Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,530
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Ring of Fireflies
    Newest Member
    Ring of Fireflies
    Joined

Coastal Storm Potential - Jan 11-12


Baroclinic Zone

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The NAM didn't get a 6 hour plot right for days and it's right this time this far out? It just tried to wrap lows too close to the coast 2-3 times in the last few days at around this range. I'm pretty sure NCEP is right in saying go with the EC consensus track.

I'm not saying it's right.....I just said "if it is".

I don't think that you can apply what took place with respect to the last couple of events because this is a different animal; I would think the NAM would have a better shot of scoring a coupe in mesos like this.

Not saying I buy it, but I can see the argument.

Gun-to-head, this tracks between your pad and ACK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Close; my driveway.

~16.5" in about 8 hrs; one of the most phenomenal spectacles of my life.

~7.5" in the final 1.5 hrs of the event....then the sun came out; all in the span of about half a day.

16.5 in about 8 hours. very nice

it is almost crazy to think that SW CT got about 13-14 in 5-6 hours fri nite

hubba dave i noticed savoy state park had a 18 in that dec 9 event also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NCEP MODEL DIAGNOSTIC:

MODEL DIAGNOSTIC DISCUSSION

NWS HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL PREDICTION CENTER CAMP SPRINGS MD

127 PM EST SUN JAN 09 2011

...CYCLOGENESIS SOUTH OF LONG ISLAND DAY 3...

PREFERENCE: ECMWF

THE NAM IS CONSIDERABLY WEST OF THE MOST RECENT EUROPEAN CENTRE

GUIDANCE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AND TRACK OF THIS LOW...LUMPING THE

MIDWEST CIRCULATION TOGETHER WITH THE WAVE LIFTING UP THE EAST

COAST. THE GFS TRACKS CLOSER TO THE ECMWF...BUT IS SLIGHTLY

FASTER AND LESS INTENSE. THE GEM GLOBAL AND UKMET ARE FLATTER AND

FARTHER OFFSHORE. WILL RELY ON THE MIDDLE GROUND SOLUTION OF THE

WESTERN CLUSTER AFFORDED BY THE ECMWF...WHICH SEEMS TO SORT THE

INTERACTING ENERGY MOST REASONABLY.

This may be all wrong though as we have been discussing... We are advacting cold over the ocean but after 48 hours of sitting there...eh, it all depends where the thermodynamic gradient is, and where that has a nexus with the nose of the jet max leaving the coast is where the low will pin-point. The NAM has a superior skill in reading that finite circumstance and is also why it blow away the other guidance on the Dec 9 2005 system, too. I see these two system have some similarity in that specific regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying it's right.....I just said "if it is".

I don't think that you can apply what took place with respect to the last couple of events because this is a different animal; I would think the NAM would have a better shot of scoring a coupe in mesos like this.

Not saying I buy it, but I can see the argument.

Gun-to-head, this tracks between your pad and ACK.

Ray yep I knew you weren't saying it's right...should have been clear on that was more speaking in general.

I haven't looked and won't until tonight at 0z beyond a general glance. I just distrust the NAM badly now. Rotating the 12z GFS through I'd have the same concerns at this range with the vorticity on the SE side of the approaching center. That probably explains the ENE wobble models show at that point. Just looking at the GFS it's "different" for sure but at 500 you have the nose of the energy shooting ENE off the coast where a center jump takes place YET again. We just saw what happens when the timing changes on that same thing. This whole system is different, but it was that delicate balance that screwed us last night. The difference being this has a lot of moisture with it to begin with and isn't trying to develop it so the outcome even in a "bad" situation on the GFS would be nowhere near as tough as this last one.

The reason I'd tend to discontent the NAM like NCEP did...look at the last 3 runs it's gradually shifted towards the GFS. I don't know where the EURO falls in this but it's probably a little sharper as it sounds like it wraps back more precip.

EDIT: Oh and verbatim I think these maps would favor a slightly more northern solution IE shift the maxes north as we always seem to end up with the d/s getting a ltitle father north. Again just based on this exact model evolution. Also my thought is the NAM will flop around again at 18z.

gfs_700_072l.gif

gfs_500_072l.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Preliminary sketch

:wub: I'm surprised you pros are going so high, but I'm not going to complain.

Hunchback like...

That SW CT corner will be breaking records this year

We're rolling. I've been a tad too far east for Boxing Day and too coastal for the trough to get the full out jackpot on either but it's already been a memorable ride. It's the kind of year where you feel like you won't miss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may be all wrong though as we have been discussing... We are advacting cold over the ocean but after 48 hours of sitting there...eh, it all depends where the thermodynamic gradient is, and where that has a nexus with the nose of the jet max leaving the coast is where the low will pin-point. The NAM has a superior skill in reading that finite circumstance and is also why it blow away the other guidance on the Dec 9 2005 system, too. I see these two system have some similarity in that specific regard.

John not doubting you at all or what you guys were saying. Just throwing it in the mix. I put my thoughts up on that one little post above yours...speaking specifically of the GFS. It's good to see that in this case we're not seeing major differences at 500 which if it continues I'd buy into what you are saying. IE if the only differences are at the surface I'd take the NAM over the others. IE, if the setup at 500 continues to be the same and the NAM is on the intense/NW side Id buy it.

Right now I'm skeptical of the NAM as it is at 12z. I'm also wondering about some of the same issues being the possible explanation for the ENE wobble...but again lots of moisture coming up with this one vs having to be developed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John not doubting you at all or what you guys were saying. Just throwing it in the mix. I put my thoughts up on that one little post above yours...speaking specifically of the GFS. It's good to see that in this case we're not seeing major differences at 500 which if it continues I'd buy into what you are saying. IE if the only differences are at the surface I'd take the NAM over the others. IE, if the setup at 500 continues to be the same and the NAM is on the intense/NW side Id buy it.

Right now I'm skeptical of the NAM as it is at 12z. I'm also wondering about some of the same issues being the possible explanation for the ENE wobble...but again lots of moisture coming up with this one vs having to be developed.

I feel like a lot of times we see these things tick NW when we're seeing big cyclogenesis and energy interaction right off the coast. A track over ACK or HYA seems totally reasonable to me... especially given the number of ensemble members on the NW side of the envelope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GFS ensemble track is what we need, It keeps the storm moving NE instead of ENE, Even a tick west from that and its Warning snows all the way to the Mtns........

Don't fret yet. The 15z srefs still peg the KAFN-KCON-KLEW-KAUG for jackpot zone (or secondary one). May be wrong...but no one in NH or SRN/CNTRL ME should give up yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like a lot of times we see these things tick NW when we're seeing big cyclogenesis and energy interaction right off the coast. A track over ACK or HYA seems totally reasonable to me... especially given the number of ensemble members on the NW side of the envelope.

It's true and this is a different setup for sure. I overlayed a NAM forecast when we had the big hit here, the next frame is actual at 0z last night vs the 72 hour forecast. EDIT for clarity (frame 1 is the 12z Friday NAM forecast for last night where it gave us a big snow, the 2nd image is the 0z init from last night when it finally figured out the nose of the vorticity had shot east. The third panel is the current 72 hour prog for our next storm)

What happened with the NAM was eventually it just shifted that energy coming out the SE a little east as it adjusted. It was not able in the end to "wrap" as much as the NAM thought which moved the center jump back a bit and ENE.

Again just tossing this out for consumption. Off Jersey south of us it tried a couple of times with two different s/w to curl it up and pinch it enough to kick off a low. Tried originally to do it a day earlier but that s/w got blasted. If you look closely you can see how the nose of the vorticity got east instead of getting tucked up. Seems to be the big difference between the westies and easties right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at how many hits there are...this is a question of how much at this point.

...

And 3 hours later is porn for many of you to my NE. Gonna need it to be a bit more intense to get what we really want...but that would be fine by me.

One thing that is interesting about those panels is that weakening low in NYS that evolves ...maybe, into a post system norlun of sorts. This as 1960 March 5th

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...