jm1220 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I think there might be some kind of feedback error on the GFS just glancing at it-notice the dot of heavy precip/convection over the Gulf Stream from hrs 33-42 that seems to head NE and completely rob the precip west of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpantz Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 NOOOOOOO. Dont even kid about that.. the worst exprience of my 35 years watching the weather. considered counseling after it .LOL Not saying for a second the evolution is similar. More just the refrain of big snows gone missing, only to be found in SNE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbo81 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Back to the GEM for a sec...does it show appreciable snow after the morning thump snow, or is it over after that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgwp96 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 hr 57 on the gfs has the oddest 850 line i have ever seen.(on storm vista maps) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWCCraig Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 GFS is going to show what it's going to show. Don't get so worked up on the mid level temps and qpf on the GFS. I love the GFS but the last thing I look at for mid level temp and qpf guidance is the GFS in EC storms. It's possible the convective feedback on the GFS is robbing the precip from the NW side of the storm, and the lighter QPF would limit dynamic cooling resulting in warmer mid levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 The gfs has been a total outlier with the dynamics of this storm for days now so I think I'll take the other models over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 The H5 evolution on the GFS this run was so much improved from prior runs, I am sitting here looping it repeatedly. You just have to hope that it's not correct with its handling of the mid level winds pressing on the flow and inhibiting precipitation development. The trend towards a faster development of an explosive CCB was evident as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juliancolton Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsPens87 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Exactly three days ago Jetspens and I had a lengthy discussion about this. This is not model fantasy or the model being wrong -- it's the model picking up on compressive mid level winds and flow from the kicker system back over the Great Lakes. Precipitation development is shunted and much weaker because of that. Whether or not the GFS is correct with this idea is an entirely different story. Exactly, the spooky part to me is that the GFS has been decent with the northern stream this winter. So if it indeed is onto something with that NRN stream disturbance then that could be bad. Like I said with the new data ingested its either been onto something all along, or way out to lunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpantz Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Nice thing is we seem to have some agreement occurring on the track of the system. From there we can use meteorology/not modelology to forecast the rest. Agree with this. It's been hard to get agreement on any aspect of this event. If we can get agreement on the SLP track, some of the other stuff may need our intuition to tease out. Of course, agreement on SLP is somewhat less encouraging when the 500mb features still differ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 GFS is going to show what it's going to show. Don't get so worked up on the mid level temps and qpf on the GFS. I love the GFS but the last thing I look at for mid level temp and qpf guidance is the GFS in EC storms. It's possible the convective feedback on the GFS is robbing the precip from the NW side of the storm, and the lighter QPF would limit dynamic cooling resulting in warmer mid levels. The kicker looks more aggressive and is having an effect on the storm it appears, but it also seems like feedback is playing a role in preventing heavy precip from streaming back as far west as it should. I've seen heavy precip "dots" appear before on these runs and they are almost always wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjay Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 UKMET is text book huge hit Hr 48 983 mb low 40-70 or so miles SE of AC...looks nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 UKIE ccb .75…and great front end thump... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelocita Weather Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 983 mb low 40-70 or so miles SE of AC...looks nice 3 - 1....with the ggem pending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyblizz44 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Not saying for a second the evolution is similar. More just the refrain of big snows gone missing, only to be found in SNE. I know. I remember that baby was a complex handoff a Miller B that formed about 200 miles 2 far north...perfect example of CCB though : we wound up with 6 nches in Queens and that accum grew to 15-18 on eastern end of LI. what COULD have been ( remember the forcasts for 2-3 FT of snow ..ahhhhhh) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Exactly, the spooky part to me is that the GFS has been decent with the northern stream this winter. So if it indeed is onto something with that NRN stream disturbance then that could be bad. Like I said with the new data ingested its either been onto something all along, or way out to lunch. It seems to be a bit too aggressive with northern stream disturbances this year, but that may just be my memory playing tricks on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjay Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 3 - 1....with the ggem pending. The gfs is a win ...that track is classic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelocita Weather Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 UKIE ccb .75…and great front end thump... What's total qpf? 1" or so....mostly snow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user13 Posted February 12, 2014 Author Share Posted February 12, 2014 That blob between 30 - 39 might be a feedback issue...I remember a similar situation with a previous storm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsnowx53 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 The H5 evolution on the GFS this run was so much improved from prior runs, I am sitting here looping it repeatedly. You just have to hope that it's not correct with its handling of the mid level winds pressing on the flow and inhibiting precipitation development. The trend towards a faster development of an explosive CCB was evident as well. The fact that its H5 evolution has improved and CCB has become more explosive would lead one to believe it would eventually catch onto the idea of a more explosive precipitation shield. That being said, there could be an initial lag in the CCB from the mid-level flow compressing. But as long as H5 closes off south of our latitude, we should catch in on the CCB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allsnow Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 3 - 1....with the ggem pending. If you don't count the GFS trend as a win, well, I don't know what to tell ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsPens87 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 It seems to be a bit too aggressive with northern stream disturbances this year, but that may just be my memory playing tricks on me. No you very well could be correct. I'm just thinking of the GFS earlier in the winter performing much better when it was a northern stream dominated pattern. But if it has been too aggressive with northern stream disturbances than that could explain what is going on with the precip shield on the NW side. I just think a track like that with that H5 depiction, the system would be much more robust than what the GFS is showing. Though I think the cutoff on the NWrn side will indeed be quite sharp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 That blob between 30 - 39 might be a feedback issue...I remember a similar situation with a previous storm No one else is picking up on it, so it might be nothing, but it's certainly something the GFS likes to do. I certainly think the precip is well underdone for a low strengthening like that and upper air features like this, for sure. But the CCB may not completely get going because of the kicker, so maybe it could be somewhere between the west/wet models and this when it comes down to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsPens87 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 If you don't count the GFS trend as a win, well, I don't know what to tell ya. Like you said, loop through that H5 and it's just beyond classic. Take out the qpf and just look at the LP track, and again, just classic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+SNfreak21 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 No you very well could be correct. I'm just thinking of the GFS earlier in the winter performing much better when it was a northern stream dominated pattern. But if it has been too aggressive with northern stream disturbances than that could explain what is going on with the precip shield on the NW side. I just think a track like that with that H5 depiction, the system would be much more robust than what the GFS is showing. Though I think the cutoff on the NWrn side will indeed be quite sharp. Like Dec 2010? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsnowx53 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I think the GFS has been better with northern stream disturbances than the Euro, but it has overdone them as well, too. I still do believe the GFS's coarse model physics will have it be stronger with the synoptic forcing (zonal mid-level jet) rather than focus on the mesoscale intricacies of a negatively tilted/PVA/closing off 500mb low leading to explosive banding. The fact that it eventually does explode the banding in New England is just the GFS scratching the surface of potential. The Ukie looks great with the CCB, btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I think the GFS has been better with northern stream disturbances than the Euro, but it has overdone them as well, too. I still do believe the GFS's coarse model physics will have it be stronger with the synoptic forcing (zonal mid-level jet) rather than focus on the mesoscale intricacies of a negatively tilted/PVA/closing off 500mb low leading to explosive banding. The fact that it eventually does explode the banding in New England is just the GFS scratching the surface of potential. The Ukie looks great with the CCB, btw. I think it has over 0.50" liquid with it through NJ, NYC and western Long Island. This feature might actually be real if the upper air lows blow up where models are saying they will tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsPens87 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Like Dec 2010? Boxing day im assuming? Yes it could be, the best dynamics this system has to work with will likely be in a pretty narrow corridor limited on the NWrn side by the GL disturbance. And let's not speak of boxing day(at least to me lol) the band would literally come to my doorstep and then back off, I wound up with 4 inches while just down the road was 12+ and then further east... well you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I think the GFS has been better with northern stream disturbances than the Euro, but it has overdone them as well, too. I still do believe the GFS's coarse model physics will have it be stronger with the synoptic forcing (zonal mid-level jet) rather than focus on the mesoscale intricacies of a negatively tilted/PVA/closing off 500mb low leading to explosive banding. The fact that it eventually does explode the banding in New England is just the GFS scratching the surface of potential. The Ukie looks great with the CCB, btw. Every time I catch myself defaulting to the play that the GFS has broader resolution, etc I stop for a second. Because the model has made me look like a fool for assuming that several times in the past. In this scenario though, I just can't believe its precipitation distribution and RH fields given the dynamics at play aloft and from the upper to mid levels. Everything argues for expansive precipitation with enhanced lift and dynamics, from the jet positioning straight down to the low level jet. If it is correct in its idea that precipitation will struggle due to mid level winds and a compressed flow in that regard, I will really have to tip my cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.