SACRUS Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Anyone in the western monmouth area? Looks like some heavier band there now. Its southwest of me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR Airglow Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Three to six seems reasonable for a first call for tomorrow night, even the EURO supports the low end of it. NAM is out to lunch. -skisheep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEG NAO Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 I think the nam just feels bad with us. Also they should change the nams name to the scam. thats a good one - how about Nonsense A Must model Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris L Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 I knew this would happen. I didn't want to admit it, but this event is busting worse than the March 2001 event. Whoa. Not even close. We weren't getting 30-32" from this system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 I hope nobody is taking the nam seriously. We'll be lucky to pick up a couple inches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StatenWx Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 I prefer NAM = Not A Model. You are way more creative than me lol, but I think tere is a good chance for te troughs tomorrow since its not just the nam showing it, although I am not too optimistic about it at this point in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wxoutlooksblog Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 If the NAM verifies tomorrow night I will eat my snowman. I think a more prudent forecast would be three to six inches for NYC tomorrow night, not 17.5". To me I think the NAM is overdoing the WAA at the 850MB level, it will not be +3C at 15Z Friday. The NAM is becoming literally a joke! These solutions it is coming up with are now at least predictably ridiculous and hilarious. Just get a laugh, wait, and move on to the more reliable guidance. If the NAM has ANY credibility at all, which is doubtful, we could get 3-6" tomorrow night, but considering it could be off by two or three hundred miles, let's see if it has any support from any other 00Z model tonight at all. WX/PT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEG NAO Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Anyone in the western monmouth area? Looks like some heavier band there now. Its southwest of me. Rossi is in monmouth county but he probably is in mercer county by now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 I prefer NAM = Not A Model. Reminds me of the good ole NGM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wxoutlooksblog Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Reminds me of the good ole NGM. I think the NGM was better and the LFM was better too. I think the NAM used to be MUCH better than it is now. WX/PT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hudsonvalley21 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 thats a good one - how about Nonsense A Must model or Not Another Mistake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEG NAO Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Reminds me of the good ole NGM. does that stand for Not Good Model ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RU848789 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 If the NAM verifies tomorrow night I will eat my snowman. I think a more prudent forecast would be three to six inches for NYC tomorrow night, not 17.5". To me I think the NAM is overdoing the WAA at the 850MB level, it will not be +3C at 15Z Friday. I think you'll have plenty of folks at the table with you if the NAM verifies, lol. Craig Allen must've been referring to the NAM with his cryptic comment on FB 20 minutes ago, about possibly getting "plastered" with a "heaping amount of snow" tomorrow night. He was pretty skeptical of the initial coastal giving us much snow and he's not generally a hypester, so it's at least interesting that he's so intrigued... http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151533429357889&set=a.466752657888.257852.587992888&type=1&theater¬if_t=photo_reply#!/pages/Craig-Allen-On-Air-Inc/230609267719 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEG NAO Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 anybody have an analog storm for what the NAM is advertising tomorrow night ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WintersGrasp Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 What is a working link to Craig Allen's blog? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user13 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Check out that band south of Rockaway moving northwest! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 This is getting interesting, band moving onshore... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WintersGrasp Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Check out that band south of Rockaway moving northwest! If only it was accumulating snow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeatherFox Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Its NOW forecasting time soon for SNOW. I like the current radar trends. Temps falling and we could get an inch or so on the grass and car tops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green tube Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 What is a working link to Craig Allen's blog? http://www.facebook.com/pages/Craig-Allen-On-Air-Inc/230609267719 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 The NAM does something ridiculous with this incoming wave, which is to slow it down and dig as an independent entity pretty much for a time instead of keeping it flatter, quicker and moving it toward the main ULL as other models do. As such, other models have much of the snow north and east over upstate NY and CT, and keep it generally lighter. There should be a decent area of snow somewhere with this, given the dynamics that will be driven by this strong wave, but I'm not sure that will be centered over the NYC area and obviously I doubt it's anywhere near that wet. Even the NMM and ARW both seem more progressive and drier with this feature for their 21z runs. I would expect maybe a 3-6" stripe somewhere with this, maybe a spot or two more because of the dynamic nature of this feature, but I still think we have to watch and see that this doesn't trend north and east to be centered over eastern upstate NY or CT later on, or that it mostly just merges into the main snow area over eastern New England. These precip events can change literally on a dime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxman Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 I think the NGM was better and the LFM was better too. I think the NAM used to be MUCH better than it is now. WX/PT Absolutely 100%, but how? Have the physics been tweaked? Is it just doing poorly in our area (where we focus on coastals) or with the current climate regime? I remember the NAM (and ETA for that matter) being deadly accurate inside of 24 hours, now a total joke. I wonder if its absurdly poor performance this winter is a fluke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseBlizzard2014 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Absolutely 100%, but how? Have the physics been tweaked? Is it just doing poorly in our area (where we focus on coastals) or with the current climate regime? I remember the NAM (and ETA for that matter) being deadly accurate inside of 24 hours, now a total joke. I wonder if its absurdly poor performance this winter is a fluke. It's most likely have to do with the weather regime. It's completely different from the time the NAM came into existence and cannot adapt properly (unlike the GFS/ECMWF). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 The NAM does something ridiculous with this incoming wave, which is to slow it down and dig as an independent entity pretty much for a time instead of keeping it flatter, quicker and moving it toward the main ULL as other models do. As such, other models have much of the snow north and east over upstate NY and CT, and keep it generally lighter. There should be a decent area of snow somewhere with this, given the dynamics that will be driven by this strong wave, but I'm not sure that will be centered over the NYC area and obviously I doubt it's anywhere near that wet. Even the NMM and ARW both seem more progressive and drier with this feature for their 21z runs. I would expect maybe a 3-6" stripe somewhere with this, maybe a spot or two more because of the dynamic nature of this feature, but I still think we have to watch and see that this doesn't trend north and east to be centered over eastern upstate NY or CT later on, or that it mostly just merges into the main snow area over eastern New England. These precip events can change literally on a dime. Those 9z runs are control runs of the srefs. So they usually match the srefs. Sref plumes are 7" for KNYC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wxoutlooksblog Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Absolutely 100%, but how? Have the physics been tweaked? Is it just doing poorly in our area (where we focus on coastals) or with the current climate regime? I remember the NAM (and ETA for that matter) being deadly accurate inside of 24 hours, now a total joke. I wonder if its absurdly poor performance this winter is a fluke. To figure this, one would have to go back about 2 years. I do not recall any problems like this with NAM last winter because there was really very little weather to forecast with it. But I certainly do NOT recall this kind of inaccuracy during winter 2010-2011 or 2009-2010 when there was so much activity. I do recall some updates to the NAM, but I do not recall exactly on what dates they were made. Aside from the event/non-event that GFS nailed (keeping to our south) and NAM completely blew in early February 2010, I thought it performed well that season. WX/PT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user13 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 To figure this, one would have to go back about 2 years. I do not recall any problems like this with NAM last winter because there was really very little weather to forecast with it. But I certainly do NOT recall this kind of inaccuracy during winter 2010-2011 or 2009-2010 when there was so much activity. I do recall some updates to the NAM, but I do not recall exactly on what dates they were made. Aside from the event/non-event that GFS nailed (keeping to our south) and NAM completely blew in early February 2010, I thought it performed well that season. WX/PT It was the 10 -11 winter. I remember we had the old nam and the new nam for a while Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeatherX Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 It's most likely have to do with the weather regime. It's completely different from the time the NAM came into existence and cannot adapt properly (unlike the GFS/ECMWF). What is this that you are referring to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR Airglow Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Upton's 10:09 PM take, very similar to earlier maps. Storm Total Snow Forecast Created: 03/06/13 10:05 PM EST Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Light to mod snow in the city hr 30 gfs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Hr 33 light to mod snow continues. Light stuff to about ttn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.