Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,515
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    amirah5
    Newest Member
    amirah5
    Joined

JAN 23-24 anyone ?


DTWXRISK

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Longtime lurker and snow-lover here. I was wondering if there was any hope in getting snow in Arlington, VA (the part closer to Fairfax than D.C.). Models seem to be getting worse, but the NAM seemed to have rebounded slightly. Do I have 1-2 inches to look forward to, or should I bet on rain?

With no cold high to our north for this storm, I'd bet on rain. You like snow, you need to hit the high elevations or head north into Penn or the SNE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Longtime lurker and snow-lover here. I was wondering if there was any hope in getting snow in Arlington, VA (the part closer to Fairfax than D.C.). Models seem to be getting worse, but the NAM seemed to have rebounded slightly. Do I have 1-2 inches to look forward to, or should I bet on rain?

Similar area, I would bet on seeing some snow at the very start or the very end, but I would doubt any significant accumulation would come from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This might actually work out OK around this part of MD.

 

I liked this gfs run better. At least the storm was a bit better organized. Only way to win here is with a better storm to aid in dynamic cooling. This run was closer to that

 

I like Ellinwood's map a lot. I had a busy day so I didn't really look at the models too closely but it looks like most give us about .5 QPF. A few inches seems very possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jason Samenow just blasted DT on his facebook post. 

 

See facebook post: https://www.facebook.com/WxRisk/posts/808338719213388

 

Jason Samenow's comment:

 

Jason Samenow DT - I take issue with your characterization of what Wes said. He simply said we had above normal snow chances in the DC area...he was NOT favoring big East Coast storms but rather an active pattern with disturbances coming through (not up the coast, but clippers) and cold air around. And given storm systems coming through every few days, I think his idea has been basically right. . Of all people, Wes is among the more conservative forecasters and has been bearish about big coastal storms in this pattern for the reasons you state (no blocking, +AO, etc). Considering you were woofing and ALERTing the Euros incorrect ideas about snow in DC, NOVA, BWI etc for Fri night, I find it bizarre you would call out Wes here and CWG, because all along we saw no big high and have downplayed the snow potential from this particular system all week! I say this all respectfully.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, 2.5 degrees is totally reasonable .... or not

bias_fhr96_P850T_g236.png

Hey I was just joking around but what does the graph depict.. Is it showing actual departure from forecast... If this is the case it would seem that the gfs has a cold bias.. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jason Samenow just blasted DT on his facebook post.

See facebook post: https://www.facebook.com/WxRisk/posts/808338719213388

Jason Samenow's comment:

Jason Samenow DT - I take issue with your characterization of what Wes said. He simply said we had above normal snow chances in the DC area...he was NOT favoring big East Coast storms but rather an active pattern with disturbances coming through (not up the coast, but clippers) and cold air around. And given storm systems coming through every few days, I think his idea has been basically right. . Of all people, Wes is among the more conservative forecasters and has been bearish about big coastal storms in this pattern for the reasons you state (no blocking, +AO, etc). Considering you were woofing and ALERTing the Euros incorrect ideas about snow in DC, NOVA, BWI etc for Fri night, I find it bizarre you would call out Wes here and CWG, because all along we saw no big high and have downplayed the snow potential from this particular system all week! I say this all respectfully.

The other thing also is that wes's outlook was a two week outlook that indicated a more favorable pattern in the second half of week 2 which is really not until after this Saturday event passes through. It focused on a negative ao and positive PNA.. Not a mega block -nao scenario that would support a mecs or hecs type event. No where in the artical was there any big storm hype

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing also is that wes's outlook was a two week outlook that indicated a more favorable pattern in the second half of week 2 which is really not until after this Saturday event passes through. It focused on a negative ao and positive PNA.. Not a mega block -nao scenario that would support a mecs or hecs type event. No where in the artical was there any big storm hype

 

DT is a total fool. Never did I read the article by Wes and ever think I needed to gas up my snowblower for a big snowstorm. I took from the article that it was one of our better patterns for snow that we've had this winter and there should be some cold and some systems and so it should be active with a decent chance to cash in. DT blows forecasts all the time and never admits he was wrong, yet is quick to blast the forecasts of many other meteorologists. Can't stand that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every post you make these days is you being extremely defensive over a perceived slight against a computer weather model...

My posting the fact that the GFS has a mean 0.1 degree bias at 850 hPa with 96 hours lead time over CONUS is being extremely defensive?  Honestly, most of the anecdotes thrown around about the models are nonsense....my apologies for trying to educate and elevate the tone of the discussion.  I'd be happy to keep my comments to myself.  I'll let everyone go back to their "GFS is garbage", "Crazy uncle is a 2nd rate model", etc. conversation and stay out of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's probably a good sign since it was already often better than the euro with northern stream systems. I'm more positive about the upgrade overall as we see it run. I wasn't paying much attention to it till a few weeks prior to the flip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GFS is my clipper go to until further notice. It might secretly be really good we just haven't figured it out yet. Flipping in the heart of winter seemed odd.

Do you mean the implementation?  EMC/NCO has no choice as there is effectively a moratorium during the ATL/EPAC hurricane seasons which pretty much takes May through November off the table.  That leaves a window from November through May to do an upgrade, and this is how it fell into place given the planned supercomputer upgrades.  If I understand them correctly, I believe that EMC is hoping to push for a more regular (annual) GFS upgrade in the winter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's probably a good sign since it was already often better than the euro with northern stream systems. I'm more positive about the upgrade overall as we see it run. I wasn't paying much attention to it till a few weeks prior to the flip.

While an improvement over the old GFS, the new package is plenty flawed.  The higher run-to-run variability has also been noted by the field, though this is at least in part a function of the higher resolution and new dynamics.  I don't think there is an easy fix to this, but the extension to 4D data assimilation and improved initialization techniques could/should help.  The physics (especially the boundary layer and physics schemes) still need significant work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't implementation delayed as well? If I remember correctly, the original plan was to get things up and running during the first two weeks of met winter. 

Correct, the original target date was early/mid December but had to be postponed because of a technical issue.  Part of the package that was originally delivered to central ops included a bug in some of the post processing (not the model itself).  This restarted the clock and pushed things into January in part because of the holidays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you mean the implementation?  EMC/NCO has no choice as there is effectively a moratorium during the ATL/EPAC hurricane seasons which pretty much takes May through November off the table.  That leaves a window from November through May to do an upgrade, and this is how it fell into place given the planned supercomputer upgrades.  If I understand them correctly, I believe that EMC is hoping to push for a more regular (annual) GFS upgrade in the winter.

Yes, and that's true. I did think about it a bit and figured winter is probably among the lowest potential impact period should there be issues.. even though we only care about winter. ;) Didn't know there was a moratorium, but figured they wouldn't necessarily want to switch in tornado season or hurricane season.. which leaves limited ops elsewhere. More consistent upgrades are obviously a good thing especially with the increased computing power available etc. I was not that huge a fan of the dual GFS period.. it just muddied the waters in an issue a lot of people already really poorly understand thanks to the Euro humping after Sandy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't implementation delayed as well? If I remember correctly, the original plan was to get things up and running during the first two weeks of met winter. 

That's also true. I guess if it's a yearly thing maybe it should just happen without any fanfare. Two GFS was bad for everyone. :P

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...