ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 GGEM is feet. Odd analysis Not for us...perhaps more like 10 or 12" verbatim on that solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Indiv. 12z GFS Ensm are all over the place with placement and timing . Good consensus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tropopause_Fold Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 days and days of model analysis incoming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 days and days of model analysis incoming. For some. I'm just posting the images to have a record for future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 days and days of model weenie analysis incoming. FYP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 For some. I'm just posting the images to have a record for future. I always like doing that, so when we go back into the threads at a future date we can see what models were showing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I always like doing that, so when we go back into the threads at a future date we can see what models were showing. Agreed. At this range analysis is just weenie fodder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tropopause_Fold Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 the ideal situation for SNE is definitely getting this a bit more seaward with a later capture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 We should also realize just what an eternity 5-6 days is in the model world. Especially this winter where we've seen plenty of issues much closer in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 The charts look eerily similar to those of the 1962 March storm. What did that one give us for snow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 The charts look eerily similar to those of the 1962 March storm. What did that one give us for snow? Almost nothing. An inch or so. It gave the highlands of VA though about 4 feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 GGEM is feet. Odd analysis No. And meteorology not modelology Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 the ideal situation for SNE is definitely getting this a bit more seaward with a later capture. Indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 FYP NB I would rather have days of weenie analysis than one day of temp talk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eduggs Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I dunno...I'd be careful at only focusing on where the storm bombs out the most intense. Obviously that is a great spot for ML fronto and QG forcing...but I wouldn't disregard a total firehose coming off the Atlantic in the mid-levels. December 1992 bombed and stalled way to our SW but we didn't have a lack of QPF for sure. There was also a sharp cutoff in that one which is noted. No two storms are exactly alike, but we've seen storms where we get hammered from strong mid-level inflow off the Atlantic with the best dynamics to our SW...we've also gotten screwed in similar setups. I think its good to look at it from both angles. This is true, good point. The firehose off the Atlantic is a possibility, even with the early occlusion. I think the GGEM panels after 144hr suggest that, and the GFS too. But I think that also introduces warmer midlevels. There was a little more leeway with midlevel temps in 1992 IIRC, even though it had a strong elevational dimension. My hunch is something like a GGEM solution would burn SNE (maybe not in an absolute sense, but compared to the mid-atlantic). 4" isn't a whiff, but compared to 18" it might as well be. But you're right it's far from a certainty, especially in the hills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 No. And meteorology not modelologyWell as Will said its certainly 1 foot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Ryan is having Boxing day nightmares already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Ryan is having early spring dreams so he will do anything for a springlike solution. He wants to keep his rain/wind forecast for Wednesday night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 So maybe a further north version of 1962 Ash Wednesday storm as modeled? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Well the 12z GFS actually takes the SLP way offshore. With that in mind, the GEFs mean SLP position doesn't look that far SE to me...especially at 120hr and 132hr. I think it's signaling pretty good support... and has pulled a little closer and wetter the past few runs. A handful of complete whiffs on the individuals will bias the mean dry. But the NW members should be wet. GEFS are well SE, the big precip is nowhere near SNE. It really doesn't mean anything to me now..just pointing it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 This is true, good point. The firehose off the Atlantic is a possibility, even with the early occlusion. I think the GGEM panels after 144hr suggest that, and the GFS too. But I think that also introduces warmer midlevels. There was a little more leeway with midlevel temps in 1992 IIRC, even though it had a strong elevational dimension. My hunch is something like a GGEM solution would burn SNE (maybe not in an absolute sense, but compared to the mid-atlantic). 4" isn't a whiff, but compared to 18" it might as well be. But you're right it's far from a certainty, especially in the hills. '92 was actually pretty warm in the mid-levels relatively speaking....here's the loop of it: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~fxg1/NARR/1992/us1211.php But we could def still get screwed if things are slightly off when relying on just a firehose. We tried that on 2/10/10 but the low levels were just destroyed with dry air...thankfully this setup does not look as prone to that as that one did...but at this juncture, that doesn't really mean anything. The guidance is going to change a lot between now and verification. The way they are handling the retrograding energy and the Quebec block has been changing a lot from run to run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I love the model analysis fail going on already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I hope nobody was writing off this system. It was basically pointless to really discuss in detail at day 7-10 time frame. Still out in la-la land but having it come back from the suppressed solutions is nice to see. At this range nothing is on or off the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Well as Will said its certainly 1 foot so "perhaps more like 10-12"" turns into "certainly 1 foot"....lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Ryan is having Boxing day nightmares already. For you. http://www.eas.slu.edu/CIPS/ANALOG/stats.php?reg=EC&fhr=F120&model=GFS212&sort=500HGHT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 At this range nothing is on or off the table. Yea a couple of good runs today but some stinkers too. Something to talk about besides temps for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 For you. http://www.eas.slu.edu/CIPS/ANALOG/stats.php?reg=EC&fhr=F120&model=GFS212&sort=500HGHT Not in our time frame yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 so "perhaps more like 10-12"" turns into "certainly 1 foot"....lolIn my world yes lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eduggs Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 In my world yes lol The GGEM run is pretty exciting to be sure. And it's not far off from wet snow blizzard. But if that exact solution were to verify, I would take the under on that 1-foot call. Dry air north then a few hours of ripping at 9:1, then some midlevel taint to finish up. 6-8" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Have some fun and look how similar March 19th -22nd 1958 looks like the GFS http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/dwm/data_rescue_daily_weather_maps.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.