Skip Navigation Links 
NOAA logo - Click to go to the NOAA homepage National Weather Service   NWS logo - Click to go to the NWS homepage
The Weather Prediction Center



Follow the Weather Prediction Center on Facebook Follow the Weather Prediction Center on Twitter
NCEP Quarterly Newsletter
WPC Home
Analyses and Forecasts
   National High & Low
   WPC Discussions
   Surface Analysis
   Days ½-2½ CONUS
   Days 3-7 CONUS
   Days 4-8 Alaska
   Flood Outlook
   Winter Weather
   Storm Summaries
   Heat Index
   Tropical Products
   Daily Weather Map
   GIS Products
Current Watches/

Satellite and Radar Imagery
  GOES-East Satellite
  GOES-West Satellite
  National Radar
Product Archive
WPC Verification
   Medium Range
   Model Diagnostics
   Event Reviews
   Winter Weather
International Desks
Development and Training
WPC Overview
   About the WPC
   WPC History
   Other Sites
Meteorological Calculators
Contact Us
   About Our Site is the U.S. Government's official web portal to all federal, state, and local government web resources and services.
Model Diagnostics Discussion
(Caution: Version displayed is not the latest version. - Issued 1839Z Feb 21, 2019)
Version Selection
Versions back from latest:  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   
Abbreviations and acronyms used in this product
Geographic Boundaries -  Map 1: Color  Black/White       Map 2: Color  Black/White

Model Diagnostic Discussion
NWS Weather Prediction Center College Park MD
139 PM EST Thu Feb 21 2019

Valid Feb 21/1200 UTC thru Feb 25/0000 UTC

...See NOUS42 KWNO (ADMNFD) for the status of the upper air

12Z Model Evaluation...with Preferences and Confidence

...Closed low ejecting out of Southwest tracking through
Plains/Midwest/Great Lakes Sat/Sun...
Preference: General model blend
Confidence: Slightly above average

19z Update: The largest adjustment was the 12z CMC shifting toward
a slightly faster and more importantly, stronger solution; it is a
shade slower than the 12z NAM/GFS.  The 12z UKMET, like the
NAM/GFS also depict an early, strong response to deep
moisture/instability to rapidly deepen cyclone through MO into
Midwest; its occlusion is the strongest leading to deeper surface
low that is west of the main cluster.  The 12z ECMWF showed
positive adjustment with the trof in south central Canada,
significantly reducing the westward shift of the track/upper level
pattern on Day 3; yet the 12z run is also slower than the 00z run.
 Still, the overall spread has reduced in the mass fields to
suggest that a general model blend may suffice, splitting the
timing difference between the ECMWF/UKMET/CMC and the GFS/NAM. 
Confidence remains slightly above average in this blend.  Please
note: the QPF preference may incorporate the magnitude of the NAM,
but the QPF axis appears clearly too far north, as WPC is favoring
an ECMWF/GFS/UKMET axis for this hazard.

---Prior Discussion---
Closed low over the Southwest is fairly well agreed upon in the
large scale, but typical timing biases start to manifest as it
ejects into the Southern Plains by 12z Sat.  The 12z GFS continues
to show this slightly faster ejection shifting a bit faster north
and east into Sunday but as it intersects with deeper
moisture/instability late Sunday, the system receives some
feedback to rapidly occlude, this slows the northeast timing and
increase TROWAL/deformation QPF band to the NW of the surface
cyclone, and leads the GFS to slow compared to prior runs and
start matching in track/placement of the cyclone toward day 3
across the Midwest into the Great Lakes, providing some confidence
in more of its inclusion to the preference.  The 12z NAM has
remained consistent and while slightly slower initially ejecting
compared to the GFS, it also shows upscale enhancement on late
Sunday for a strong/deep occlusion.  The 00z UKMET also falls
generally in line with this solution, but is a bit east and
deeper/fast through the end of Day 3, typical of its negative
known bias;  some lower weighting/incorporation to the mass fields
seems warranted.

The 00z ECMWF, is a slow member of the 00z ECENS solutions
suggesting some concern for falling into its known slow bias;
however, it is fairly well timed with the NAM/UKMET through the
Plains to have some confidence in its inclusion initially.  A
stronger northern stream shortwave/cold plunge out of the Arctic
develops a southern Prairie trof that is clearly out of place in
the ensemble suite, with only the CMC showing some vague
similarity.  As the cyclone occludes and the TROWAL enhances by
Sunday, this trof has negative influences, maintaining the depth
of the cyclone as well as drawing it back toward the West and
delaying its weakening across the Great Lakes into Ontario by 00z such the ECMWF is included in preference but
eventually becomes eliminated/removed by Day 3.    The 00z CMC,
like the ECMWF is slow, but is also the weakest solution with very
limited TROWAL enhancement and little upscale enhancement that is
expected by late Sat into such it is not included in
the preference.

As such the overall preference is a non-CMC blend but initially no
12z GFS (until 24/00z) transitioning to no ECMWF after 24/12z with
inclusion of the 12z GFS.  The overall mass spread is fairly small
to build slightly above average confidence; however, it is the
higher impact, small scale details that show moderate spread in
the Day 2/3 period that lead to the time specific
inclusion/exclusion within this blend.

...Pacific Northwest Trof Sat/Sun...
Preference: Non-NAM blend weighting toward 12z ECMWF/UKMET
Confidence: Average to slightly above average

19z update: The CMC trended a bit slower and does not shift the
inner core of the wave east into the Rockies by the end of the
forecast period, this leads to better agreement with the placement
of the inner core, but the trof extending back into the Pacific is
a bit faster/SE than the trend would suggest.  This is grown more
true as the ECMWF shows a slower southward shift of the western
extent of the trof matching best with the 12z GFS.  The UKMET
slowed a bit too and continues to be similar to the initial
preference if a shade faster than the GFS/ECMWF.  The QPF/moisture
axis in the ECMWF/UKMET/CMC continues to be south of the GFS
leading to some uncertainty to the the QPF portion of the
preference.  Overall will support a non-NAM blend though will
continue to weight the GFS and CMC a bit less than the ECMWF/UKMET

---Prior Discussion---
A trof will be descending along the BC coast on the eastern side
of an amplifying Gulf of AK ridge by the weekend.   The initial
lead wave will bleed through the North US/Southern Canadian
Rockies Sat/Sun and act as a kicker wave to the developing deep
cyclone described above, this appears fairly well handled with
some depth concerns mainly after affecting the Northwest (so
please refer to section above).  As flow under-cuts the developing
ridge, a weak Omega block pattern develops over the Northwest
aiding slowing of the trof dropping south as well as tapping some
subtropical moisture stream for developing an Atmospheric River
toward Day 3.  The 12z NAM and 00z CMC are clearer outliers with
respect to the elongating/amplifying trof, as they both shift the
shortwave energy onshore and press height-falls into the Northern
Rockies.  The 12z GFS has maintained a bit of increased
enhancement to the trof which delays the southward press of the
moisture stream into the Pacific Northwest, but given the overall
setup (upstream ridge) and the uncertainty in the precise latitude
of the under-cutting moisture, it still remains somewhat viable in
the blend at the Day 3 time-period, though the UKMET/ECMWF are a
bit better agreed upon and have some better ensemble support.  At
this point, a 00z ECMWF/UKMET preference with some inclusion of
the 12z GFS is preferred at average to slightly above average

Model trends at
500 mb forecasts at