Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,502
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Weathernoob335
    Newest Member
    Weathernoob335
    Joined

August dawgs are barking ... but it looks like the month may split


Typhoon Tip
 Share

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Last night. I meant yesterday morning. 

Yeah...but my point originally was... in this situation, timing and placement should be given in terms of expected error - ...

If doing so, the models were fine. 

Seems there's difficulty keeping the former in mind - but whatever... To each his own.

The NAM did okay all things considered.. just imho -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Pushing noon and my peak solar for the day is 91 W/m2. It's sometimes higher than that in winter with 4" of snow caked onto the sensor. :axe:

I was just nerdly hyper focusing on the hi res vis imagery loop and it really appears the mid and high level is < 50 % of that puke up there at this point.

Particularly down this way..  3,000 foot thick saturated inversion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Yeah...but my point originally was... in this situation, timing and placement should be given in terms of expected error - ...

If doing so, the models were fine. 

Seems there's difficulty keeping the former in mind - but whatever... To each his own.

The NAM did okay all things considered.. just imho -

But two different processes and features created the rain. That’s a rather large timing error(more than 12hrs in a 24 hr forecast)  and I think it was incorrect in what created the rain. That’s all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

But two different processes and features created the rain. That’s a rather large timing error(more than 12hrs in a 24 hr forecast)  and I think it was incorrect in what created the rain. That’s all. 

Right - I think we're arguing disparate points here.

I've already ceded to that notion about the incorrectness - my point was/is ... it's fine given the parameters handled.  Euro was atrocious last night - it seems your protecting a bad opinion about the NAM here and I honestly am not defending the NAM?  I don't care that you are whomever said the NAM was bad whenever - don't think you have to protect that opinion. 

If that's kinda sorta 'in a way' what's between the text in this conversation - don't worry, I'm not impugning anyone's bad opinion about matters.  I just said, it gets a pass - ... I was being kinda sorta 'in a way' sardonic earlier when I first mentioned it and so it's not gospel.

I will say, though, that a lot of modeling grief is inappropriate as a general rule, regardless of target ridicule. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Right - I think we're arguing disparate points here.

I've already ceded to that notion about the incorrectness - my point was/is ... it's fine given the parameters handled.  Euro was atrocious last night - it seems your protecting a bad opinion about the NAM here and I honestly am not defending the NAM?  I don't care that you are whomever said the NAM was bad whenever - don't think you have to protect that opinion. 

If that's kinda sorta 'in a way' what's between the text in this conversation - don't worry, I'm not impugning anyone's bad opinion about matters.  I just said, it gets a pass - ... I was being kinda sorta 'in a way' sardonic earlier when I first mentioned it and so it's not gospel.

I will say, though, that a lot of modeling grief is inappropriate as a general rule, regardless of target ridicule. 

Well I think we all know model biases and when to cut it some slack. Like missing a deformation band by 30-50 miles. That can happen and is well within modeling error. I guess my point is, it played into the hands of guidance being too “wet” when there is the potential for convection to screw around with the advection processes. People went verbatim with it, and there were caution flags.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HIPPYVALLEY said:

How much rain did you get?

less than a tenth of an inch forecast up to 2 for Saturday alone

possible to likely down ours last night and today

it wasn't even that big an area that got soaked (parts of se new england)

we don't need it but I planned around it, just a terrible forecast...when I saw some rain in ct yesterday and the vast majority out in pa/nj and the other blob that skirted the south coast then saw the nearly motionless radar

 

then the back tracking in the box discussion about models too far north blah blah

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, codfishsnowman said:

less than a tenth of an inch forecast up to 2 for Saturday alone

possible to likely down ours last night and today

it wasn't even that big an area that got soaked (parts of se new england)

we don't need it but I planned around it, just a terrible forecast...when I saw some rain in ct yesterday and the vast majority out in pa/nj and the other blob that skirted the south coast then saw the nearly motionless radar

 

then the back tracking in the box discussion about models too far north blah blah

What?  Greenfield got almost 3" and you got .10" ?    Weird. I thought all of I-91 corridor got smoked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like Stephen King's "The Mist" here right now. Near zero visibility fog outside, meanwhile inside, a moth is fluttering around in the lampshade and a spider is crawling on the wall. Current temperature is 60° F.

We never mixed out today. Cloudy, coolish, with periods of light drizzle and fog. A fine Sunday in August.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Modfan said:

Looks like 2nd half of the weekend not looking so promising; hopefully front drifts further south

What's interesting/ironic ...somewhat, is that the warmer than normal heights and thickness overall may cause the cooler/nastier weather. 

It's causing the stall farther N with that boundary... It's almost like the low's that form and ripple along the boundary later in the weekend are because of that push and shove in a lot of ways.  The whole thing belies the warm look overall, by sensible ending up colder due to clouds and showers. Interesting.

We'd otherwise be better off - as you suggest ... - if that sucker'd just go ahead and just push on south into the deep M/A we'd clear out.  The air mass behind it would be 82/50 probably... But this way, we may end up with 69 to 72 with drab skies and shredded strata rains.  Woooonderful - 

The extended is quite warm looking in both the Euro and GFS operational... The teleconnectors are supposedly still asleep in their perennial noisiness, but, the clustering is remarkably good that in about 4 or 5 days, the PNA goes negative, the NAO remains elevated, and the EPO shallowly goes to about -5 or so SD, and at this time of year with the wave lengths the way they are, that's a hot look sorry to say.

The 850 mb temperatures gutted though - ie., not impressively warm. That's not the first time I've seen that this summer - where these ginormous heights evolve, but the air mass contained is surprisingly tepid.  we'll see -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

What's interesting/ironic ...somewhat, is that the warmer than normal heights and thickness overall may cause the cooler/nastier weather. 

It's causing the stall farther N with that boundary... It's almost like the low's that form and ripple along the boundary later in the weekend are because of that push and shove in a lot of ways.  The whole thing belies the warm look overall, by sensible ending up colder due to clouds and showers. Interesting.

We'd otherwise be better off - as you suggest ... - if that sucker'd just go ahead and just push on south into the deep M/A we'd clear out.  The air mass behind it would be 82/50 probably... But this way, we may end up with 69 to 72 with drab skies and shredded strata rains.  Woooonderful - 

The extended is quite warm looking in both the Euro and GFS operational... The teleconnectors are supposedly still asleep in their perennial noisiness, but, the clustering is remarkably good that in about 4 or 5 days, the PNA goes negative, the NAO remains elevated, and the EPO shallowly goes to about -5 or so SD, and at this time of year with the wave lengths the way they are, that's a hot look sorry to say.

The 850 mb temperatures gutted though - ie., not impressively warm. That's not the first time I've seen that this summer - where these ginormous heights evolve, but the air mass contained is surprisingly tepid.  we'll see -

And dews stay in 60’s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...