February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Page 4 of 23 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13 ... 23  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by aiannone on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:04 pm

How's Binghamton looking lol. NWS has snow showers with less than an inch while SREF plume mean is near 10" here
avatar
aiannone
Advanced Forecaster
Advanced Forecaster

Posts : 2399
Join date : 2013-01-07
Location : Saint James, LI (Northwest Suffolk Co.)/ Binghamton, NY (Binghamton University)-Broome County

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by hyde345 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:05 pm

Frank, RB, are you guys buying the ene movement of gfs offshore?
avatar
hyde345
Pro Enthusiast
Pro Enthusiast

Posts : 332
Join date : 2013-01-08
Location : Hyde Park, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by rb924119 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:09 pm

Frank_Wx wrote:
rb924119 wrote:
Frank_Wx wrote:Wait, 700mb VV's on the GFS of all models are maxed out. I have NEVER seen this before.

That would mean INSANE snowfall rates.

Again, I think the globals are struggling with this one, especially if the jets verify like the short-range models show. Question: Did you ever see the explanation of that graphic you asked me for? Second question: Where did you get said graphic from? It's sweet!!!! lol

No? What graphic.

And here

http://weather.cod.edu/forecast/



I then responded with:

Here is a video explanation of that graphic you posted earlier, Frank (and, anybody else who is interested)!!

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Byod2Sk27yNYSi10VDltN0ozQ2c

Also, the 11.3°C temperature through the omega layer corresponds to about a 12:1 ratio event, on the average (MUGS lol), based on the empirically derived graphic below:


rb924119
Meteorologist
Meteorologist

Posts : 3201
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 25
Location : Greentown, Pa/Fishkill, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by Frank_Wx on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:10 pm

The CMC should be shut down. Has done awful this storm. It still looks off to me.


_________________
Snow Accumulation Archive
2013-2014: 62.1"
2014-2015: 56.0"
2015-2016: 34.0"
2016-2017: 19.0"

________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CLICK HERE to view NJ Strong Snowstorm Classifications
avatar
Frank_Wx
Godzilla Seeker
Godzilla Seeker

Posts : 16840
Join date : 2013-01-05
Age : 25
Location : Cranford, NJ

View user profile http://njstrongweather.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by rb924119 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:11 pm

hyde345 wrote:Frank, RB, are you guys buying the ene movement of gfs offshore?

I am not, no. I think it's too far offshore and will correct to be more in line with the majority of other short-range guidance.

rb924119
Meteorologist
Meteorologist

Posts : 3201
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 25
Location : Greentown, Pa/Fishkill, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by rb924119 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:12 pm

Frank_Wx wrote:The CMC should be shut down. Has done awful this storm. It still looks off to me.


Agree 100%! This whole time, its suites (including he RGEM) have been on the far southeastern edge of guidance, and I just don't like it either.

rb924119
Meteorologist
Meteorologist

Posts : 3201
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 25
Location : Greentown, Pa/Fishkill, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by jmanley32 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:12 pm

Wow CMC has precip way south and E.
avatar
jmanley32
Senior Enthusiast & Loyalist
Senior Enthusiast & Loyalist

Posts : 12193
Join date : 2013-12-12
Age : 35
Location : Yonkers, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by billg315 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:12 pm

Looks like your former opinion of the NAM is now that of the CMC.
avatar
billg315
Senior Enthusiast & Loyalist
Senior Enthusiast & Loyalist

Posts : 1212
Join date : 2015-01-24
Age : 43
Location : Somerville, NJ

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by jmanley32 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:14 pm

o rb your thinking the RGEM doesnt have a lot of merit either or not sure yet? Another last minute storm, they seem to be becoming more and more common.
avatar
jmanley32
Senior Enthusiast & Loyalist
Senior Enthusiast & Loyalist

Posts : 12193
Join date : 2013-12-12
Age : 35
Location : Yonkers, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by Frank_Wx on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:14 pm

GGEM snow map


_________________
Snow Accumulation Archive
2013-2014: 62.1"
2014-2015: 56.0"
2015-2016: 34.0"
2016-2017: 19.0"

________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CLICK HERE to view NJ Strong Snowstorm Classifications
avatar
Frank_Wx
Godzilla Seeker
Godzilla Seeker

Posts : 16840
Join date : 2013-01-05
Age : 25
Location : Cranford, NJ

View user profile http://njstrongweather.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by Frank_Wx on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:16 pm

00z German model


_________________
Snow Accumulation Archive
2013-2014: 62.1"
2014-2015: 56.0"
2015-2016: 34.0"
2016-2017: 19.0"

________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CLICK HERE to view NJ Strong Snowstorm Classifications
avatar
Frank_Wx
Godzilla Seeker
Godzilla Seeker

Posts : 16840
Join date : 2013-01-05
Age : 25
Location : Cranford, NJ

View user profile http://njstrongweather.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by rb924119 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:17 pm

jmanley32 wrote:o rb your thinking the RGEM doesnt have a lot of merit either or not sure yet? Another last minute storm, they seem to be becoming more and more common.

I think it does, I just think it hasn't caught up with the setup yet. Like I said in the chat, I think it will continue to correct northwest in line with the other short-range guidance based on the look of its upper-level features. The CMC, however, I think is simply out to lunch with this one, just like the NAVGEM. They have no clue, in my opinion. The GFS is trying, but not there yet aha

rb924119
Meteorologist
Meteorologist

Posts : 3201
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 25
Location : Greentown, Pa/Fishkill, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by hyde345 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:18 pm

rb924119 wrote:
hyde345 wrote:Frank, RB, are you guys buying the ene movement of gfs offshore?

I am not, no. I think it's too far offshore and will correct to be more in line with the majority of other short-range guidance.

Ok, thanks
avatar
hyde345
Pro Enthusiast
Pro Enthusiast

Posts : 332
Join date : 2013-01-08
Location : Hyde Park, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by billg315 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:18 pm

Interestingly, depending on which model you place your bets on the area of heaviest snow could still be anywhere from the South Jersey coast back up into the Hudson Valley. Although in all cases it looks like 5 or 6" is the bottom for most of the people on this board, so everyone should make out decent. It's really a question of who is at the top end which is nowhere near being nailed down yet.
avatar
billg315
Senior Enthusiast & Loyalist
Senior Enthusiast & Loyalist

Posts : 1212
Join date : 2015-01-24
Age : 43
Location : Somerville, NJ

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by rb924119 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:18 pm

Frank_Wx wrote:00z German model


Jesus, that's a large area of 0.5" of liquid equivalent in a three-hour period aha BRING IT ONNNNNN!!!!!!!

rb924119
Meteorologist
Meteorologist

Posts : 3201
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 25
Location : Greentown, Pa/Fishkill, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by amugs on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:19 pm

IM BACK - just saw the run down - where do I sign??

GERMAN


_________________
Mugs 
AKA:King: Snow Weenie
Self Proclaimed
WINTER 2014-15 : 55.12" +.02 for 6 coatings (avg. 35")
WINTER 2015-16 Total - 29.8" (Avg 35")
WINTER 2016-17 : 39.5" so far
avatar
amugs
Advanced Forecaster
Advanced Forecaster

Posts : 8086
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 47
Location : Hillsdale,NJ

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by aiannone on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:20 pm

rb924119 wrote:Here is my first call for this event:

Start: 3-6am
End: 2-5pm



As you can see, I am remaining cautious before jumping on the high totals that we are seeing being advertised currently, except for southern and central New England. The reason for this is because I am uncertain of how much available anomalous moisture there will be for the regions further west, back through southern New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Instead of having a classic moisture source from the Gulf or the Atlantic, we are relying on the dynamics to be able to squeeze out what moisture there is. According to the GFS, PWAT anomalies of around 1-1.5 sigma will be working through the southern tier of Pennsylvania and central New Jersey, but they tail off very quickly to the north, and don't really begin to blossom until the system begins really impacting southern and central New England, and the fetch becomes elongated off the Atlantic toward the New England coast. During this same time, the dynamics of this system will be stronger and more established than they are for regions further west, which is why I have increased totals there. I am also uncertain of the actual jet structure, although there is seemingly a growing level of consistency in developing a coupled jet system as the low is traversing the Mid-Atlantic. With that as is, combined with the uncertainty of when the trough begins tilting negative and adjusting the steering flow so that mid-level forcings are directed more south to north versus southwest to northeast, which also determines how strong the lower-level frontogenesis will be and where, I am not ready to make a determination on just how soon this occurs and how far west the precipitation shield can be expanded as a result. This also played a role in my lower amounts. However, I may have to increase these if what I think CAN happen with this event starts being shown. As for the placement of the heaviest snow axis, I am continuing to believe that this still trends a bit further northwest, given the factors outlined yesterday in my video, as well as one additional one that I forgot to mention; the anomalously warm coastal Atlantic waters. In any case, if adjustments need to be made, I feel that they will only include upward adjustments of the numbers, and not the locations of the gradients, as I feel pretty confident about the gradients, but we shall see. During the height of this event, snowfall rates of 1-3"/hour will be likely, but given the fast and progressive nature of this system, it will not be a long-duration event, which is another limiting factor in my lower numbers. If the forcing appears to align sooner and extend the window of heaviest precipitation, I will increase my totals. Again, however, I am not confident enough to pull the trigger at this time given the above. Lastly, the reason that I am low through southern Pennsylvania and New Jersey is because I believe the lower-level circulation will be passing pretty much over these regions before scooting offshore. This will act to direct the best forcing between about 50-100 miles to the northwest of the closed circulation (mainly H850), and potentially dry slot these regions, forcing them to rely on the CCB banding that follows (which will be very impressive, even if only for a short time). Admittedly, I wanted to extend the lower totals further northeast through the eastern 2/3 of Long Island and into extreme southeastern New England, but given the dynamic and moisture factors discussed above, I also feel that they could make up for the decreased snow activity to start.

RB, NWS has less than one inch here in BGM. You thinking a less progressive system with a more westward extending precip field?
avatar
aiannone
Advanced Forecaster
Advanced Forecaster

Posts : 2399
Join date : 2013-01-07
Location : Saint James, LI (Northwest Suffolk Co.)/ Binghamton, NY (Binghamton University)-Broome County

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by jmanley32 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:22 pm

rb can you see your area of 9-14 moving into nyc area, in any way?
avatar
jmanley32
Senior Enthusiast & Loyalist
Senior Enthusiast & Loyalist

Posts : 12193
Join date : 2013-12-12
Age : 35
Location : Yonkers, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by amugs on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:25 pm

See you all in da morning!!

_________________
Mugs 
AKA:King: Snow Weenie
Self Proclaimed
WINTER 2014-15 : 55.12" +.02 for 6 coatings (avg. 35")
WINTER 2015-16 Total - 29.8" (Avg 35")
WINTER 2016-17 : 39.5" so far
avatar
amugs
Advanced Forecaster
Advanced Forecaster

Posts : 8086
Join date : 2013-01-07
Age : 47
Location : Hillsdale,NJ

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by Frank_Wx on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:26 pm

rb924119 wrote:
Frank_Wx wrote:
rb924119 wrote:
Frank_Wx wrote:Wait, 700mb VV's on the GFS of all models are maxed out. I have NEVER seen this before.

That would mean INSANE snowfall rates.

Again, I think the globals are struggling with this one, especially if the jets verify like the short-range models show. Question: Did you ever see the explanation of that graphic you asked me for? Second question: Where did you get said graphic from? It's sweet!!!! lol

No? What graphic.

And here

http://weather.cod.edu/forecast/



I then responded with:

Here is a video explanation of that graphic you posted earlier, Frank (and, anybody else who is interested)!!

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Byod2Sk27yNYSi10VDltN0ozQ2c

Also, the 11.3°C temperature through the omega layer corresponds to about a 12:1 ratio event, on the average (MUGS lol), based on the empirically derived graphic below:


Big help, thank you. I figured it was something to do with VV's. And I found the graphic off another forum. Will ask where they got it. It may

_________________
Snow Accumulation Archive
2013-2014: 62.1"
2014-2015: 56.0"
2015-2016: 34.0"
2016-2017: 19.0"

________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CLICK HERE to view NJ Strong Snowstorm Classifications
avatar
Frank_Wx
Godzilla Seeker
Godzilla Seeker

Posts : 16840
Join date : 2013-01-05
Age : 25
Location : Cranford, NJ

View user profile http://njstrongweather.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by rb924119 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:27 pm

aiannone wrote:
rb924119 wrote:Here is my first call for this event:

Start: 3-6am
End: 2-5pm



As you can see, I am remaining cautious before jumping on the high totals that we are seeing being advertised currently, except for southern and central New England. The reason for this is because I am uncertain of how much available anomalous moisture there will be for the regions further west, back through southern New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Instead of having a classic moisture source from the Gulf or the Atlantic, we are relying on the dynamics to be able to squeeze out what moisture there is. According to the GFS, PWAT anomalies of around 1-1.5 sigma will be working through the southern tier of Pennsylvania and central New Jersey, but they tail off very quickly to the north, and don't really begin to blossom until the system begins really impacting southern and central New England, and the fetch becomes elongated off the Atlantic toward the New England coast. During this same time, the dynamics of this system will be stronger and more established than they are for regions further west, which is why I have increased totals there. I am also uncertain of the actual jet structure, although there is seemingly a growing level of consistency in developing a coupled jet system as the low is traversing the Mid-Atlantic. With that as is, combined with the uncertainty of when the trough begins tilting negative and adjusting the steering flow so that mid-level forcings are directed more south to north versus southwest to northeast, which also determines how strong the lower-level frontogenesis will be and where, I am not ready to make a determination on just how soon this occurs and how far west the precipitation shield can be expanded as a result. This also played a role in my lower amounts. However, I may have to increase these if what I think CAN happen with this event starts being shown. As for the placement of the heaviest snow axis, I am continuing to believe that this still trends a bit further northwest, given the factors outlined yesterday in my video, as well as one additional one that I forgot to mention; the anomalously warm coastal Atlantic waters. In any case, if adjustments need to be made, I feel that they will only include upward adjustments of the numbers, and not the locations of the gradients, as I feel pretty confident about the gradients, but we shall see. During the height of this event, snowfall rates of 1-3"/hour will be likely, but given the fast and progressive nature of this system, it will not be a long-duration event, which is another limiting factor in my lower numbers. If the forcing appears to align sooner and extend the window of heaviest precipitation, I will increase my totals. Again, however, I am not confident enough to pull the trigger at this time given the above. Lastly, the reason that I am low through southern Pennsylvania and New Jersey is because I believe the lower-level circulation will be passing pretty much over these regions before scooting offshore. This will act to direct the best forcing between about 50-100 miles to the northwest of the closed circulation (mainly H850), and potentially dry slot these regions, forcing them to rely on the CCB banding that follows (which will be very impressive, even if only for a short time). Admittedly, I wanted to extend the lower totals further northeast through the eastern 2/3 of Long Island and into extreme southeastern New England, but given the dynamic and moisture factors discussed above, I also feel that they could make up for the decreased snow activity to start.

RB, NWS has less than one inch here in BGM. You thinking a less progressive system with a more westward extending precip field?

Not less progressive, just hedging my bets on a continued west shift in the modeling and also yes, a more expansive precipitation shield. I didn't realize I barely missed putting the actual city on the 6" line or just inside the 3-6" zone, though lmao I meant to, but I lost track when I had to correct a prior mistake ahaha oh well, it's close enough for a first call. I am figuring between 4/5-6-7 for you, put it that way aha

rb924119
Meteorologist
Meteorologist

Posts : 3201
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 25
Location : Greentown, Pa/Fishkill, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by rb924119 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:29 pm

jmanley32 wrote:rb can you see your area of 9-14 moving into nyc area, in any way?

Yes, but it then becomes tricky because you start straddling the very fine line of mix/no mix the way I would see it happening/in my opinion lol

rb924119
Meteorologist
Meteorologist

Posts : 3201
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 25
Location : Greentown, Pa/Fishkill, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by aiannone on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:29 pm

rb924119 wrote:
aiannone wrote:
rb924119 wrote:Here is my first call for this event:

Start: 3-6am
End: 2-5pm



As you can see, I am remaining cautious before jumping on the high totals that we are seeing being advertised currently, except for southern and central New England. The reason for this is because I am uncertain of how much available anomalous moisture there will be for the regions further west, back through southern New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Instead of having a classic moisture source from the Gulf or the Atlantic, we are relying on the dynamics to be able to squeeze out what moisture there is. According to the GFS, PWAT anomalies of around 1-1.5 sigma will be working through the southern tier of Pennsylvania and central New Jersey, but they tail off very quickly to the north, and don't really begin to blossom until the system begins really impacting southern and central New England, and the fetch becomes elongated off the Atlantic toward the New England coast. During this same time, the dynamics of this system will be stronger and more established than they are for regions further west, which is why I have increased totals there. I am also uncertain of the actual jet structure, although there is seemingly a growing level of consistency in developing a coupled jet system as the low is traversing the Mid-Atlantic. With that as is, combined with the uncertainty of when the trough begins tilting negative and adjusting the steering flow so that mid-level forcings are directed more south to north versus southwest to northeast, which also determines how strong the lower-level frontogenesis will be and where, I am not ready to make a determination on just how soon this occurs and how far west the precipitation shield can be expanded as a result. This also played a role in my lower amounts. However, I may have to increase these if what I think CAN happen with this event starts being shown. As for the placement of the heaviest snow axis, I am continuing to believe that this still trends a bit further northwest, given the factors outlined yesterday in my video, as well as one additional one that I forgot to mention; the anomalously warm coastal Atlantic waters. In any case, if adjustments need to be made, I feel that they will only include upward adjustments of the numbers, and not the locations of the gradients, as I feel pretty confident about the gradients, but we shall see. During the height of this event, snowfall rates of 1-3"/hour will be likely, but given the fast and progressive nature of this system, it will not be a long-duration event, which is another limiting factor in my lower numbers. If the forcing appears to align sooner and extend the window of heaviest precipitation, I will increase my totals. Again, however, I am not confident enough to pull the trigger at this time given the above. Lastly, the reason that I am low through southern Pennsylvania and New Jersey is because I believe the lower-level circulation will be passing pretty much over these regions before scooting offshore. This will act to direct the best forcing between about 50-100 miles to the northwest of the closed circulation (mainly H850), and potentially dry slot these regions, forcing them to rely on the CCB banding that follows (which will be very impressive, even if only for a short time). Admittedly, I wanted to extend the lower totals further northeast through the eastern 2/3 of Long Island and into extreme southeastern New England, but given the dynamic and moisture factors discussed above, I also feel that they could make up for the decreased snow activity to start.

RB, NWS has less than one inch here in BGM. You thinking a less progressive system with a more westward extending precip field?

Not less progressive, just hedging my bets on a continued west shift in the modeling and also yes, a more expansive precipitation shield. I didn't realize I barely missed putting the actual city on the 6" line or just inside the 3-6" zone, though lmao I meant to, but I lost track when I had to correct a prior mistake ahaha oh well, it's close enough for a first call. I am figuring between 4/5-6-7 for you, put it that way aha

Ahh I see your point. Interesting how the SREF mean has near 10" for BGM and only 5" for ISP lol
avatar
aiannone
Advanced Forecaster
Advanced Forecaster

Posts : 2399
Join date : 2013-01-07
Location : Saint James, LI (Northwest Suffolk Co.)/ Binghamton, NY (Binghamton University)-Broome County

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by rb924119 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:31 pm

[quote="aiannone"]
rb924119 wrote:
aiannone wrote:
rb924119 wrote:Here is my first call for this event:

RB, NWS has less than one inch here in BGM. You thinking a less progressive system with a more westward extending precip field?

Not less progressive, just hedging my bets on a continued west shift in the modeling and also yes, a more expansive precipitation shield. I didn't realize I barely missed putting the actual city on the 6" line or just inside the 3-6" zone, though lmao I meant to, but I lost track when I had to correct a prior mistake ahaha oh well, it's close enough for a first call. I am figuring between 4/5-6-7 for you, put it that way aha

Ahh I see your point. Interesting how the SREF mean has near 10" for BGM and only 5" for ISP lol

Mixing for the coastal sections.

rb924119
Meteorologist
Meteorologist

Posts : 3201
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 25
Location : Greentown, Pa/Fishkill, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by rb924119 on Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:49 pm

UKMET!!!!!!

rb924119
Meteorologist
Meteorologist

Posts : 3201
Join date : 2013-02-06
Age : 25
Location : Greentown, Pa/Fishkill, NY

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: February 9th Godzilla: Fast & Furious Storm

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 23 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13 ... 23  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum