Have a look!




Amazing if this was to verify!
Moderator: S2k Moderators
LAwxrgal wrote:I'd like to have some of that good herb the GFS is smoking.
PurdueWx80 wrote:Actually, you would typically follow the -4 isotherm at 850 mb for snow - the 540 thickness can be a general indicator of the rain-snow line, BUT low-level warm air always throws a mix into that. You would have to watch the 1000-850 thicknesses, 700-850 and so on, plus surface temperatures would have to be just right. For all we know that could be a sleet or freezing rain event.
KingOfWeather wrote:PurdueWx80 wrote:Actually, you would typically follow the -4 isotherm at 850 mb for snow - the 540 thickness can be a general indicator of the rain-snow line, BUT low-level warm air always throws a mix into that. You would have to watch the 1000-850 thicknesses, 700-850 and so on, plus surface temperatures would have to be just right. For all we know that could be a sleet or freezing rain event.
-4 sence when?
southerngale wrote:Is anyone picking this up besides the GFS?
CaptinCrunch wrote:Heres the deal folks, the GFS is much like the "Boy who cryed Wolf" because it has lied so much that it gets to where nobody beleives it anymore and then when it starts telling the truth noboby will beleive it.
Well, here comes the BIG BAD WOLF!!!
PurdueWx80 wrote:southerngale wrote:Is anyone picking this up besides the GFS?
None of the other models go out that far, so we'll have nothing to compare it to for another day or so (once the Euro and Canadian 240-hr forecasts are at the same time as the GFS 240-hr). According to that map, most of the precipitation in TX would not be snow, because the precipitation would've fallen before the coldest air crashed in. It's exciting, but not worth worrying about at the moment.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests