Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,508
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

Thanksgiving Week Storm (Wed/Wed night)


ORH_wxman

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 857
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Sleet.

Even if it does punch to the NH border late in the game, pretty immaterial.

 

NAM solution would def cut into the expected amounts because it rips it so far north and earlier than other guidance.

 

But I'm not really concerned about it given the SREFs that just ran, along with the more reliable RGEM/ECMWF blend. NAM always has a couple of steroid runs during coastals...this is probably one of them. The "give 35 inches of snow to N NJ in Feb 2013" NAM run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the 6 hr difference from 21hr this run and 27 hr on its 12z run. Looks so weird that it could jump the low position that much in one run. That's why I don't trust the 18z ever.

Haven't looked, but it's possible convection is doing weird things. However dismissing an 18z run in favor of 12z and 00z runs while only 24 hrs out makes little sense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NAM solution would def cut into the expected amounts because it rips it so far north and earlier than other guidance.

 

But I'm not really concerned about it given the SREFs that just ran, along with the more reliable RGEM/ECMWF blend. NAM always has a couple of steroid runs during coastals...this is probably one of them. The "give 35 inches of snow to N NJ in Feb 2013" NAM run.

I didn't care enough to entertain what a verbaitm verification of this run would entail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wrote this last night... NAM should have drug-testing prior to each run

 

Not advocating any particular solution, but I do wonder how much the outburst of convection off the Carolinas hours 15-21 is dragging this system a little northwest. Not a "weenie" wish. I raised the same question on 18Z last night which was a huge hit for mby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general, no, but I'm dismissing this run. 

Ring the bell....file to the door, not even any homework.

 

 

I think the more correct thing to say would be "I'm just dismissing the NAM"...as in the model in general.

 

But I agree with Scooter about the 18z myth...that argument used to have a bit more weight, but not these days.

 

 

My general problem with the NAM is that it doesn't show an ability to be consistent...some models are consistent so when you see it make a move, it is more believable. The NAM is a highly volatile model that makes wild swings and can drive you nuts if you try and think each one is a sign that the system is trending one way or the other.

 

 

So I'll await the 18z RGEM/GFS.

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...