Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

Feb 7 Winter Storm


Brick Tamland

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

For my own selfish reasons, I'd like to see a 50-75 mile shift west with the heavier precipitation and it's game on for Lexington & Columbia, SC.  Right now, it's borderline heavy enough for snow and all that kind of stuff.  If I were taking a forecast guess, a lot of sloppy rain with flakes mixed in right now per 18z OP NAM/HI-RES.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh boy.  12z ARPEGE:  (Lookout, thank you kindly for showing us this model.  I had no idea it existed until the last event.)

 

 

lol..i didn't either until a couple of months ago. For those wondering it did fairly well with the last event. In fact, for one or two runs it had a better handle on the low level cold/wedge than virtually every other model. Much like some of the other models, it did track the upper low a bit too far south several days out but was correct in the short term. Bottom line though is i didn't notice any glaring errors.  Will be really interesting to see how it does with this one.

 

 

For my own selfish reasons, I'd like to see a 50-75 mile shift west with the heavier precipitation and it's game on for Lexington & Columbia, SC.  Right now, it's borderline heavy enough for snow and all that kind of stuff.  If I were taking a forecast guess, a lot of sloppy rain with flakes mixed in right now per 18z OP NAM/HI-RES.

Same here. Surface temps might be a problem here but if it shifted that much i think there would be enough to compensate considering that temps aloft are quite a bit colder here/further north in south carolina. This run is also colder in the low levels as you can see here by the 925mb temps. the 12z run only had a narrow sliver. It's hard to believe that there wouldn't be at least a little bit falling further north in association with the upper low itself.

 

namUS_925_temp_039.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol..i didn't either until a couple of months ago. For those wondering it did fairly well with the last event. In fact, for one or two runs it had a better handle on the low level cold/wedge than virtually every other model. Much like some of the other models, it did track the upper low a bit too far south several days out but was correct in the short term. Bottom line though is i didn't notice any glaring errors.  Will be really interesting to see how it does with this one.

 

 

Same here. Surface temps might be a problem here but if it shifted that much i think there would be enough to compensate considering that temps aloft are quite a bit colder here/further north in south carolina. This run is also colder in the low levels as you can see here by the 925mb temps. the 12z run only had a narrow sliver. It's hard to believe that there wouldn't be at least a little bit falling further north in association with the upper low itself.

 

 

 

That image you posted.. if we can get the heavier precip would spell ground zero from 50 miles west of Columbia, towards the coast.  Glorious picture there showing the big area of cold.  That was way more small and closer to the cost at 12z.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

:yikes:

 

http://www.eas.slu.edu/CIPS/ANALOG/DFHR.php?reg=SE&fhr=F048&rundt=2016020512

 

Interesting looking at the #2-#4 analogs... #4 being the March 6/7, 2014 juicy late blooming coastal I brought up a few pages back.

 

#2 is the March 2010 snowstorm that dumped as much as 8" of snow in portions of the NC Piedmont (it was a heavy wet snow with no cold air feed, for the most part, and rate dependent).

 

#3 is the December 2004 E NC crusher, which has showed up a few times in recent runs.

 

#4 is the March 6/7, 2014 juicy late bloomer that was a huge ice storm here along with sleet and dumped boatloads of QPF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not seeing how this would compare with the 2000 event.  Was there a decent cold source with that one?

 

This one appears to be bring its own cold air and will be entirely rate driven.  RAH agrees with that and says that A.  Dry air would be tough to overcome in the triangle and B. Rates would have to be sufficient enough to overcome the warm layer.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't looked at the intricates, but overall to be the #1 analog on the CIPS site... various levels of the atmosphere and surface have to compute to be the highest out of them all.  So 1/25/2000 ranked the highest amongst TONS of other events based off those parameters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't looked at the intricates, but overall to be the #1 analog on the CIPS site... various levels of the atmosphere and surface have to compute to be the highest out of them all.

 

Are analogs an indication of both dynamics and location, or just dynamics?  I'm assuming just dynamics based on the fact that not a single model since one of the GFS runs on Monday or Tuesday has given the Triangle more than a few flurries...or am I misinterpreting what I'm reading in this thread...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like there's a bit of a warm nose on the coastal side of 17 in the low country. KCHS is getting potentially good snow though at 45.

From KCHS southward to the coast is always a bastard to gauge on subtle micro temperature issues. Almost always the transitional zone is usually from KCHS and north of that generally fairs better for frozen just from vast experience, something I know you are very well aware of. Subtle warm nosing you noted, I wonder if that's jetting off the ATL from the extreme wrap up the NAM appears to be doing. US17 and Downtown are almost always screwed up by marinal influences even with ripe conditions almost always.

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...