Re: 01/22/16 - 01/23/16 Update #3 - Will Models Trend Back North?

by **SoulSingMG** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:46 am

Blizzard Watches just hoisted for entire DC/Baltimore Metros.

by **RJB8525** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:49 am

Wow NNJ gets nice right there if im reading it correctly on what the map is showing with the qpf

by **SoulSingMG** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:49 am

NAM BURIES NYC...~ 2 feet I think!

by **Frank_Wx** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:53 am

We all know the NAM is overdone. Let's see what the GFS shows. I just like where it tracked the storm. QPF is meaningless.

by **jmanley32** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:53 am

WOW! NAM MASSIVE HIT FOR NYC AREA! And just started at the end of run.

by **rb924119** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:55 am

Based on 10:1:

01/22/16 - 01/23/16 Update #3 - Will Models Trend Back North? - Page 18 Namconus_asnow_neus_29

by **billg315** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:55 am

Oh no. You're not getting me to listen to the NAM. I'm not falling for the old banana in the tailpipe again. Lol.

by **rb924119** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:56 am

WE ALL GET THE GOODS!!!!

01/22/16 - 01/23/16 Update #3 - Will Models Trend Back North? - Page 18 Namconus_ref_neus_28

by **jmanley32** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:56 am

Still you even said madonne lol, just for some memory fun from last year, and to those that were not here last year with Juno....

Manamanam!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z79jnz9v60

by **RJB8525** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:56 am

rb924119 wrote:WE ALL GET THE GOODS!!!!

now thats a pretty picture, everyone's happy (i think)

by **rb924119** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:56 am

billg315 wrote:Oh no. You're not getting me to listen to the NAM. I'm not falling for the old banana in the tailpipe again. Lol.

I hear you man ahaha the good news is that it looked better than 00z and 06z, so just maybe.......

by **jmanley32** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:57 am

rb924119 wrote:WE ALL GET THE GOODS!!!!

18-20 with a ton left to go I wouldn't be surprised if that ran all way through neared 2 1/2 feet plus, but as frank said qpf doesn't mean much on the nam yet.

by **jmanley32** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:59 am

RJB8525 wrote:
rb924119 wrote:WE ALL GET THE GOODS!!!!

now thats a pretty picture, everyone's happy (i think)

ummm 36-45 dbz snowfall for me, and likely thundersnow and blasting winds ah ya I have nothing to complain and if I did id ban myself. But its still not to be taken verbatim this far out.

by **billg315** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:59 am

I think the storm is definitely going to move faster than originally projected (seems like it always does with these things right?) but that shouldn't be a major issue because the precip is so heavy and it's a large precip field. Also it seems there is ample cold air so mixing issues don't concern me much. Right now I think track is the biggest concern and that looks decent on the latest models.

by **rb924119** Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:59 am

Honestly, I'd probably halve what we see here, because the NAM is notorious for being to heavy with the QPF, and also has a northwest bias. I guess we now wait on the others lmao

by **RJB8525** Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:01 am

jmanley32 wrote:
RJB8525 wrote:
rb924119 wrote:WE ALL GET THE GOODS!!!!

now thats a pretty picture, everyone's happy (i think)

ummm 36-45 dbz snowfall for me, and likely thundersnow and blasting winds ah ya I have nothing to complain and if I did id ban myself. But its still not to be taken verbatim this far out.

GET CANTORE!

by **CPcantmeasuresnow** Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:03 am

jmanley32 wrote:
rb924119 wrote:WE ALL GET THE GOODS!!!!

18-20 with a ton left to go I wouldn't be surprised if that ran all way through neared 2 1/2 feet plus, but as frank said qpf doesn't mean much on the nam yet.

Again it's the NAM so steady ass she goes but that cutoff line in the north is very similar to 96. I'm getting almost 2 inches qpf and 50 miles north almost nothing. Again as Frank said amounts are meaningless but that cutoff for people in the HV may be critical.

As a note in 96 I received over 30 inches of snow, 70 miles NW of me 0.

by **essexcountypete** Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:04 am

billg315 wrote:Oh no. You're not getting me to listen to the NAM. I'm not falling for the old banana in the tailpipe again. Lol.

LOVE IT! We use that line in our house all the time.

Let's just ignore the NAM snowfall maps, which were seemingly constructed to sucker snow weenies, and just take the NAM results as a move in the right direction, and hopefully a trend.

by **hyde345** Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:07 am

Wow, anyone north of 84 in HV is in big trouble with this one. Very sharp cutoff.

by Guest Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:07 am

Frank_Wx wrote:Winds

Frank question. Isn't the NAM too far out to be accurate yet, or are you just excited because it's another model trending in the right direction?

by **Quietace** Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:08 am

Not sure if anyone saw the overnight Para Euro run. Lots of CFI. But i think H5 was improved.
01/22/16 - 01/23/16 Update #3 - Will Models Trend Back North? - Page 18 Pecmwf10

01/22/16 - 01/23/16 Update #3 - Will Models Trend Back North? - Page 18 Pecmwf10

by **SoulSingMG** Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:08 am

Just read this from another source: "The parallel Euro at 0z is further NW than the OP with heavier snow across the area. Just came in a few minutes ago."

by **Quietace** Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:09 am

01/22/16 - 01/23/16 Update #3 - Will Models Trend Back North? - Page 18 Pecmwf11

01/22/16 - 01/23/16 Update #3 - Will Models Trend Back North? - Page 18 Pecmwf12

CFI on the NE side of the low

by **nutleyblizzard** Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:09 am

I know the NAM likes to overdue the precipitation, but is it because the shield itself was overall more intense or did the heaviest snows in DC make it up here? That's important to me because if its the latter, this needs to be watched as a possible trend with the other models today.

by Guest Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:11 am

CFI????

by **Quietace** Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:14 am

syosnow94 wrote:CFI????

James,
Convective Feedback Issues(CFI)

by chief7 Wed Jan 20, 2016 10:15 am

The euro para just came out and it's the bomb Bluewave from the other website confirmed it

by Sponsored content