Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    16,987
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Dankles
    Newest Member
    Dankles
    Joined

January Storm Term Threat Discussions (Day 3 - Day 7)


WxUSAF
 Share

Recommended Posts

too weak... the wave was simply too weak and couldn't amplify at all.  Dampened as it came east.  We need a healthier wave to eject from that western trough then that.  Just the GFS but that run troubled me slightly more then the last few misses to the south because that was at least consistent with itself.  If the wave that ejects out west is that weak...it will go south.  The other runs were just doing stupid GFS stuff but the storm should have been further north.  This run did was it will do IF that wave is actually that weak.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok let me clarify what I meant above before I start a panic....this run of the GFS does not bother me because its the GFS and its all over the place at this range.  But...the way it suppressed the storm on THIS run was a more realistic scenario.  What I saw on the last few runs didn't bother me at all because it was suppressing the storm for the wrong reasons.  So...as long as none of the other guidance trends to a weak pathetic flat wave ejecting out west tonight...we are fine.  But if we start to see across guidance a trend weaker with the upper level low coming across that is BAD because that is what is driving this storm.  There has to be an amplifying upper level low to our west to pump ridging for this scenario to work.   The trough axis is off the east coast and the flow is NW to SE...this isnt a type of setup where a surface low is going to amplify up the coast along the baroclinic boundary.  This only works if we have a strong upper level center to our west pumping heights into the confluence to our NE creating a strong inverted trough for a low to amplify along.  That won't work if the upper low is weak.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ji said:

GGEM is weak POS..id rather have no storm

it was better then last run lol.  But really want to go crazy...the TPV lobe that was supposed to slide across in front of the monday wave and help suppress the flow over top of that wave...and keep it from cutting...slowed down sooo much that not only did it allow that Monday wave to get out in front of it and drive north but its still around and compressing the flow over the top of the storm later in the week.  LOL  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cobalt said:

Seems like the GEFS doesn't agree all too much with the GFS. It's encouraging when the ensembles take a step in the right direction despite the operational taking a step back. Precip/snow maps still rolling out

the op probably just drank Jobu's rum  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Ok let me clarify what I meant above before I start a panic....this run of the GFS does not bother me because its the GFS and its all over the place at this range.  But...the way it suppressed the storm on THIS run was a more realistic scenario.  What I saw on the last few runs didn't bother me at all because it was suppressing the storm for the wrong reasons.  So...as long as none of the other guidance trends to a weak pathetic flat wave ejecting out west tonight...we are fine.  But if we start to see across guidance a trend weaker with the upper level low coming across that is BAD because that is what is driving this storm.  There has to be an amplifying upper level low to our west to pump ridging for this scenario to work.   The trough axis is off the east coast and the flow is NW to SE...this isnt a type of setup where a surface low is going to amplify up the coast along the baroclinic boundary.  This only works if we have a strong upper level center to our west pumping heights into the confluence to our NE creating a strong inverted trough for a low to amplify along.  That won't work if the upper low is weak.  

But I still don't get how this squares with the concern of us not being cold enough...How, in the disaster scenario you mentioned, would it be cold enough to snow down south?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

But I still don't get how this squares with the concern of us not being cold enough...How, in the disaster scenario you mentioned, would it be cold enough to snow down south?

Dynamically driven...its actually raining on the northern fringe of precip on WV while its snowing in SC on the gfs run...but with incredibly heavy precip and crashing heights under the mid and upper level lows it creates just enough cold to get snow.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...