16 replies to this topic

[Jimrin1967]

As Fred Sanford used to say..."Its the big one!!" I think QPF is over done. As it is pretty much oh...always. But even so looks like a very significant storm. I am concerned about mid-level warming causing mixing issues in snj and eli

[Stormchaser]

Nice map Jim. I'm in agreement w/ the mixing issues for E LI and SE NJ/DE, but I believe minimum amounts will be around 10" for central NJ and the immediate NYC area (10-16" range).

12z data coming up rather than down w/ QPF. I don't think it'll be as wet as some as some of the SREFS and GGEM ensembles (insane totals near 2"), but at least 1" of QPF is a good bet for most IMO.

[Jimrin1967]

Stormchaser, on Mar 1 2009, 12:11 PM, said:

Nice map Jim. I'm in agreement w/ the mixing issues for E LI and SE NJ/DE, but I believe minimum amounts will be around 10" for central NJ and the immediate NYC area (10-16" range).

12z data coming up rather than down w/ QPF. I don't think it'll be as wet as some as some of the SREFS and GGEM ensembles (insane totals near 2"), but at least 1" of QPF is a good bet for most IMO.

I'm just always skeptical of that much QPF from a 1000+ mb low.

[ericjcrash]

Jimrin1967, on Mar 1 2009, 12:25 PM, said:

I'm just always skeptical of that much QPF from a 1000+ mb low.

That is true, but theres a LOT of moisture on the table here, look at some of the radar returns in the Carolinas, pretty impressive. Keep posting your thoughts man! Its been a while.

[njblizzard]

Jimrin1967, on Mar 1 2009, 12:25 PM, said:

I'm just always skeptical of that much QPF from a 1000+ mb low.

Jim, any chance of Low being stronger then progged. I think thats the only way i get more then 10"....

[Jimrin1967]

ericjcrash, on Mar 1 2009, 12:27 PM, said:

That is true, but theres a LOT of moisture on the table here, look at some of the radar returns in the Carolinas, pretty impressive. Keep posting your thoughts man! Its been a while.

Yeah Eric...been sick and busy. But better and slower now

[Jimrin1967]

njblizzard, on Mar 1 2009, 12:28 PM, said:

Jim, any chance of Low being stronger then progged. I think thats the only way i get more then 10"....

There is no parameter on the models that can't be wrong. Especially this winter.

[ericjcrash]

Jimrin1967, on Mar 1 2009, 12:31 PM, said:

Yeah Eric...been sick and busy. But better and slower now

Thats good man, good to see you posting.

[snowfreak188]

i think they are under doing the precip,those 2 higher res models have around 2" im told of qpf.

[Jimrin1967]

snowfreak188, on Mar 1 2009, 01:32 PM, said:

i think they are under doing the precip,those 2 higher res models have around 2" im told of qpf.

I never say I know anything is wrong before the event is over. But, overwhelmingly QPF is wrong too high, not too low. It does happen on rare occasions and maybe this will be one of them. But if I predict under QPF values I will be right 8 or 9 out of 10 times. I'll take those odds.

[snowfreak188]

Jimrin1967, on Mar 1 2009, 01:36 PM, said:

I never say I know anything is wrong before the event is over. But, overwhelmingly QPF is wrong too high, not too low. It does happen on rare occasions and maybe this will be one of them. But if I predict under QPF values I will be right 8 or 9 out of 10 times. I'll take those odds.

not to fight you or anything but they where wrong last night. and we really havent had a southern stream storm this year to really tell if QPF would be over or under done in this wacky winter on the models.i just see the NGM drops almost 1.25" QPF for me and thats usually to dry.

[rgwp96]

snowfreak188, on Mar 1 2009, 01:43 PM, said:

not to fight you or anything but they where wrong last night. and we really havent had a southern stream storm this year to really tell if QPF would be over or under done in this wacky winter on the models.i just see the NGM drops almost 1.25" QPF for me and thats usually to dry.

cut 20% of most model outputs and that will be closer to the actual amounts.

[joe714]

snowfreak188, on Mar 1 2009, 01:32 PM, said:

i think they are under doing the precip,those 2 higher res models have around 2" im told of qpf.

for arguments sake if we got 2' of precip...whats that amount to in inches in snow.....

[snowfreak188]

joe714, on Mar 1 2009, 01:46 PM, said:

for arguments sake if we got 2' of precip...whats that amount to in inches in snow.....

around 24"

[Jimrin1967]

joe714, on Mar 1 2009, 01:46 PM, said:

for arguments sake if we got 2' of precip...whats that amount to in inches in snow.....

Probably at least 15-20...verbatim if all snow

[vascudave]

joe714, on Mar 1 2009, 02:46 PM, said:

for arguments sake if we got 2' of precip...whats that amount to in inches in snow.....

235-250"

[Jimrin1967]

vascudave, on Mar 1 2009, 04:22 PM, said:

235-250"

That would be cool!