tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6168620747792092240.post994714421345891053..comments2024-03-27T15:09:59.039-06:00Comments on Wasatch Weather Weenies: Storms Going Out with a WhimperJim Shttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15799757451626876963noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6168620747792092240.post-67548117146833902842013-07-09T16:48:56.151-06:002013-07-09T16:48:56.151-06:00It could have to do with differences in their conv...It could have to do with differences in their convective parameterizations. I think the NAM uses the BMJ scheme, which has a specific set of biases, and the GFS scheme has specific biases as well, but this is not my area of expertise.Adam Varblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14991968453822376063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6168620747792092240.post-68490195411569314562013-07-09T10:22:19.163-06:002013-07-09T10:22:19.163-06:00Looking at the forecast models last week, there we...Looking at the forecast models last week, there were some huge differences in the forecast with regard to the convective activity. As a good example, look at the forecasts initialized on July 3. The NAM forecasted essentially only diurnal activity (mostly limited to the higher terrain), while the GFS forecast included a lot of nocturnal storm activity particularly over northwestern Utah. In this case at least, the GFS schooled the NAM. I am wondering why these models have such huge differences with regard to the diurnal variations in convection, there is obviously a lot more going on than just differences in terrain resolution. Any ideas on this? Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02814313368731066590noreply@blogger.com