The Jan 31 Potential: Stormtracker Failure or 'Tracker Trouncing

[SnowenOutThere]

Just chiming in to say that last night 18z runs were the first that made me think this storm could be a legitimate possibility for the forum. So far through the 6z runs my opinion hasn't really changed. I still think for areas west of 95 nothing is more likely than something; but now I can at least see a chance of something happening. I also think south of 1-64 is in a decent position to see something thanks to the initial burst of precip as the streams phase. The NWS seems to put today as the day models start to lock down a solution so I think reconvening at tomorrow's 6z runs will give us a full picture of what will occur.  

[bncho]

1 minute ago, Buddy1987 said:

Still a night and day difference, at least with heights, comparing FV3 to NAM at 12Z. FV3 also kinked a good bit further north and west by hr 60.

Hopefully it's a good omen for the GFS, for whatever the hell the GFS is worth.

[Lucy Pull]

2 minutes ago, Buddy1987 said:

Still a night and day difference, at least with heights, comparing FV3 to NAM at 12Z. FV3 also kinked a good bit further north and west by hr 60.

Yeah I agree. FV3 could’ve been interesting if it ran out further. consolidates energy in the western lobe of the ULL and starts tilting the trough negative. 
 

 

[jayyy]

Hopefully it's a good omen for the GFS, for whatever the hell the GFS is worth.

On its own? It’s worth almost nothing sadly.

[peribonca]

Does anyone have the Z500 animation from January 25, 2000?

[H2O]

2 minutes ago, peribonca said:

Does anyone have the Z500 animation from January 25, 2000?

Snow and ice storm, January 25, 2000 - 500 Millibar Maps

[MN Transplant]

3 minutes ago, peribonca said:

Does anyone have the Z500 animation from January 25, 2000?

https://www.meteo.psu.edu/ewall/NARR/2000/us0125.php

[Terpeast]

1 minute ago, MN Transplant said:

https://www.meteo.psu.edu/ewall/NARR/2000/us0125.php

you can see how the "kicker" starts to pull that ULL up north instead of booting it out to sea - it was close enough to do that.

[midatlanticweather]

Waiting for 12z and the Weenie posts using Animal House and giving up.. 

 

[Maestrobjwa]

1 minute ago, Terpeast said:

you can see how the "kicker" starts to pull that ULL up north instead of booting it out to sea - it was close enough to do that.

So what's making this one boot it out? Lol Wondering if seeing a transition from boot to pull is still possible here...

[bncho]

Just now, Terpeast said:

you can see how the "kicker" starts to pull that ULL up north instead of booting it out to sea - it was close enough to do that.

is it because it wants to phase, so the kicker and the ULL go towards eachother?

[baltosquid]

1 minute ago, Maestrobjwa said:

So what's making this one boot it out? Lol Wondering if seeing a transition from boot to pull is still possible here...

Too far west. But too far east to give room for the energy to tilt and climb far enough on its own. It either needs to hang back in Montana/Idaho (ideally even further maybe) or drive into the Midwest even faster so the ULL can rotate counter clockwise around that influence, pulling it north and towards us in the process.

[Buddy1987]

RGEM trying hard.. confirming with my pops @stormtracker first though to check me because I got owned last go.

[Kevin Reilly]

21 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

What part of February 2010?

February 5th to 6th 2010 picked up 23” in SE Pa 

[baltosquid]

ICON too positive unfortunately.

[stormtracker]

3 minutes ago, Buddy1987 said:

RGEM trying hard.. confirming with my pops @stormtracker first though to check me because I got owned last go.

Just got into work.  Haven't seen it.   Going to look now.

[Ji]

Just now, baltosquid said:

ICON too positive unfortunately.

progressive model progressive outcome

[bncho]

3 minutes ago, Buddy1987 said:

RGEM trying hard.. confirming with my pops @stormtracker first though to check me because I got owned last go.

Looks similar to 6z. Maybe a little bit better?

[Terpeast]

Based on all these posts about the kicker kicking the ULL out to sea, I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding of what a "kicker" really is and what role it plays. 

Some extra vorticity behind the main low doesn't really act to "kick" it east. The main issue is wave spacing.

If spaced far enough apart, there's little or no effect... the ULL is on its own and may or may not close/neg tilt depending on the overall trough/ridge orientation and/or any upstream blocking if any.

If spaced close enough though, they begin to phase and pull the ULL north, as has happened on 1/25/00.

But if they are closely spaced but not close enough to phase, i.e. poor wave spacing, the flow becomes flattened in between, making it harder for the ULL to deepen.

I think we've went over this before. It's not so much of a "kicker" but wave spacing.

[Nomz]

FWIW I do believe models are struggling with bombogenesis, but with most of the runs its already too far east to matter.

[Ji]

Just now, stormtracker said:

Just got into work.  Haven't seen it.   Going to look now.

dont bother--the ULL is almost in the GOM

[LP08]

Weenie me all you want and hopefully someone smarter will tell me I'm wrong, but i'd argue, at the end of the RGEM run that NS wave coming in out west is coming at an advantageous angle to maybe not kick but to actually help.

[DDweatherman]

1 minute ago, LP08 said:

Weenie me all you want and hopefully someone smarter will tell me I'm wrong, but i'd argue, at the end of the RGEM run that NS wave coming in out west is coming at an advantageous angle to maybe not kick but to actually help.

There is the right chance for a backside phase. 

[stormtracker]

1 minute ago, Ji said:

dont bother--the ULL is almost in the GOM

Yeah, looks positively tilted too.  Oh well.

[bncho]

3 minutes ago, Terpeast said:

Based on all these posts about the kicker kicking the ULL out to sea, I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding of what a "kicker" really is and what role it plays. 

Some extra vorticity behind the main low doesn't really act to "kick" it east. The main issue is wave spacing.

If spaced far enough apart, there's little or no effect... the ULL is on its own and may or may not close/neg tilt depending on the overall trough/ridge orientation and/or any upstream blocking if any.

If spaced close enough though, they begin to phase and pull the ULL north, as has happened on 1/25/00.

But if they are closely spaced but not close enough to phase, i.e. poor wave spacing, the flow becomes flattened in between, making it harder for the ULL to deepen.

I think we've went over this before. It's not so much of a "kicker" but wave spacing.

Which is the more plausible option in your opinion? Trending the "kicker" wave far enough apart or trending the "kicker" wave close enough to phase?

[SnowGolfBro]

A lot of complicated pieces (what else is new) are going to come together in the next 48 hours. Small adjustments in wave spacing, low placement, etc can have huge downstream effects. If the 12z is awful we still have a chance to score. If 12z shows a huge hit we still have a chance to fail. Steady she goes…

[DDweatherman]

I’m not out, but this one is on life support for us. 

[Buddy1987]

1 minute ago, stormtracker said:

Yeah, looks positively tilted too.  Oh well.

Even if we were to try and extrapolate past 84 you don't think that could climb the coast? Low looks tucked in a good bit at the end of it's run. Maybe i'm pulling at straws.

[stormtracker]

5 minutes ago, bncho said:

Looks similar to 6z. Maybe a little bit better?

Maybe better,  probably slower

[stormtracker]

1 minute ago, Buddy1987 said:

Even if we were to try and extrapolate past 84 you don't think that could climb the coast? Low looks tucked in a good bit at the end of it's run. Maybe i'm pulling at straws.

This I don't know.  It looks good surface wise, just kinda weary of H5.  This might be question for our mets.  I mean, its better than the NAM for sure.