Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

December Discussion


NorEastermass128
 Share

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

Not everyone agrees that this is a weak modoki el nino. I've seen references to it being a weak to moderate el nino. Which years do you consider to be a weak modoki el nino?

It currently is weak, that is fact.....using climatology as a guide, the upper bounds of this intensity wise is borderline weak/moderate. It's very unimpressive from a MEI standpoint (.468), which is a better measure of the ocean-atmosphere coupling than ONI.

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/enso/mei/table.html

But even by ONI standards, we are still solidly weak. 

http://origin.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ONI_v5.php

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Ukie looks pretty far south. Tough to tell what it does after, without seeing 500 vort plots.

It does look like it has potential after 144....my preferred evolution on this storm though would be for things to happen sooner....get this much further north off to the west and then redevelop it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ORH_wxman said:

It does look like it has potential after 144....my preferred evolution on this storm though would be for things to happen sooner....get this much further north off to the west and then redevelop it.

We have seen models latch onto a fate similar to this evolution with regard to east coast cylogenesis, and they never make those adjustments this early of a lead time.

We still have plenty of time for that......but I don't see a blockbuster from this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ORH_wxman said:

It does look like it has potential after 144....my preferred evolution on this storm though would be for things to happen sooner....get this much further north off to the west and then redevelop it.

Yeah, I wondering how much of the northern stream energy was digging on the backside over Minnnesota. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never will be on board about a blockbuster storm at all with this.  All that comes to mind is a potential classic Miller A storm like Feb 6-7 1967 in the KU Book.  Not saying that is going to happen either of course but potential for an outgrowth is there of course if and only if in the very end things break right for a lot of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dryslot said:

DC to BOS has had some good ones in the past where we have sat shaking a snow globe to get the same affect up here.

That sucky track also had GC steering at the reddiwhip in our cocoa.  Hubb would be doing the same despite the fact that he'd still score in the end.

1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Like I said earlier ... the GGEM is the only model that's consistently showing much impact this far up the eastern seaboard over many cycles.. this one is no exception. 

Which may or may not fit in with folks' preferences for deterministic Meteorology ... probably less. Just sayn'.   

It's been consistently moving south.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Great Snow 1717 said:

Not hugging it at all but many here would be hugging it if it was showing a cold snowy pattern in the long term.

I think they'd like what it was showing if it was showing snow and cold...but most would know to take that too, with a grain of salt.  That model is all over the place in the long range(as are many lately), so I wouldn't be getting to excited either way with what it shows for the LR OP run..but that's just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Good luck

gfsshortwaves.gif

Yeah that is a disaster of shortwaves...definitely might not work out for us, but that is a classic recipe for a lot of quick changes in model solutions as each of those gets sampled better (both by satellite and RAOB).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

Why?

 

As I said in my earlier post, the GFS is ok with the medium range but with this particular set up it doesn't do well with the northern stream.  Again, anything outside of 120 hours should never be taken as etched in stone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Greg said:

As I said in my earlier post, the GFS is ok with the medium range but with this particular set up it doesn't do well with the northern stream.  Again, anyhting outside of 96 hours should never be taken as etched in stone.

Why do you lean colder? What are you basing your opinion on?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Yeah that is a disaster of shortwaves...definitely might not work out for us, but that is a classic recipe for a lot of quick changes in model solutions as each of those gets sampled better (both by satellite and RAOB).

Agree. Every run handles these a little differently each time so that's why it's always better to get them onshore before getting too emotional about the model outcomes.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

I think they'd like what it was showing if it was showing snow and cold...but most would know to take that too, with a grain of salt.  That model is all over the place in the long range(as are many lately), so I wouldn't be getting to excited either way with what it shows for the LR OP run..but that's just me.

Usually all it takes is for one good model run for many here to proclaim "cold and snow ahead" It's always the "bad" model runs that get tossed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Agree. Every run handles these a little differently each time so that's why it's always better to get them onshore before getting too emotional about the model outcomes.

Until sampled, It don't matter, Even if our model that is running now shows a bomb at 12z, It needs more time to get sorted out.

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...