Thats a great point. And makes sense because it is almost like a developing TC that has competing centers. Given the H5 look, I would expect the SFC low closer to the coast and to develop quicker as well
It’s also skewed by the few huge membersHmm that’s an interesting mean. Notice DCs mean went up. So it would suggest a lp strengthening and heading north
I see decent hits in Virginia7 nice hits
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I will say that one of those amped up members does get the Triad into the action. Gets close to Charlotte too. I don't recall seeing any other members doing this over the past few days. I would definitely think that Raleigh east towards I-95 should be pretty optimistic after the trends over the past 36 hours.It’s also skewed by the few huge members
Not surprised at all . A big win on this storm would be, precip East of 95GEFS not very impressed for those of you in interior SC, GA, NC. Darn it!
I’m surprised the 18z gefs didn’t improve given the look at H5 the OP had
they are usefulMy question is how helpful are the ensembles w/this setup? It seems the ops have been leading the way for the most part.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you think is causing the two lows?What doesn't make sense is how the 18z GEFS mean H5 trough goes neutral tilt faster with a quicker phase than 12z, yet there is less precipitation. However, looking at the individual SLPs tells the story - they are all doing what the operational is it appears by developing the low too far east. Impressively, two are pulled northwest and still slam NC and two more at least get close.
That vort is the result of convective feedback. I took a look at convective precipitation on Dupage and you can see it develops in response to modeled convective precipitation. I am confident the low track will be west and one, consolidated low. If we can get the upper level pattern, the rest will fall in line.
What do you think is causing the two lows?
Exactly, this version of the GFS has a notorious sub-vortex scale convective feedback problem which becomes very evident during the hurricane season particularly over the CA monsoon gyre and monsoon trough wherein it creates these spurious diabolically induced eddies which quickly grow upscale and manifest onto the large-scale flow and moisture transport within an incipient tropical disturbance and lead to massive forecast errors in tropical cyclogenesis and intensification even well inside the medium range. I suspect the same issue is occurring here and thus I concur we're likely only going to see one consolidated low here probably further NW where the baroclinicity is highest at the interface of the Gulf Stream and the cooler shelf waters adjacent to the Carolinas and Mid-Atlantic states...
Would this feedback issue cause the gefs to produce similar results. Seemed like the gefs should’ve been way west with the H5 lookExactly, this version of the GFS has a notorious sub-vortex scale convective feedback problem which becomes very evident during the hurricane season particularly over the CA monsoon gyre and monsoon trough wherein it creates these spurious diabolically induced eddies which quickly grow upscale and manifest onto the large-scale flow and moisture transport within an incipient tropical disturbance and lead to massive forecast errors in tropical cyclogenesis and intensification even well inside the medium range. I suspect the same issue is occurring here and thus I concur we're likely only going to see one consolidated low here probably further NW where the baroclinicity is highest at the interface of the Gulf Stream and the cooler shelf waters adjacent to the Carolinas and Mid-Atlantic states...
Please dumb down for me? You are like the opposite of bill Nye the science guyExactly, this version of the GFS has a notorious sub-vortex scale convective feedback problem which becomes very evident during the hurricane season particularly over the CA monsoon gyre and monsoon trough wherein it creates these spurious diabolically induced eddies which quickly grow upscale and manifest onto the large-scale flow and moisture transport within an incipient tropical disturbance and lead to massive forecast errors in tropical cyclogenesis and intensification even well inside the medium range. I suspect the same issue is occurring here and thus I concur we're likely only going to see one consolidated low here probably further NW where the baroclinicity is highest at the interface of the Gulf Stream and the cooler shelf waters adjacent to the Carolinas and Mid-Atlantic states...
The coastal areas received snow on the 18z anyways. I think it would’ve been further inland with precipAnd to sum this up everyone, coastal SC/NC/GA would likely be in the game if the surface map was reflected right.