Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,586
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    23Yankee
    Newest Member
    23Yankee
    Joined

#PD3Attempt#13since2003 -Tracking the threat of the Presidents day storm Feb 15-16 2016


Ji

Recommended Posts

I'm not a met and I don't have the historical knowledge of many posters here, but if I were a weenie in Ohio I'd be nervous about something like the 06z GFS (or yesterday's 18z GFS) verifying.

 

Every one of the Canadian ensemble members last night had at least some snow for DC.  There's also a lot of freezing rain.  00z GEFS were less snowy with not nearly as many members showing freezing rain.

 

fQGsyEt.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Looks like things are trending eastward ... headed in the right direction. Yesterday's western shift just didn't make much sense.

what trended eastward? The 6z  GFS was awfully west. the nam at  72-84 isnt usually a trend. Its usually wrong lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You and I both know that it's not going to be right.  It'll just serve to give us false hope and toward the end, we'll wonder (again) why we ever trusted the NAM.

 

Although....isn't it supposed to be good with CAD :yikes:

if we are going to see changes...its going to be today. By tomorrow, things are probably going to be locked in. its dark and damp here in the valley bro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like things are trending eastward ... headed in the right direction. Yesterday's western shift just didn't make much sense.

respectfully disagree.  the west shift made sense based on how the models were interpreting the data.  GFS still seeing west solution.  not sold it won't be straight up I95 track...but I do agree the CAD is always erased too quickly so maybe longer frozen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My, my, my how short the memory of some is.

 

The NAM did a damn fine job with the blizzard.  Intentional negativity isn't the same as objectivity.

every model did a good job on the blizzard. It was like throwing a softball to a steroid barry bonds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing that is worth notice on the NAM is it brings sig precip in earlier than the globals. Is it on to something? I sure damn hope so but have zero confidence until the globals trend that way. 

 

Noticed that too.  In fact, earlier runs of the globals brought the precip in earlier, too as I recall, at least the ones that looked good for the front end.  Then they backed away from that, unfortunately.

 

The NAM may be on to something...or simply "on" something (my guess is the latter!)...but we'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My, my, my how short the memory of some is.

 

The NAM did a damn fine job with the blizzard.  Intentional negativity isn't the same as objectivity.

The NAM is not a good model.  Even the folks who programmed models will tell you this.   There's a difference between intentional negativity and being realistic.  

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...