40/70 Benchmark

Yea, its fair to question snowgrowth, too with the mid levels so jacked up. Not pretty.

Why do you plan to take your aggression at scooter out on me? Lol

I don't think so.....that one downsloped the CTRV horrendously.

Not necessarily if it sleets.

I view this is more of a general, uniform WAA slug....in for like 8-10 hours, and drizzle-slot. Banding is usually more west of the mid level lows...

Agree.

QPF is often overdone east of mid level lows....but noteworthy trend.

I could see a foot there, but jackpot even with mid levels west? Where did the H85 and H7 lows track in 12/14/1992? This is where getting the mid level to at least stretch out, and if not totally redevelop on approach, would be huge..

...which brings me back to 12-16-2007.....that did not happen.

Certainly an interesting forecast. Its nice to have a system not working out perfectly, and yet not have the thread go to crap and still have great discussion.

One more note...this was not an issue in 12-16-07....the high was anchored NNW of Caribou, and it hit with an absolute wall of snow. I think that enhances frontogenesis, especially in the low levels just to the polar side of the coastal front. Now, this antecedent airmass may be a bit more impressive, but usually dry air is fairly easily overcome in intense WAA. Its seems inconsistent to to harp on how proficient the lift looks with the WAA, and then cite the high retreating as a positive to help overcome dry air. Not sure I buy that, and view the retreating high as a negative. if the WAA is that impressive, then...dry air? Really?

Absolutely fair point....but a question for this weekend, not tonight haha

Exactly. Right now, to me that is the main difference between this event and high-end WAA producers like 12-16-2007, which approached 1' over a large area.

This is why I give myself two kicks at the can before go-time....obviously, pro forecasts are even more fluid.

The only system that I can recall producing widespread amounts in excess of one foot when the primary vehicle for the production of precipitation is WAA with decaying mid levels flying west is 3-14-93...Will can correct me if I am wrong on that.

Fair point, but I feel like at this point where are getting into the type of considerations better suited for short lead times....I think the initial course of least regret considering the mid levels it to begin conservative, and if it looks extraordinary enough at the 11th hour, fine..

No one is getting 12-18" in SNE...only spot to approach a foot will be the higher terrain of Berkshires. You would need some extraordinary WAA dynamics for that..this isn't 3/4/1993. Plus, don't forget....the high is hauling ass to the east...its not remaining NW of Caribou like 12/16/2007, so that will limit the front ender, too. Could be some slight enhancement near the CF during the WAA burst, but I can explore that more for Sunday's map.

12-18" where??

The mid levels are a HUGE red flag in this.....its a limiting factor that is next to impossible to overcome if you are looking for excessive snowfall amounts. 1) They are flying west, so you not only have warm air advection, which is the primary mechanism for precipitation for us...but you also have a dry slot that will shut off precip shortly after change over well inland. 2) The mid level mechanics/dynamics will be in decay on approach, which would still be a limiting factor even if it were tracking farther east. This will be a nice, lateral thump of WAA driven snowfall for a several hours, and that is it....you warm and dry out in the mid levels and its done.

I always do a first call 72-84 hours out.

Ugh...hadn't seen this. Sorry to be redundant.

Same page....I hit on both of these aspects in my first call.

Kev must have early onset dementia...always disoriented.

Disregarded for now.

Unfortunately, Henry's weather looks pretty boring on Monday.