• Member Statistics

    15,886
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    christopher58
    Newest Member
    christopher58
    Joined
Sign in to follow this  
WxWatcher007

Model discussion--1/5-1/8 Period of Interest

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

Get this metric sh*t out of my country, dude.

Eat a dick.. when you're talking about such low measurements, metric is the best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, yoda said:

00z German model, DWD-ICON:

 

Even if it's wrong, it has been pretty consistent in our area.  Here are the last five runs.

xlO56Kk.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, dtk said:

They are completely different at a fundamental level with one being spectral (spherical harmonic representation) and one grid point.  They also have vastly different physics as someone else noted.  The Canadian models are a different story as rgem comes from the same design and code base as the ggem.

That makes sense since rgem and ggem diverge way less 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, yoda said:

:(

But its just one more...

Don't listen to him.  Ukie!  Ukie!  Ukie! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cae said:

Don't listen to him.  Ukie!  Ukie!  Ukie! 

At least now I know the ignore button works as a first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, WxWatcher007 said:

Ok. Ukie time. Damn maps. Waiting for precip. 

Ukie1.gif

I like that frame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Ok. Ukie time. Damn maps. Waiting for precip. 

Ukie1.gif

12z map below. This run is slower and closer to the coast.

http://meteocentre.com/models/explorateur.php?lang=en&map=na&run=12&mod=ukmet&stn=PNM&comp=1&run2=12&mod2=ukmet&stn2=PNM&hh2=048&fixhh=1&stn2_type=prog&mode=latest&yyyy=latest&mm=latest&dd=latest&hh=060

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, yoda said:

DCA looks like 0.3" QPF on the UKIE, yes?

Looks that way to me. Ukie definitely more west with precip this run

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, yoda said:

DCA looks like 0.3" QPF on the UKIE, yes?

I thought it was going to be east based on the panel but yeah, looks like 0.3" at DCA.  Definitely west with the precip.  

Now its UKIE/GGEM/RGEM/NAM/SREF vs GFS for measureal snow at DCA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So its UKIE/RGEM/NAM triplets/SREFs that get 2" or more snow for DCA... GGEM is around an inch... and GFS brings nadda... I like tonights runs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compared to the 12z run, the 00z update for the Ukie has a slightly stronger low which is tucked more into the coast of SC as of 12z Saturday morning.  Precip shield looks to be a little more expansive to the west as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

I took note of that right away from your previous discussion. :)

On second thought, HighRisk, what's your thoughts on the output?

       I'm kind of scratching my head, along with a lot of other people.     I'm quite surprised that the NAM/GFS differences weren't resolved with the 00z cycle, as the event is only 36 hours away.   The NAM problems are well-known, but inside of 48 hours, it should never be entirely discounted.   And we have the parent and the higher-res nests as well as the parallel system all with the same general idea for several consecutive cycles.   It's still impossible to jump on board until the ECMWF or GFS brings good QPF into our area, but I don't think that the NAM & Friends solution should be thrown out just yet.

   <<edit>>   The 00z UKMET run looking more interesting for our area is certainly note-worthy.    The  00Z ECMWF run will be the most important model run of our lifetime!     ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, high risk said:

       I'm kind of scratching my head, along with a lot of other people.     I'm quite surprised that the NAM/GFS differences weren't resolved with the 00z cycle, as the event is only 36 hours away.   The NAM problems are well-known, but inside of 48 hours, it should never be entirely discounted.   And we have the parent and the higher-res nests as well as the parallel system all with the same general idea for several consecutive cycles.   It's still impossible to jump on board until the ECMWF or GFS brings good QPF into our area, but I don't think that the NAM & Friends solution should be thrown out just yet.

:hurrbear:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.