Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,509
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

Anafrontal Thumpul Discussion 3/5


TheSnowman

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Right Tip, because I was "taking their snow away", so to speak.  Never mind verifying if I was correct, just pummel away.  I can relate to the pummeling Kevin takes on here, maybe for different reasons.

All of these NAM solutions are garbage anyways. We're 2.5 days away. If you want to focus on only fictitious QPF from a crappy model past 6hrs....then yeah, this run of the NAM was a little bit worse for your back yard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of these NAM solutions are garbage anyways. We're 2.5 days away. If you want to focus on only fictitious QPF from a crappy model past 6hrs....then yeah, this run of the NAM was a little bit worse for your back yard.

Why don't you tell that to all the others hyping up earlier what this crappy model was showing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't you tell that to all the others hyping up earlier what this crappy model was showing?

I think this run looked better for SNE, but I think everyone here knows to take the NAM at 60hrs+ with a grain of salt.

 

Moral of the story:

 

Don't argue over the NAM beyond 48hr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since another met has agreed with me, verbatim, what were you looking at?

In regard to the time frame and different look of the system, you are not correct. It is more robust and look for yourself.

 

18z:

post-437-0-31546600-1425337870_thumb.gif

 

12z:

post-437-0-33651600-1425337892_thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what I mean is on the NAM it's totally separate from Wednesday.

That isn't what defines an anafront though. You have a steeply sloped front with a wave developing on it pushing the warm moist air back over the cold side of the front.

It doesn't have to be part of a leading low pressure. December 26, 2004 was an anafront too.

If we get the southern stream wound up enough to start ripping the circulation around from the east enough to lose our elongated shape of the mid-levels, then the storm would start losing it's anafront characteristics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That isn't what defines an anafront though. You have a steeply sloped front with a wave developing on it pushing the warm moist air back over the cold side of the front.

It doesn't have to be part of a leading low pressure. December 26, 2004 was an anafront too.

If we get the southern stream wound up enough to start ripping the circulation around from the east enough to lose our elongated shape of the mid-levels, then the storm would start losing it's anafront characteristics.

by definition it is I guess but it's overrunning rather than classic, front goes by and back end snows. When Brett and Ray said they never work out I imagined that's what they defined it as. Rather than a sloped isentrophic separate from Wednesday system because those do work out pretty frequently.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right Tip, because I was "taking their snow away", so to speak.  Never mind verifying if I was correct, just pummel away.  I can relate to the pummeling Kevin takes on here, maybe for different reasons.

 

I actually didn't disagree with you :) I wasn't sure exactly what data you were referring to -  

 

I was speaking - my self - though with limited time to do so, that the 00z NAM to 12z had showed a downward trend, then the 18z came fully back again to the 00z (or huge amount of that distance anyway).

 

Heh, the NAM has almost no dependability in that time range, so it's all probably moot until it's not.  But, be that as it may, there are reasons to suspect more. 

 

I spoke to them earlier, but I'm interested in the sampling for input grids over Canada.  Also, some numerical guidance had this concern a couple few days ago.  

 

Interesting to follow... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will was Dec 11-12 2008 ice storm kind of a hybrid?

Yeah. Def not a pure anafront but it had a lot of characteristics. ML flow backed pretty good, esp the higher up you went.

I think most people fear anafronts because it's true that the models often show more robust precip than what actually happens. Part of it is that usually the winds are NW so that hurts. You need some strong mid level forcing to offset that.

Some of these solutions are providing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. Def not a pure anafront but it had a lot of characteristics. ML flow backed pretty good, esp the higher up you went.

I think most people fear anafronts because it's true that the models often show more robust precip than what actually happens. Part of it is that usually the winds are NW so that hurts. You need some strong mid level forcing to offset that.

Some of these solutions are providing that.

Do you think it is still possible to get a wound up low at the bottom of this thing to come up just like in the Ice storm?, but obviously this time it would be mostly snow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anafrontal stuff rarely deliver snow...most often it rains due to the hang back cold that doesn't get to us in time. A notable anafrontal snow was 11/29/95. The day before that thump it was well into the 60s.

If you recall, we had a gtg in Boston 12/23/13. That day featured an anafrontal rain event that folks were pimping for snow until the final 36 hours.

What is being progged here is mostly snow....and IMHO this event has a good chance of delighting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

by definition it is I guess but it's overrunning rather than classic, front goes by and back end snows. When Brett and Ray said they never work out I imagined that's what they defined it as. Rather than a sloped isentrophic separate from Wednesday system because those do work out pretty frequently.

Well the ascent slopes toward the cold side with an anafront...so by definition they resemble an overrunning situation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the ascent slopes toward the cold side with an anafront...so by definition they resemble an overrunning situation.

yes, just trying to clarify this is not one of those back end rain changes to snow types. Jerry I guess forgot his buddies year of the Anafrontal prolific snow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for clarity... Anafront refers to a front where warm air ascends the frontal slope.  

 

The reason that happens ...which is highly evidenced in the scenario in present discussion, is because there is accelerating wind core on the polarward side (usually paralleling) the boundary, and thus restoring forces pulls portions of the WCB up the elevate frontal slope.  This often results in precip lagging behind fronts when it happens.

 

It's "like" overrunning, but the mechanics for why it is happening are very different.  Also, just about every cyclogenesis scenario has a period of time where the baroclinic zones starts moving warm air along the isotropes. But that's getting into a different discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regard to the time frame and different look of the system, you are not correct. It is more robust and look for yourself.

 

18z:

attachicon.gif18zNAM.gif

 

12z:

attachicon.gif12zNAM.gif

 

 

Since the 18z shows a slower system, the precip has not moved in at 60 hr, but had already for 6hrs at 66 hr on the 12z.  That is why I used 24 hrs, not 12 hrs @ 72 and 78.  Let's not get ridiculous here.

As I said earlier, and as noted above, that is why 24 hrs was used, not the 12 hr precip panels you seem to rely upon for comparison.  Since there was no precip in the 48-60 hr period on the 18z NAM, we are comparing apples to apples.  Show us the 24 hr qpf paneIs for 72 and 78.  It really is amazing how a simple statement can evoke such argumentative discussion.  I wouldn't have made a big deal about this but for the piling on that took place.  I'm done with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GFS holds serve. It's ridiculous how far apart the GFS and the NAM are within 72 hours.

The 18z GFS is definitely an improvement over 12z.  It didn't translate to more QPF into SNE and points north, but the mid and upper levels moved in the right direction.  Not as big a change as the NAM, but still a positive change.  QPF upstream bumped northward and higher.  If the southern wave is modeled stronger in future runs (which I anticipate), I expect the beefed up QPF to translate northeastward through EPA, SENY, and eventually SNE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said earlier, and as noted above, that is why 24 hrs was used, not the 12 hr precip panels you seem to rely upon for comparison.  Since there was no precip in the 48-60 hr period on the 18z NAM, we are comparing apples to apples.  It really is amazing how a simple statement can evoke such argumentative discussion.  I wouldn't have made a big deal about this but for the piling on that took place.  I'm done with this.

Using the 24 hour precip to validate your post is bogus. The NAM is more robust plain and simple. Just because it is faster (as in hours of snow compared to 12z) with the system doesn't mean it cut back on precip. The storm evolution is just different and you seem to be missing that point.

 

Edit: And you can even see with this that snowfall indeed increased!

http://coolwx.com/cgi-bin/getbufr.cgi?region=MA&stn=KORH&model=nam&time=2015030218&field=pcompare

http://coolwx.com/cgi-bin/getbufr.cgi?region=MA&stn=KCEF&model=nam&time=2015030218&field=pcompare

http://coolwx.com/cgi-bin/getbufr.cgi?region=MA&stn=KBOS&model=nam&time=2015030218&field=pcompare

Only Providence decreased here:

http://coolwx.com/cgi-bin/getbufr.cgi?region=RI&stn=KPVD&model=nam&time=2015030218&field=pcompare

But that is probably because the axis of heaviest precip shifted north.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

by definition it is I guess but it's overrunning rather than classic, front goes by and back end snows. When Brett and Ray said they never work out I imagined that's what they defined it as. Rather than a sloped isentrophic separate from Wednesday system because those do work out pretty frequently.

Yea, every 10 years!
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...