Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,507
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    SnowHabit
    Newest Member
    SnowHabit
    Joined

The Psuhoffman Storm


Ji

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 6.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

here's DCA at 84 hours

that's at least a mix of rain and a lot of sloppy fakes if not all snow imho....Wes?

995. 70.E 1.2 0.7 8.2 8.4

975. 237. 0.2 0.1 15.8 13.8

950. 445. 0.1 0.0 30.0 19.3

925. 659. 0.5 0.3 42.0 21.4

900. 879. 0.4 0.2 41.1 19.2

875. 1105. 0.3 0.1 41.6 18.1

850. 1338. 0.1 -0.1 43.5 17.1

825. 1577. -0.2 -0.3 43.6 15.9

800. 1823. -0.5 -0.7 38.0 14.4

775. 2077. -1.2 -1.4 41.0 12.7

750. 2338. -2.1 -2.3 54.3 11.6

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here's DCA at 84 hours

that's at least a mix of rain and a lot of sloppy fakes if not all snow imho....Wes?

995. 70.E 1.2 0.7 8.2 8.4

975. 237. 0.2 0.1 15.8 13.8

950. 445. 0.1 0.0 30.0 19.3

925. 659. 0.5 0.3 42.0 21.4

900. 879. 0.4 0.2 41.1 19.2

875. 1105. 0.3 0.1 41.6 18.1

850. 1338. 0.1 -0.1 43.5 17.1

825. 1577. -0.2 -0.3 43.6 15.9

800. 1823. -0.5 -0.7 38.0 14.4

775. 2077. -1.2 -1.4 41.0 12.7

750. 2338. -2.1 -2.3 54.3 11.6

"Fakes", indeed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

those out in Leesburg will be happy to know that soundings for everything that falls starting 78 hrs (and maybe sooner) and beyond is ALL SNOW per soundings

Yep, I noted that on another forum. The sref ensembles are showing 40 % of the members with surface temps below freezing at 87hrs. They and the 850 temps are a little cooler than the nam for what that is worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup...in a situation like this, very true, when there are a wide range of solutions or a couple of very different ideas that "average out". But in a situation where there's decent agreement, they can be more informative. If I'm not mistaken, ensembles are best used for the medium-longer range to get an idea of the overall longwave flow, and in that they excel much more (EDIT: I'm talking more the global ensembles here).

It depends, there are really good applications of ensemble being developed/used for mesoscale/convective scale features (things like convective initiation, storm type, etc.). Also, the SREF does really well with QPF verification (and even precip type forecasting occasionally).

But to your point, ensembles were originally developed / applied to medium/long range (3-14 day) synoptic scale forecasting.....and they are still extremely useful when used correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends, there are really good applications of ensemble being developed/used for mesoscale/convective scale features (things like convective initiation, storm type, etc.). Also, the SREF does really well with QPF verification (and even precip type forecasting occasionally).

But to your point, ensembles were originally developed / applied to medium/long range (3-14 day) synoptic scale forecasting.....and they are still extremely useful when used correctly.

well, I hope you're accusing us of that! :lmao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are hoping the models are once again too warm at this range as they were with the last event and that dynamic cooling caused by heavy precip will take care of the marginal surface since the layers above are all cold enough. Bottom-line, there will be rain and a nasty cut-off line. Hope everyone is wearing their big-boy pants.

The problem is that the situation is vastly different this time around (compared to the in-situ CAD that set up for the last event)....so it's fine to hope that this is the case (models being too warm), but I'm not sure there is any real reason to believe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the trouble. This still is not an ideal set up even with the nam track.

Wes Is there any policy that you are able to reveal at NWS that because GFS is an American model it must be given much greater weight weight than any of the foreign models particularly the Euro? On Bastardis pro site this morning he was saying that last week for energy clients for one day GFS was predicting 20 degree temps and within a couple of days of that Minneapolis the city that was the subject matter of the forecast actually hit 20 below and how completely useless the model is. If you can comment it would be appreciated Brad Chandler CHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that the situation is vastly different this time around (compared to the in-situ CAD that set up for the last event)....so it's fine to hope that this is the case (models being too warm), but I'm not sure there is any real reason to believe it.

Every situation is different. I just think the NAM might be off by a degree or three (either way) at 84 hours. Perhaps not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, I hope you're accusing us of that! :lmao:

Actually yes....it brings a tear to my eye when people actually notice clustering of solutions/possibilities, realize that large spread is associated with low predictability, and stop posting stupid ensemble mean quantities (especially qpf) as if they are going to verify verbatim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually yes....it brings a tear to my eye when people actually notice clustering of solutions/possibilities, realize that large spread is associated with low predictability, and stop posting stupid ensemble mean quantities (especially qpf) as if they are going to verify verbatim.

This...thank you! Sure, it's nice (and fun) to see a great-looking ensemble mean. But if the spread is all over the place it doesn't "mean" a whole lot (pun slightly intended).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol: Yeah, we can hope for that I suppose! Actually I was surprised that BWI had relatively little as areas not far from there got a fair bit more. I got about 2.3" here, DCA had a meagre 0.2", but there were a lot of reports to the north and west of DC of 5-6" or so. Guess it depended on the banding and where they ended up, as I think most areas had a similar temperature profile for the most part if I'm not mistaken.

Actually, another storm comes to mind, Feb. 25 ( somewhere around that date?) in 2007. Got a good period of heavy, wet snow that ended as drizzle, about 5" or so of snow accumulated. Surface was barely at or below freezing but it was snowing hard. I heard later on that we had essentially a rather deep isothermal layer.

I had 7 inches 12/5/09. Snowman.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wes Is there any policy that you are able to reveal at NWS that because GFS is an American model it must be given much greater weight weight than any of the foreign models particularly the Euro? On Bastardis pro site this morning he was saying that last week for energy clients for one day GFS was predicting 20 degree temps and within a couple of days of that Minneapolis the city that was the subject matter of the forecast actually hit 20 below and how completely useless the model is. If you can comment it would be appreciated Brad Chandler CHO

No, you'll often see in their medium range discussions that they are going 80% towards the euro and 20 towards the GFS, They are not required to forecast what the GFS has because it's the american model. Besides, this year it has had some big wins compared to the euro. The latter has forecast at least 3 big snowstorms for dc that never occurred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

looking at 60 hrs, and I may look stupid for saying this, but I think the GFS will look good for us this run

It's definitely coming north with the precipitation this run though it still may not be as heavy as the nam but it does look like were are approaching some type of consensus barring a euro flop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...