CT Rain Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 1 minute ago, ice1972 said: lol Ryans map tonight on air has me right on the line.....2-8 it is.....JFC I hate that We do that on purpose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, ice1972 said: lol Ryans map tonight on air has me right on the line.....2-8 it is.....JFC I hate that Or, 4" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 3 minutes ago, JC-CT said: ? models can still spit out decent QPF totals despite showing subsidence for that area. For example, say you look at 6 HR QPF map for CT and it spit out .5'' for the state and had a nice band over eastern CT...but you look at VV and bufkit profiles and see positive omega within the SGZ and negative VV's over W CT...W CT probably not getting .5'' QPF b/c of this but the algorithm or whatever is used to compute QPF doesn't take this into account Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weathafella Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 3z RPM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 1 minute ago, ice1972 said: I hope you are wrong obviously but all we have to do is get a good band in here and that forecast is busted......it seems like its 50/50.....we'll see It is very, very close...which is why I wasn't comfortable making a forecast tonight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Just now, weatherwiz said: models can still spit out decent QPF totals despite showing subsidence for that area. For example, say you look at 6 HR QPF map for CT and it spit out .5'' for the state and had a nice band over eastern CT...but you look at VV and bufkit profiles and see positive omega within the SGZ and negative VV's over W CT...W CT probably not getting .5'' QPF b/c of this but the algorithm or whatever is used to compute QPF doesn't take this into account It's just weird you don't think the models account for sinking air. Hard to imagine they don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceanStWx Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 13 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said: Question, i noticed on the 18z and 0z (gfs runs) that v.v's@7H were Jacked up for a short 3hr period /very transient (over SNE), While V.V's@5H were jacked up for like 10hours over some parts of the area. Is the area just NW of that tremendous lift at 500mb Gonna Experience huge banding or not so much 500 mb is starting to get a little too high (cold) for significant banding. That 700 mb map I showed is sort of right in the sweet spot for dendritic growth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Chris, do you have that H7 banding map for the 12z euro? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 1 minute ago, JC-CT said: It's just weird you don't think the models account for sinking air. Hard to imagine they don't. well models do just not the QPF algorithm. Same reason why I can't stand the ridiculous model snowfall maps. They only take into account whatever is designed into their algorithm. I don't think they take into account things like where the DSZ is, how much moisture is in it, how much lift is in it, whether or not there is subsidence, etc. Think its mainly just max temperature in profile, a constant snowfall ratio (which is stupid b/c snowfall ratios are not constant throughout an entire duration of a storm), and QPF, and maybe a couple other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice1972 Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 4 minutes ago, CT Rain said: We do that on purpose lol.....Wait up for the Euro? At this point so close in does it even matter though? I recall a few maybe where it did......don't ask which ones though lol.....I'm not good like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 1 minute ago, weatherwiz said: well models do just not the QPF algorithm. Same reason why I can't stand the ridiculous model snowfall maps. They only take into account whatever is designed into their algorithm. I don't think they take into account things like where the DSZ is, how much moisture is in it, how much lift is in it, whether or not there is subsidence, etc. Think its mainly just max temperature in profile, a constant snowfall ratio (which is stupid b/c snowfall ratios are not constant throughout an entire duration of a storm), and QPF, and maybe a couple other things. Sounds like there is a lot of room for improvement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolri_wx Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 7 minutes ago, weatherwiz said: models can still spit out decent QPF totals despite showing subsidence for that area. For example, say you look at 6 HR QPF map for CT and it spit out .5'' for the state and had a nice band over eastern CT...but you look at VV and bufkit profiles and see positive omega within the SGZ and negative VV's over W CT...W CT probably not getting .5'' QPF b/c of this but the algorithm or whatever is used to compute QPF doesn't take this into account I think a more common sense reason why you get good QPF over areas of subsidence on model output is because those areas of subsidence fluctuate and move. Even the "RI snow hole" grows and shrinks over the duration of a storm. It also doesn't help that the GFS output is either 3 hours or 6 hours depending on time frame, and things are moving around between those output frames. This is why I like the simulated radar on the 3km NAM and the HRRR (once you get close enough) because it's much better at showing how that type of feature will show up at the surface, and it's hour-by-hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 9 minutes ago, ice1972 said: lol Ryans map tonight on air has me right on the line.....2-8 it is.....JFC I hate that 2-5" for the valley 5-8" for the elevation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Just now, ice1972 said: lol.....Wait up for the Euro? At this point so close in does it even matter though? I recall a few maybe where it did......don't ask which ones though lol.....I'm not good like that It mattered with Juno. A lot of media outlets wouldn't have busted so bad if it weren't for the 24 hour Euro! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Just now, JC-CT said: Sounds like there is a lot of room for improvement That's where the upgrades come in! Don't forget the equations thrown into these models are insane...incredibly complex series of partial differential equations which people can't solve so computers do them lol. There are always tweaks being done to the equations and work done into how the equations can be further fine tuned and figuring out which terms in some of the equations hold significant importance and which terms are so insignificant that they don't really matter and can be ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice1972 Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 1 minute ago, JC-CT said: It mattered with Juno. A lot of media outlets wouldn't have busted so bad if it weren't for the 24 hour Euro! Juno was just ok here IIRC.....right? I remember it being mildly annoying the whole time..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxsniss Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 I think beginnings of our surface low... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherwiz Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 3 minutes ago, bristolri_wx said: I think a more common sense reason why you get good QPF over areas of subsidence on model output is because those areas of subsidence fluctuate and move. Even the "RI snow hole" grows and shrinks over the duration of a storm. It also doesn't help that the GFS output is either 3 hours or 6 hours depending on time frame, and things are moving around between those output frames. This is why I like the simulated radar on the 3km NAM and the HRRR (once you get close enough) because it's much better at showing how that type of feature will show up at the surface, and it's hour-by-hour. I agree about the time intervals. On bufkit now you can do 1-hr intervals on the GFS out to 120 hours which is sick!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 1 minute ago, ice1972 said: Juno was just ok here IIRC.....right? I remember it being mildly annoying the whole time..... Kind of a bummer for you. I had 20, Boston had like 36. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterWolf Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Just now, ice1972 said: Juno was just ok here IIRC.....right? I remember it being mildly annoying the whole time..... Probably gonna be nothing great here unfortunately....unless we get another tick West. But a few inches of snow is better than no inches of snow...so I’ll take it and be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceanStWx Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 7 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said: Chris, do you have that H7 banding map for the 12z euro? I do but can't reproduce those images. But I can say it is a bit west of the 18z GFS image I posted. Not by much though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ericjcrash Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice1972 Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 1 minute ago, JC-CT said: Kind of a bummer for you. I had 20, Boston had like 36. Ya.....Boxing Day was probably the worst.....what a terrible POS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STILL N OF PIKE Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Ray, i reluctantly put the pipe down. Do you believe hobbyists usually go too low or too high w accumulations. 13 minutes ago, OceanStWx said: 500 mb is starting to get a little too high (cold) for significant banding. That 700 mb map I showed is sort of right in the sweet spot for dendritic growth. Thank you for the response How many hours are those areas on your shaded map looking like they could potentially see banding for. 2/4/6? Thank you very much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, OceanStWx said: I do but can't reproduce those images. But I can say it is a bit west of the 18z GFS image I posted. Not by much though. That is what I expected. Thank...I like my spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice1972 Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Ryan is the best at softening the blow of uncertainty....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Christian, if depends on the hobbyist...but some sports are def. getting over 12" imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceanStWx Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 1 minute ago, STILL N OF PIKE said: Ray, i reluctantly put the pipe down. Do you believe hobbyists usually go too low or too high w accumulations. Thank you for the response How many hours are those areas on your shaded map looking like they could potentially see banding for. 2/4/6? Thank you very much Looks like someone in NE MA/SE NH could get into it for more than 6 hours at the pivot point. Verbatim, a little east of ASH maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Have a hunch the EURO may tick east a hair tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 1 minute ago, OceanStWx said: Looks like someone in NE MA/SE NH could get into it for more than 6 hours at the pivot point. Verbatim, a little east of ASH maybe. Same page....my first call was predicated on a continued west trend, but should that not transpire, then I should be sitting pretty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.