rb924119 - 33andrain Weather Discussion Community Jump to content

rb924119

Meteorologist
  • Content Count

    1,136
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

rb924119 last won the day on June 18 2018

rb924119 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,120 Excellent

1 Follower

About rb924119

  • Rank
    Superstar Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Greentown, Pa/Fishkill, NY

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think this would just be more of what we are seeing now - a lot of ridging in eastern North America (central) with a raging pacific jet that keeps unloading on the West coast flooding us with Pacific-influenced air, muting the western ridge response and allowing storms to largely cut behind the riding in eastern North America......,rinse, wash, repeat. Just my opinion, though.
  2. Not to mention, when you look at the trends of the ensemble mean snow maps, they continue to trim the snow further northwestward. Sorry man, but I continue to respectfully disagree, which is fine. Again, I enjoy the spirited debate here But until I see notable changes, my opinion will remain unchanged. If I do see those changes, as I acknowledged with the GEFS, then I will comment on it
  3. My argument is not that we won't see secondary development; in fact I even said that I think we see multiple redevelopments throughout this event as a result of repeated occlusion processes. My argument is that it's too late/too far north to matter with the airmass that we will have to contend with given the synoptic setup. Secondly, the EURO Op is displaced extremely far southeast with its H5 evolution compared to its own ensemble, which features the H5 low (and therefore H7 and H850) tracking through the heart of the Great Lakes......that's a warm look in this setup regardless of how you slice it, and after a sustained southerly/southeasterly flow is not a setup for snow.....you need to be north of that track, not south of it. The GEFS and GEM Ensembles tell the same tale. Two operationals versus three entire ensembles...sorry, but I wouldn't call that trending toward your idea no matter what the surface looks like. Lastly, I really don't care what the JMA looks like, because it's rarely right in my experience, the UKMET is wave that develops along the frontal boundary which STILL cuts west of I-95 AFTER cutting the primary, and with an H5 that looks very similar to the other ensembles, and GEM Op has never met an East Coast cyclone that it hasn't tried to make a raging blizzard at some point or other. Remember, I NEVER said that the surface needs to torch, I just said that the upper-BL and mid-levels warm too much for us to capitalize, and given the setup, I sincerely doubt we see favorable trends at those levels. But obviously we are going to have to agree to disagree here, because you see white and I see black, and no matter we say to each other, we won't see grey lmaoo I explained how we get to your solution, but in my opinion, that is an extreme outlier, and it being an extreme outlier is supported by a bunch of factors, again, in my opinion.
  4. @PB GFI, as promised, here is my continuance of our friendly battle (haha) Since we have already gone over the synoptic and hemispheric arguments, I feel no need to revisit them now, unless you or others want to rehash all of that. I will note, however, that I feel that the modeling has largely been correcting in the direction that I have been expecting based on the points discussed in that previous post. From here, I will bring the focus a bit closer, and focus on some of the "broader details", which is where we left off yesterday. Again, my focus is going to largely be on the evolution of the H5 (anomalies) at times that I feel are crucial points, but instead of just using the EURO Ensemble plots, I will also pull in the ensembles of the GEFS and GEM as well to demonstrate the differences between them. All images will be annotated to help demonstrate my analysis (was thinking of doing a video initially, but they seem to get "lost in the sauce" so to speak lol ), but keep in mind there are some timing differences between the three ensembles, so the forecast periods used may not all match, but they match in the process of evolution. Without further adieu, the first image will be of the EURO Ensemble at the point in which we begin to see our system of interest amplify in response to the downstream amplification/blocking (as I mentioned a few days ago): The amplifying energies are outlined by the three lines near the Rockies, our building Eastern Seaboard ridge is denoted by the zig-zag line, and the circled region is the area in which blocking is beginning to develop (again, for reasons mentioned earlier). The last piece, and honestly, the most importance piece in my opinion, is the shortwave outlined by the box. This specific component is what will cause any difference of outcome, as I will show now. Up until this point, all three ensembles are in agreement. Here are all three ensembles valid at the point in which the western energies have bundled, and the system begins to amplify: All three ensembles agree on a substantial enhancement of the (blocking) ridging across eastern North America, the low trapped underneath (blocked), and the general location of the system of interest over the central CONUS. I want to draw your attention to three key differences with the GEFS versus the other two, though, that are all connected. Notice how the GEFS keeps the northern stream energy elongated and fights it through the developing ridging over eastern North America, whereas the others keep that energy as a consolidated shortwave that harmlessly rockets by to the north. The GEFS' solution allows three key things to happen: 1. it starts to shear out the blocking ridge in eastern North America as it SLOWLY fights its way eastward, which both weakens the blocking ridge out in front of our system interest, and thereby the onshore/warmer low-level flow (initially in response to the higher pressure upstream of the blocked system over the western Atlantic as well the early development of the upper-level ridge across the northwestern Atlantic/eastern North America) 2. acts as a "lead" and helps to create a pathway for the system of interest which allows for a continued positive tilt concomitantly with 3. the substantial amplification of upstream ridging forced by the very slow progression of the elongated shortwave and continued rapid progression of systems into the West Coast. As the eastern North American ridging continues to shear out, it also shifts the axis of the Atlantic high eastward along with it, while also weakening its influence. Meanwhile, the trailing ridging continues amplify and reorient/develop increasing surface pressure in a way that enhances cold air advection into the northern tier of the eastern CONUS. Since we are all looking for a snowstorm, you should root for this to continue, and continue to trend in this direction. That said, I do not think this evolution is correct based on my earlier analysis, and wholeheartedly believe that that Canadian shortwave remains compact and races quickly through the higher latitudes, rather than elongating and fighting through the ridging. I just DO NOT think the larger pattern supports this - the ridging has STRONG support from a plethora of factors. So assuming, the GEFS corrects to look like the others, why else do I think that we don't see much, if any, wintry weather from this? Let's continue the evolution. With the pattern amplifying across eastern North America, you have to look at the finer details, and the most important are the following: 1. Where is the ridging amplifying? 2. How is it oriented? Based on the above, the first is pretty obvious - across eastern North America, AHEAD of our system. When this is the case, systems lift out, they don't continue to dig. When a system begins to lift, it tilts negative, and changes its direction from mostly zonal to mostly meridional while also intensifying the lower-level features associated with it. Combine that with the amplifying ridging, both at the surface and aloft, it further enhances the southerly/southeasterly flow......warming flow, while directing the primary (and probably even a secondary low BEHIND the INITIAL BLOCKING). Eventually, the amplification process takes the mostly meridional orientation of the Eastern Seaboard ridge and through advective processes reorients it into a mostly zonal orientation across eastern Canada, which DOES halt its northward progression (cuts BENEATH this SECONDARY BLOCKING), at which point the system begins sliding east. However, by this point, it's too late as you are still tapping a warmer easterly flow off the Atlantic, and cannot establish enough cold air advection in time for the system to draw into it until it is passing us by (and much, if not all of the precipitation along with it). So you see, I agree with your premise that the low does eventually slip beneath the blocking, but not before it gains too much latitude behind it. Keep in mind, that as the blocking ridge begins to tilt from meridional to zonal as it lifts northward into Canada, it also unblocks the Atlantic. Therefore, just as you start to establish your low-level flow in a favorable way to enhance cold advection, just like our most recent system, it immediately begins retreating to the northeast, and you're then forced to try to snow in a marginal airmass on a wicked southerly or southeasterly wind, which will more than likely just not work. The air is already contaminated, it's not fresh like our last event, so it's already too late. This is why I said earlier that even IF we see a system take a perfect track, it is still unlikely to snow EXCEPT in northern New England, where I think they can do fairly well with this. It also would not surprise me, as I already alluded to, to see multiple lows develop as we see repeated occlusions here, and may end up seeing a surface feature ride along the frontal boundary itself, but cannot begin wrapping itself up until its past us. Anyway, this is why I still do not like this event at all for us, and I think such an outcome is being well-advertised on the guidance right now. As usual, though, this is always up for further discussion, and I am looking forward to it! At the very least, I hope that you all enjoyed this, and if anything requires further clarification, please don't be afraid to ask!
  5. They’re way behind the eightball with this. This was a known issue a few months after I guess the floodgates couldn’t hold any longer, as they shouldn’t.
  6. Oh really?? That’s crazy!! Haha I actually was born and raised there! My parents still live out there, but I moved to Fishkill almost four years ago now once I took my first job out of college. I go back all the time, though. I love it out that way!
  7. I can strongly agree with this!! Granted, we need it quite a bit sooner, but definitely a much improved look. Do I/you/ we believe it? That’s the first question. The second would then be if you do, how much better do you think it can get (in terms of how quickly it can find its way there)? You get the answers to those questions right, you get the whole kit and kaboodle right.
  8. I can tell you with 100% confidence that this will not happen because it puts both of my possible storm chasing spots in local maxima, and I’m the biggest jinx known to man when it comes that lmaooo I toss jk, obviously, just making a funny haha
  9. What do the 850 temps look like, though? I’d be willing to bet less than optimal Lol
  10. Thanks!! It’s not over yet, though; we’re just at halftime right now lmao I had to pause because of work . The last week or so has actually been quite an anomaly so far in our relatively short history of discourse - usually we see eye to eye on just about everything lol but it’s good! I love the spirited debate, and the opportunity to battle test what you think you’ve learned in real time. I’ll be on tomorrow with some more detailed thoughts, since I’ll have the time to actually sit at my computer as I’ve said before, though; everybody contributes, and you haven’t done too bad yourself! @PB GFI said it best, though, in that this field is ALWAYS humbling, no matter how smart you think you are.
  11. It certainly sounds a heck of a lot better than FM or friends in high places lmaooo but yeah, at face value and from a very quick and dirty peek at the SPC Meso Page after thinking about yours above, it seems like an enhanced area of low-level FGEN associated with the warm surge (as you said) colocated with nice differential vorticity advection and a bit of weaker assistance from the jet dynamics currently progressing overhead, which are working constructively to locally enhance the ascent/precipitation rates, thereby continuing the dynamic cooling. As you said, once this passed the precip type probably flips. Will we ever know for certain? Probably not. But I think yours is certainly plausible, at the very least
  12. F.M. Lmaooo you’ve apparently got a friend in a high place haha mind hooking the rest of us up? Aha nah, initially I thought that it could have been cold air drainage coming down the Hudson Valley which was then being displaced by the SW’ly flow as it was being lifted, but that doesn’t make sense given the synoptics. So, I revert back to my initial response - F.M. not really sure of the reason why, to be honest, but if I can think of something plausible, I’ll post it lol
  13. The last image is the key - that yellow line represents 850-700hPa critical thickness, which indicates that there is warm nose between those levels that you cannot see on the other charts. That’s why people are reporting sleet when everything appears to be below freezing.
  14. But it’s part of the entire synoptic evolution that spawns our system. It’s not an isolated development, it’s embedded within the overall synoptic regime. So even if/as it decays it still helps to lay the foundation to build the environment for what follows it. Just because it may die, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have an impact.
  15. Much like the last time, I’m going to have to revisit this post tomorrow (have to go to work), but it DOES cut behind the block.....the initial block. As a result, it floods the eastern CONUS with warm air. So even IF we get your secondary block to develop favorably, which I’m not exactly sold on the “favorably” part, it’s too late IMO. I’ll explore this deeper tomorrow I just think you’re focusing on the wrong part of the evolution in this event, is basically what I’m getting at.
×
×
  • Create New...