Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    18,638
    Total Members
    14,841
    Most Online
    BroadWing3544
    Newest Member
    BroadWing3544
    Joined

“Cory’s in NYC! Let’s HECS!” Feb. 22-24 Disco

TheSnowman

By TheSnowman,
in New England

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

weathafella
weathafella

Well I pulled the trigger.  Will be arriving 1:09AM tomorrow overnight.   Returning to RSW Tuesday with a 6:45 PM departure which will likely be delayed.  I’m in no way missing this.

CCHurricane
CCHurricane

It won’t take much to move it another 50 miles…

CT Rain
CT Rain

This hobby is truly the worst.

Posted Images

ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, dendrite said:

I really like the 3k NAM…so much that I really don’t even look at the 12k much anymore except for mid/upper charts that aren’t as readily available with the 3k.

I don’t view the SREFs much anymore…ineedsnow forces me to see it. But when they transitioned away from the ETA and RSM members for the NMM and ARW we still kept watchful eyes on it. You would know better than me what the verification stats are, but sensible wx wise I feel like the NMM members performed better.

Even with this storm, the SREFs have had some members tracking the sfc low into LI or SE MA. No other operational models are doing that. They’re still pretty far NW at 21z, but every run they keep ticking SE toward the globals

But I appreciate all of the work that goes into these models and in trying to further the science and improve the verification and resolution. 

I agree with all of this as the transition started happening when I was still forecasting full time. 
 

The older SREF suite definitely seemed to handle east coast cyclogenesis better so they had a decent amount of utility in those types of storms. I remember they were hammering some of that banding in the Jan 2011 storm too and eventually most of the other guidance converged to them. 
 

I’ll also say they used to perform exceptionally in the SWFEs too. I used them constantly in the 2007-08 and 2008-09 winters with excellent results. 
 

Obviously the newer SREFs are superior to the older ones in many other areas, but it came at the expense of one of the more important types of event we forecast for in this part of the county.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
vortex95

vortex95

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, SeanInWayland said:

I recall reading in a book about the blizzard of '78 that there were two local maxima around Boston--Burlington with 50" and Foxboro-Sharon with close to the same. So yeah, other storms have a long way to go to match 78.

Burlington the next town over from Woburn, so makes sense that total.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MegaMike

MegaMike

Posted
Posted

 

Just now, dendrite said:

I really like the 3k NAM…so much that I really don’t even look at the 12k much anymore except for mid/upper charts that aren’t as readily available with the 3k.

I don’t view the SREFs much anymore…ineedsnow forces me to see it. But when they transitioned away from the ETA and RSM members for the NMM and ARW we still kept watchful eyes on it. You would know better than me what the verification stats are, but sensible wx wise I feel like the NMM members performed better.

Even with this storm, the SREFs have had some members tracking the sfc low into LI or SE MA. No other operational models are doing that. They’re still pretty far NW at 21z, but every run they keep ticking SE toward the globals

But I appreciate all of the work that goes into these models and in trying to further the science and improve the verification and resolution. 

I hate to call any model useless, but if my name was 'Big Balls' and I worked at DOGE, I'd probably get rid of the SREF (and maybe the CFS in favor of AI). 

It's consistently overamped during costal storms and I never use it either. It's configuration isn't ideal for severe weather/convection too (16km dxdy/only 40 vertical levels). The one + about it, the individual members are very diversified. Some fun combinations of schemes which promotes a huge model spread (ideal for an ensemble!)... It'd be replaced by the RRFS though.

It's quite fun to work with! Unfortunately, I do think WRF will be replaced by something like the MPAS. In terms of efficiency, the MPAS is better (takes less resources to run)... No need to feed bcs onto 3 different grids. It's the future and we're already experiencing it (FV3 core; ignoring AI).

Generally, we're told not to configure modeling systems with a resolution ~12km. It's a gray zone for convective parameterization... Too fine for parameterization, but too course to explicitly predict it. We need NAM 12km to feed NAM 3km bcs. It's a sacrificial lamb. <4km should do fine with convection. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
vortex95

vortex95

Posted
Posted

I don't think I have ever seen the HRRR this nuts w/ winds gusts this high over such a large area.  Huge area of 65 kt + gusts.

And you look how far NW the sfc freezing line gets (makes it to Weymouth), Some serious damage from wet paste S of BOS.  I envision CoastalWx losing power or internet for an extended period.  What will he do?  Can't go the library b/c it will be closed!  He'll have to drive around w/ his PC running in his car to find a WiFi hotspot! :lol: 

What about 5G? One thing I have found during big snowstorms, cell networks get extra taxed and way slow at times.  And cell towers need power as well.  Time to pull out a Telebit 56k modem for dial-up?!

 

hrrr3.png

  • Like 1
  • 100% 1
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
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...