorable surface output
  5. GEFS is a lot better than 00z... better alignment and amplification of the PNA ridge and it results in a much deeper trough this will certainly result in a more favorable surface output
  6. GEFS is a lot better than 00z... better alignment and amplification of the PNA ridge and it results in a much deeper trough this will certainly result in a more favorable surface output
  7. probably less confluence over SE Canada, which may allow for a bit more weakness in the heights, opening up an inland runner possibility. however, I think a suppressed solution due to a late phase / sheared energy is a much more likely way to fail here
  8. no problem! only goes to 144 so the SLPs aren't of much use, especially given the slightly slower solution
  9. EPS is much improved out west. less of a kicker, which leads to a deeper, farther W trough as a result
  10. EPS is much improved out west. less of a kicker, which leads to a deeper, farther W trough as a result
  11. EPS is much improved out west. less of a kicker, which leads to a deeper, farther W trough as a result
  12. NOT advocating for this kind of solution but it is kinda eerie how similar these are almost the exact same ridge/trough alignment
×
×
  • Create New...