• Member Statistics

    16,065
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Andre Empire
    Newest Member
    Andre Empire
    Joined
Sign in to follow this  
Ralph Wiggum

January 22-23 Storm Threat

Recommended Posts

I think Jonas is an ok name. Just think of Jonas the whale. This is gonna be a whale of a storm I kinda like it despite how dumb I think naming winter storms is lol. Been at work all night I'm glad to see the Euro came back north some. Now we have a few days to see where this sleet/rain/snow line will setup.

I'm sorry and I hope I don't offend any fans, but when I hear Jonas I immediately envision the Jonas Brothers and they are pretty lame and kind of on the sensitive side. I have always been opposed to TWC naming these storms. If the NWS concocted a naming system however, I would be more inclined to embrace it. But you cant name every single event like weak clippers, etc. Needs to be a low-end limit/criteria for naming... kind of how with tropical systems the winds need to exceed a certain sustained speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry and I hope I don't offend any fans, but when I hear Jonas I immediately envision the Jonas Brothers and they are pretty lame and kind of on the sensitive side. I have always been opposed to TWC naming these storms. If the NWS concocted a naming system however, I would be more inclined to embrace it. But you cant name every single event like weak clippers, etc. Needs to be a low-end limit/criteria for naming... kind of how with tropical systems the winds need to exceed a certain sustained speed.

TWC needs to use the MST3K names from Space Mutiny - I'd get on board with Storm Big McLargeHuge. Anyway, nontropical storms are best named after the fact, when their full impact is known, or simply by a descriptor and year since the impact is made memorable, e.g. March 93 Superstorm, Ash Wednesday Storm of 62, Blizzard of 96, etc. Tropical storms have a defined set of criteria that warrant a name even if the only thing they ever impact are shipping interests.

In conclusion, TWC trying to name storms is like trying to make fetch happen. It's not going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TWC needs to use the MST3K names from Space Mutiny - I'd get on board with Storm Big McLargeHuge. Anyway, nontropical storms are best named after the fact, when their full impact is known, or simply by a descriptor and year since the impact is made memorable, e.g. March 93 Superstorm, Ash Wednesday Storm of 62, Blizzard of 96, etc. Tropical storms have a defined set of criteria that warrant a name even if the only thing they ever impact are shipping interests.

In conclusion, TWC trying to name storms is like trying to make fetch happen. It's not going to happen.

https://www.facebook.com/StopWeatherChannelFromNamingWinterStorms/photos_stream?ref=page_internal

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to the intermittent looking blobs of high qpf and subsidence on the GFS and CMC, I believe this is in response to the strong dynamics specifically 700mb vv's and frontogenic lifting features. I liken this to summer thunderstorms/instability. Bands of very heavy precipitation will likely setup at times with zones of subsidence on either side of said banding features. Yes, there probably will be some thunder accompanying these meso-scale bands of heavy precip. Very dynamic situation setting up and nobody should be concerned about the choppy looking qpf features on some of the models. Clearly a response to convective activity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to the intermittent looking blobs of high qpf and subsidence on the GFS and CMC, I believe this is in response to the strong dynamics specifically 700mb vv's and frontogenic lifting features. I liken this to summer thunderstorms/instability. Bands of very heavy precipitation will likely setup at times with zones of subsidence on either side of said banding features. Yes, there probably will be some thunder accompanying these meso-scale bands of heavy precip. Very dynamic situation setting up and nobody should be concerned about the choppy looking qpf features on some of the models. Clearly a response to convective activity.

 

 

The Par GFS wis really wrapped up, Philly would get snow but then over to a ton of sleet probably

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep

Wow, sounds like a pd2 repeat on the para. Big front end thump to major sleet episode. Sleet has support attm on some other guidance and with prolonged screaming east winds, seems inevitable. Interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Par GFS wis really wrapped up, Philly would get snow but then over to a ton of sleet probably

would be 1 to 2 ft of snow then some sleet. A lot of it is snow though. much like PDII, far from a valentines day 07 solution which was implied..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How reliable is this para GFS? I honestly dont follow it nor do I know its verification statistics.

Sent from my LG-V410 using Tapatalk

I believe it is lagging it's predecessor the current GFS. Here is the thing with it and the Euro IMO.  Especially with these dynamic storms.  They have higher resolution like the short range meso models so sometimes in the medium range I feel like they can tend to over-amp things and I think that the 0Z Euro is a perfect example of that.  If you remember last year the blizzard that wasn't?  Every model except a few runs of the Euro showed the storm OTS and the Euro showed it hugging the coast b/c it over-amplified the system.  The PARA GFS I believe has the same resolution as the Euro currently does and is doing the same thing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just glad to see the precip...i'll have a heart attack over precip-type later...

 

yep

 

suppression was my concern (and still is).  so worrying about p-typ at this time is silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasnt going to post on the NAM but generally unchanged thru 48hrs. Only notable difference is the precip shield is considerably more expansive. Not really too interested in what it shows post 48hrs to be honest. Not saying I wont peek tho :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasnt going to post on the NAM but generally unchanged thru 48hrs. Only notable difference is the precip shield is considerably more expansive. Not really too interested in what it shows post 48hrs to be honest. Not saying I wont peek tho :-)

hour 54 precip shield noticeably further north than 6z. putting a hole in the 00z euro's slow solution..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasnt going to post on the NAM but generally unchanged thru 48hrs. Only notable difference is the precip shield is considerably more expansive. Not really too interested in what it shows post 48hrs to be honest. Not saying I wont peek tho :-)

 

Haha. The NY thread is going nuts over hour 54

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha. The NY thread is going nuts over hour 54

I wont analyze the NAM post 48hrs but I would assume the end result is improved based on what Ive seen thru that time. So their jubilation may be justified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok i will bite slightly.....NAM showing convective feedback issues in its long range likely due to its hi-res. At 60 hrs has 4 slp centers over the southeast in response to convection offshore. Thus why anything past even 36 hours on this model needs to be taken with a grain of salt/caution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wont analyze the NAM post 48hrs but I would assume the end result is improved based on what Ive seen thru that time. So their jubilation may be justified.

less confluence so this should be north of previous runs. but it's the NAM  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NAM is going to be a bomb...

 HR 72 sim radar

nam_namer_072_sim_radar.gif

 

Ok i will bite slightly.....NAM showing convective feedback issues in its long range likely due to its hi-res. At 60 hrs has 4 slp centers over the southeast in response to convection offshore. Thus why anything past even 36 hours on this model needs to be taken with a grain of salt/caution.

not seeing this at all on the ncep website?

nam_namer_060_850_temp_mslp_precip.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no changeover worries besides on the coast on the NAM, much cooler at 850 than the euro and para gfs. widespread 1.75-2" qpf and still snowing at the end of the run. It's long range NAM but still a great solution and in line with the GFS/GGEM camp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.