Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

Feb 8th-9th Obs/Discussion Thread


mappy

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

More likely that this mimics so many of the storms from pre-2013, in that we get non-accumulating snow during the day with temps/DP around 34/33, and then it whitens up the ground after the sun goes down.

Talking run up and idea we went to WSW before it etc before fail more than actual series of events necessarily. No clue how LWX is going with the numbers they are in the WSW area.. no disrespect to anyone there. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talking run up and idea we went to WSW before it etc before fail more than actual series of events necessarily. No clue how LWX is going with the numbers they are in the WSW area.. no disrespect to anyone there. :P

I mean they're taking the GFS, RGEM, GGEM, and euro to some extent... All which show those numbers. However the temp situation and climo play a role.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean they're taking the GFS, RGEM, GGEM, and euro to some extent... All which show those numbers. However the temp situation and climo play a role.

Seems like they are forecasting the boom/reasonable worst case to me. Which is fine I suppose but risky. Of those, not sure I'd take any to mean a whole lot. GFS might be the best of the group.. which ... well lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would like to write off the NAM but it's getting into its wheelhouse now. Just shows how uncertain an event like this can be.

 

Such a contrast to the RGEM, too...when considering meso models.  Is the NAM actually a sort of low-end outlier now?  The other day it was more in line with other models and the GFS was on the relative high end.  Now almost all other guidance trended (last night) to a better event and the NAM goes the other way (or stands its ground, more like).  Ugh!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No disrespect to LWX, but something doesn't seem right when their maps for max snowfall and most likely range look almost identical (at least north of I-70).

 

I think 3-6" would be a safer call for the northern counties at this point than 6-9"... there's still uncertainty and there'd be more room to adjust higher or lower when things look more clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No disrespect to LWX, but something doesn't seem right when their maps for max snowfall and most likely range look almost identical (at least north of I-70).

 

I think 3-6" would be a safer call for the northern counties at this point than 6-9"... there's still uncertainty and there'd be more room to adjust higher or lower when things look more clear.

 

They're probably tossing the NAM - as they should.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Such a contrast to the RGEM, too...when considering meso models. Is the NAM actually a sort of low-end outlier now? The other day it was more in line with other models and the GFS was on the relative high end. Now almost all other guidance trended (last night) to a better event and the NAM goes the other way (or stands its ground, more like). Ugh!

I think it's a real difficult setup. A lot of factors coming together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...