Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,530
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    northernriwx
    Newest Member
    northernriwx
    Joined

Significant Ocean Storm March 6-8 2013 Discussion Part III


earthlight

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

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

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&notif_t=photo_reply#!/pages/Craig-Allen-On-Air-Inc/230609267719

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

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

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

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

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...