Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,508
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

Central PA - Winter 2021/2022


Bubbler86
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Bubbler86 said:

Yea, when the storm first got into the Nam's range of 84, it showed what most here PA, MD, VA did not want and as usual there was a lot of "the Nam is out of range" talk.  This happens every year.  Sometimes the Nam screws up royally but it seems to be that outside being low on snow totals to start (re too much warm intrusion in the UL's), it did quite good at foretelling the important parts of the storm.   

 

 

NAM stirs up a lot of emotions...I'll continue to defend as it does better than a lot give it credit for. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Itstrainingtime said:

@Bubbler86 not sure if you saw my post early this morning but I picked up over 1" of rain. I forget which model (maybe the HRRR?) you shared with me the other day predicted that, but I got a LOT more rain than just about any other model had for me. 

I forget which one as well but yea something I was looking at showed that Rain + getting up to you from MD. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bubbler86 said:

Yea, when the storm first got into the Nam's range of 84, it showed what most here PA, MD, VA did not want and as usual there was a lot of "the Nam is out of range" talk.  This happens every year.  Sometimes the Nam screws up royally but it seems to be that outside being low on snow totals to start (re too much warm intrusion in the UL's), it did quite good at foretelling the important parts of the storm.   

 

 

I think each model added value to the storm.   It’s just being able to identify before hand.    GFS lead the way long range, nam picked up on mix line and dry slot, hrrr had the heavier qpf.   Makes it hard to be able to blend everything into a perfect  forecast.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Itstrainingtime said:

NAM stirs up a lot of emotions...I'll continue to defend as it does better than a lot give it credit for. 

I think if one looked back it would see each model got different aspects of the system right.  It seems the Nam did better synoptically/forecasting the large scale dry slots and eventually track of the low, but other models had a better handle on the initial slug of snow over us.   I think the best thing is to take them all seriously and try to use all the data to make sense of how one things will play out or has played out in the past.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cashtown_Coop said:

I think each model added value to the storm.   It’s just being able to identify before hand.    GFS lead the way long range, nam picked up on mix line and dry slot, hrrr had the heavier qpf.   Makes it hard to be able to blend everything into a perfect  forecast.   

LOL.  I was typing up the same thing as you were.  Nothing did perfect.  They all added value and data to making the right forecast.   I really frown on people casting off a model because it does not show what they want. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cashtown_Coop said:

I think each model added value to the storm.   It’s just being able to identify before hand.    GFS lead the way long range, nam picked up on mix line and dry slot, hrrr had the heavier qpf.   Makes it hard to be able to blend everything into a perfect  forecast.   

Those are very good points. GFS was the first to head west.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 6Z GFS looks like someone continuously digging a spoon into soup trying to get that last Matzo ball but having it fall off each time the spoon heads back up.  Some 3-4 instances where a S/W dig down into the S/E US only to miss the timing with a Northern S/W and the ball falls off the spoon.  It repeats this over and over.  I suspect one of the next few runs finally sees that ball stay on the spoon and we are game on.  LOL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, canderson said:

Ugh. And it’s not even windy yet. Tonight sustained will be what last nights/this am gusts are as it flips to west. 

Fingers crossed that is the tried and true side, like we talked about last night, and any weaknesses are already known and fixed since we get high wind from that direction so often. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Bubbler86 said:

Yea, when the storm first got into the Nam's range of 84, it showed what most here PA, MD, VA did not want and as usual there was a lot of "the Nam is out of range" talk.  This happens every year.  Sometimes the Nam screws up royally but it seems to be that outside being low on snow totals to start (re too much warm intrusion in the UL's), it did quite good at foretelling the important parts of the storm.   

 

 

It’s the same old story every time. Not going to complain because I have 7 or 8 inches of snow on the ground, but I went back and read some posts from last year’s snow to rain mess in Pittsburgh on 2/15-16 and it was the same thing. The NAM a couple of days before the storm decided that the low was coming much further inland than previously anticipated and that there would be p-type and dry slotting issues. When the storm arrived, there were p-type and dry slotting issues. We didn’t learn our lesson then, and apparently neither did the NWS, who finally put mix into the grids around here yesterday mid-afternoon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TimB84 said:

It’s the same old story every time. Not going to complain because I have 7 or 8 inches of snow on the ground, but I went back and read some posts from last year’s snow to rain mess in Pittsburgh on 2/15-16 and it was the same thing. The NAM a couple of days before the storm decided that the low was coming much further inland than previously anticipated and that there would be p-type and dry slotting issues. When the storm arrived, there were p-type and dry slotting issues. We didn’t learn our lesson then, and apparently neither did the NWS, who finally put mix into the grids around here yesterday mid-afternoon.

It does seem to happen every year.  I would not notice it that much were it not for the constant 'Why are we even talking about the Nam' I see on the MA board.  I should not look there when the Nam is showing something unfavorable as I know what I am going to see and I let it irritate me. But yes, this seems to be a yearly thing as to having a model, Nam or no, that is on it's own and basically looked at as an outlier and assumed it cannot be right...and yet it is more than was expected.   I did see you guys are still getting a decent amount of snow even now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, canderson said:

The nam kinda nailed that extreme warm surge. The euro … failed. Again. 

I think the more inside track of the low was what allowed the NAM to “nail” the warm surge since the low pressure ended up going right over my head. I bottomed out at 981mb this morning a few hours ago, probably the lowest MSLP around here since Hurricane Sandy. The low coming in this far really didn’t become evident on guidance until the near term yesterday since the consensus had generally been curling the rapidly deepening low into eastern PA, not dead center in the state. That was enough of a difference to not only allow a changeover to rain but also get some of the heavier rain and wind tapped down with the occluded frontal passage before the dry slot into the Sus Valley. NAM  never really saw the half decent front end snows in the LSV until it was already happening. All models weren’t cold enough at the beginning of the storm either from the Laurels eastward in the state. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bubbler86 said:

It does seem to happen every year.  I would not notice it that much were it not for the constant 'Why are we even talking about the Nam' I see on the MA board.  I should not look there when then Nam is showing something unfavorable as I know what I am going to see and I let it irritate me. But yes this seems to be a yearly thing as having a model, Nam or no, that is on it's own and basically looked at as an outlier and assumed it cannot be right...and yet it is more than was expected.   I did see you guys are still getting a decent amount of snow even now. 

Ultimately it’s not going to go down as a bust in my mind. It could have been a great winter storm, and it’s turning out to be a good winter storm. Not going to cry over getting 8” of snow when I could have gotten 12.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MAG5035 said:

I think the more inside track of the low was what allowed the NAM to “nail” the warm surge since the low pressure ended up going right over my head. I bottomed out at 981mb this morning a few hours ago, probably the lowest MSLP around here since Hurricane Sandy. The low coming in this far really didn’t become evident on guidance until the near term yesterday since the consensus had generally been curling the rapidly deepening low into eastern PA, not dead center in the state. That was enough of a difference to not only allow a changeover to rain but also get some of the heavier rain and wind tapped down with the occluded frontal passage before the dry slot into the Sus Valley. NAM  never really saw the half decent front end snows in the LSV until it was already happening. All models weren’t cold enough at the beginning of the storm either from the Laurels eastward in the state. 

I think the Nam had the track going over the central and western half of PA from the very start...or close to it.  Pivotal goes back to 12Z Friday and the Low comes into PA on the Fulton/Franklin county line.  But yea, the Nam was too warm in the UL's to start.    I think the Nam was the only model to predict sleet in Erie but not 100% sure.  Nam underestimated the sleet in lieu of too much Frz though. 

 

 

 

 

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...