Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

Jan 23/24 2016 obs/nowcast - the fight for the North


RUNNAWAYICEBERG

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

For those curious about NYC

 

26.9...FEB 11-12 2006

25.8...DEC 26-27 1947

25.1...JAN 22-23 2016...TOTAL SNOW FORECAST OF 28.1 INCHES

21.0...MAR 12-14 1888

20.9...FEB 25-26 2010

20.2...JAN 7-8 1996

20.0...DEC 26-27 2010

19.8...FEB 16-17 2003

19.0...JAN 26-27 2011

18.1...JAN 22-24 1935 AND MAR 7-8 1941

I believe the 12/26/47 number is from I the old Battery location were official records were then. When they moved to Central Park, they had the rcrds and replaced the battery numbers. 25.8 was from the battery but 26.4 was Central Park. I remember because as a kid growing up in the area I had all the numbers committed to memory by about age 10...lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw only a couple of flakes here that lost their way from the main storm.

Oh well.

Ran in to a wall coming down 95 earlier. Dry to S+ with 1/2 mi vis in 10 miles. Similar on 93 I'm sure. State caught off guard, few plows out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before it fades, what's the Memento tattoo we're giving this blizzard regarding guidance?

 

My impression was that many pro forecasters (and myself and many here) were led astray by the Euro / RGEM and skepticism of the NAM, but in the end the NAM led the way and crushed other guidance with the significantly more north track and prodigious qpf especially in NYC, as well as the easternmost of the dual-low kicking back a CCB for us.

 

Do we mark this one, like Juno Jan 29 2015, as another really impactful Euro subpar performance within 24 hours?

And a rare but really significant NAM coop?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before it fades, what's the Memento tattoo we're giving this blizzard regarding guidance?

 

My impression was that many pro forecasters (and myself and many here) were led astray by the Euro / RGEM and skepticism of the NAM, but in the end the NAM led the way and crushed other guidance with the significantly more north track and prodigious qpf especially in NYC, as well as the easternmost of the dual-low kicking back a CCB for us.

 

Do we mark this one, like Juno Jan 29 2015, as another really impactful Euro subpar performance within 24 hours?

And a rare but really significant NAM coop?

 

 

There was some discussion earlier that I wasn't part of about perhaps the reason for the NAM doing well...and I agree with the theory.

 

 

In this storm, the synoptics were not in doubt...it was a massive ULL with nothing overly complicated like multiple streams phasing or multiple vortmaxes phasing which we sometimes see in coastal storms. So this was less chance for the NAM to screw up synoptic aspects of the forecast where it has a decided disadvantage against models like the Euro.

 

Given just how intensely moisture-laden and convective the system was as it exited the southeast, this is where the NAM could shine without "worrying" if the synoptics were wrong since things were already really set in stone there....it could model the latent heat much better than the Euro and other models. That mattered in a storm so big and so convective with the really monster ULL. It pumped the heights up more than other guidance and it was correct (for the most part).

 

I certainly wouldn't go around trusting the NAM in future forecasts, but it's an interesting case study this time. We did mention earlier that it tends to score coups occasionally in very convective systems. 1/12/11 sort of matched that...though there wasn't nearly the spread in guidance in that system as this one.

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...