Yeah I don’t think it would work like How it would in winter, tbh probably would be issues with cutoffs in the Atlantic with that tho
-
Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!
Pattern Muddy March 2021
- Thread starter SD
- Start date
69 degrees, much higher then most models
Nam is trash 
May have already been mentioned but the GFS v16 is now the official GFS as of 12z
New GFS is much better, not progressive from what I’ve seen using it on wxbell
yeah maybe, from what I seen it out performs the euro, esp temp wise
Sucks to suck lick 
LickWx
Member
One map and your literally sucking on it too
Your enhanced risk wake county bust is a big suck
Got up to a surprisingly high 69F today
smast16
Member
Are we sure that feature off the coast is completely cold core? It's got some decent thunderstorms in it.
Downeastnc
Member
Yeah its been fun to watch that thing all day.....winds here have been stout out of the NE all day and I am sure the OBX are overwashed...I have seen less impressive swirls with names
Just realized with v16 basically put us in the Jan pattern but still was 60s/70s to show for it..... spring is here, and that shows how marginal it was in January
It has some decent thunderstorms with it and there actually seem to fairly close to the circulation center. This might be one of those that they determine to be a sub-tropical storm during post-analysis
From Fri from Maxar, @SD ‘s favorite company
:“GFS OP Upgrade Early Next Week
Today’s Headlines:
After a delay due to severe weather earlier in the week, the GFS OP is scheduled for an upgrade with its 12z run on Monday. This will be the model’s first upgrade since changing to its FV3 dynamical core back in summer 2019. The new model increases the number of vertical layers from 64 to 127, extending to the upper
stratosphere. More details on the changes to data assimilation and physics can be found in NOAA’s Service Change Notice. In winter 2019-2020, the new model performed better than its predecessor at longer lead times, lessening a general cold bias. Some of the improvements were in areas of snow cover, where the new model does not overstate the cooling influence as much as in the previous version. The model also handles cold air damming setups better than in the previous version, but it is still too warm in association. A case study for the Arctic outbreak from February 2021 showed the model was worse than its predecessor at 5-10+ days lead. The new model poorly handled upper level shortwaves, which pushed the cold too far east and not far enough south when compared to observation. This was an outlier response relative to other, less extreme, retrospective case studies. In summers 2019 and 2020, the new model carried similar error (RMSE) as its predecessor in the Western Half. Some changes in how the model handles soil moisture lent a warm and dry bias here, which may be an issue for the upcoming summer in the West and Plains where drought is ex- pected to persist or intensify. Model skill is poorer in the Eastern Half, where both summers saw the model being too cool at most lead times. In extreme heat situations, the model carried similar skill as its predecessor. In terms of severe thunderstorms, the new model detects threats at longer leads when compared to the current version, which is in part related to the model’s better handling of boundary positions including dry lines. The new model is worse for instability measures, with a low bias for CAPE (convective available potential energy). In the tropics, the new model is better at identifying development threats at longer leads but also has a higher ‘false alarm rate.’ Improvements are for projected intensity (i.e. reduced weak bias); although, this improvement is for storms that develop and an issue for ‘false alarm’ storms. The upgraded model better handles rainfall for storms making landfall. As its predecessor, the model retains a right track bias in relation to being too progressive with upper lows and shortwaves. For more info: www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/users/meg/gfsv16/.”
——————————————
Highlights from GaWx’s perspective:
1. Less cold bias in winter due partially to less overstating of cooling due to snow-cover.
2. OTOH, cold bias in summer E US
3. Increased TC false alarms though misses fewer geneses. Better with rainfall. Still has right bias.
4. @Myfrotho704_ type stuff he and others would find interesting about severe thunderstorms like being able to better pick up on outbreaks but low bias on CAPE.
Last edited:
Wow I thought I’ve seen a difference in how less progressive it was vs the old GFS, I was wrong lolFrom Fri from Maxar, @SD ‘s favorite company
“GFS OP Upgrade Early Next Week
Today’s Headlines:
After a delay due to severe weather earlier in the week, the GFS OP is scheduled for an upgrade with its 12z run on Monday. This will be the model’s first upgrade since changing to its FV3 dynamical core back in summer 2019. The new model increases the number of vertical layers from 64 to 127, extending to the upper
stratosphere. More details on the changes to data assimilation and physics can be found in NOAA’s Service Change Notice. In winter 2019-2020, the new model performed better than its predecessor at longer lead times, lessening a general cold bias. Some of the improvements were in areas of snow cover, where the new model does not overstate the cooling influence as much as in the previous version. The model also handles cold air damming setups better than in the previous version, but it is still too warm in association. A case study for the Arctic outbreak from February 2021 showed the model was worse than its predecessor at 5-10+ days lead. The new model poorly handled upper level shortwaves, which pushed the cold too far east and not far enough south when compared to observation. This was an outlier response relative to other, less extreme, retrospective case studies. In summers 2019 and 2020, the new model carried similar error (RMSE) as its predecessor in the Western Half. Some changes in how the model handles soil moisture lent a warm and dry bias here, which may be an issue for the upcoming summer in the West and Plains where drought is ex- pected to persist or intensify. Model skill is poorer in the Eastern Half, where both summers saw the model being too cool at most lead times. In extreme heat situations, the model carried similar skill as its predecessor. In terms of severe thunderstorms, the new model detects threats at longer leads when compared to the current version, which is in part related to the model’s better handling of boundary positions including dry lines. The new model is worse for instability measures, with a low bias for CAPE (convective available potential energy). In the tropics, the new model is better at identifying development threats at longer leads but also has a higher ‘false alarm rate.’ Improvements are for projected intensity (i.e. reduced weak bias); although, this improvement is for storms that develop and an issue for ‘false alarm’ storms. The upgraded model better handles rainfall for storms making landfall. As its predecessor, the model retains a right track bias in relation to being too progressive with upper lows and shortwaves. For more info: www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/users/meg/gfsv16/.”
——————————————
Highlights from GaWx’s perspective:
1. Less cold bias in winter due partially to less overstating of cooling due to snow-cover.
2. OTOH, cold bias in summer E US
3. Increased TC false alarms though misses fewer genesis. Better with rainfall. Still has right bias.
4. @Myfrotho704_ type stuff he and others would find interesting about severe thunderstorms like being able to better pick up on outbreaks but low bias on CAPE.
Thanks for this, great read. Interesting it says it handled CAD better but still too warmFrom Fri from Maxar, @SD ‘s favorite company
“GFS OP Upgrade Early Next Week
Today’s Headlines:
After a delay due to severe weather earlier in the week, the GFS OP is scheduled for an upgrade with its 12z run on Monday. This will be the model’s first upgrade since changing to its FV3 dynamical core back in summer 2019. The new model increases the number of vertical layers from 64 to 127, extending to the upper
stratosphere. More details on the changes to data assimilation and physics can be found in NOAA’s Service Change Notice. In winter 2019-2020, the new model performed better than its predecessor at longer lead times, lessening a general cold bias. Some of the improvements were in areas of snow cover, where the new model does not overstate the cooling influence as much as in the previous version. The model also handles cold air damming setups better than in the previous version, but it is still too warm in association. A case study for the Arctic outbreak from February 2021 showed the model was worse than its predecessor at 5-10+ days lead. The new model poorly handled upper level shortwaves, which pushed the cold too far east and not far enough south when compared to observation. This was an outlier response relative to other, less extreme, retrospective case studies. In summers 2019 and 2020, the new model carried similar error (RMSE) as its predecessor in the Western Half. Some changes in how the model handles soil moisture lent a warm and dry bias here, which may be an issue for the upcoming summer in the West and Plains where drought is ex- pected to persist or intensify. Model skill is poorer in the Eastern Half, where both summers saw the model being too cool at most lead times. In extreme heat situations, the model carried similar skill as its predecessor. In terms of severe thunderstorms, the new model detects threats at longer leads when compared to the current version, which is in part related to the model’s better handling of boundary positions including dry lines. The new model is worse for instability measures, with a low bias for CAPE (convective available potential energy). In the tropics, the new model is better at identifying development threats at longer leads but also has a higher ‘false alarm rate.’ Improvements are for projected intensity (i.e. reduced weak bias); although, this improvement is for storms that develop and an issue for ‘false alarm’ storms. The upgraded model better handles rainfall for storms making landfall. As its predecessor, the model retains a right track bias in relation to being too progressive with upper lows and shortwaves. For more info: www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/users/meg/gfsv16/.”
——————————————
Highlights from GaWx’s perspective:
1. Less cold bias in winter due partially to less overstating of cooling due to snow-cover.
2. OTOH, cold bias in summer E US
3. Increased TC false alarms though misses fewer geneses. Better with rainfall. Still has right bias.
4. @Myfrotho704_ type stuff he and others would find interesting about severe thunderstorms like being able to better pick up on outbreaks but low bias on CAPE.
Watching it on Sat yesterday, it was wrapped tight, (eye-like, spin clearly could be seen), I thought ,, sheesh! looks like a ST Storm out there.. Which BTW, still gale force winds here on the coast..