jbenedet

The cold is at least in eastern Canada, vs central/western. We have that. Pacific is poor and that keeps us with AN bias BUT in JANUARY, which is workable (meaning, when the arctic isn't involved) in areas with average highs in the 20's -- western MA, Vermont, interior NH and much of Maine. But the robust SE ridge is also a problem with storms prone to warm sectoring eastern areas. I think longitude will matter more than latitude over next few weeks. West better than north. And Northwest >> SE. Most favored areas for snow chances would be Berks and Vermont.

Anyone who would prefer a cold wedge mid 40's and overcast vs 65 and sunny, I don't get. Better off moving somewhere with a worse climate and lower COL. I don't care what the calendar is. Unless the cold is producing, I want nothing of it. 65 sunny on Jan 4 is a huge win. Congrats to those who have it.

Yea. Late March, or better yet late November - given sun angle and SST similarities.

45 is still like +13 around here. Lol.

What a late March look. All the mid 40’s behind the door. Up to caribou before freezing. 70 in Delaware.

What makes you so sure? Your bogus mid to long range forecasts? I wonder why we have such high forecast error for shortwaves in datasparse regions of Canada then. My argument is in the precision and accuracy of this. You can get a snapshot. But good luck rolling that data forward into something reliable. "Pretty darn good", in the world of forecasting is actually crap. You are way more confident than what this technology and data can output. Pick a phase any phase: "A butterfly flaps its wings"

Do you guys ever worry about how poorly sampled that area is? Like you're analyzing an illusion because the data is so sparce?

Using climo blankedly can certainly have its pitfalls. Snow cover, soil temps, lake temps, ocean temps all have a say in it. Broadly speaking, none of these variables are near Jan 3rd norms, for the region as a whole. The one key exception, of course, is the sun angle, which is fixed. But saying it's peak climo right now creates a forecast error trap given the background context. The world around us needs to look like Jan 3.... We can swing back and mean revert to the climate calendar with a string of BN days, but until that happens....caution.

No kidding. This is great.

Jan 6th threat: H5 has appeal, and will likely continue to, but surface looks too warm, and that’s the prevailing issue. Highest POP collocated with most marginal temps up to 850. Warm antecedent air mass, weak dynamics, and incoming surface cold lags behind. Systems like this where in-situ cold —or lack thereof—makes or breaks it. We know where this case falls. Advisory event if everything works out perfectly, onset during overnight, stronger system. Next.

No. I meant would lose all ice. There’s small sections of the Cocheco near the mill dam that’s been frozen over. Also Willand pond the same. Also, watch out for the mosquitoes. They’re back apparently.

Looks like the local ponds, lakes and streams will fully open up before this latest ++AN snap ends.

Naw. You and @ORH_wxman bitter that I point out that your life work is really just a waste of life. Sorry to break it. It’s a fraternity of losers. To be an outcast is a good thing here. You also undermine the credibility of meteorology. Add that to the list.

Yea you really should have. 5 minutes of daily natural observations outperforming 5 weeks of model hugging. Well done. Modelologists making meteorology a farce.

That explains a big piece of it. But I believe there’s something else going on. Some recent studies out on how Covid weakens the immune system, especially right after getting over it. This is likely another big piece, and it’s been the pattern in my specific case. The propensity for Covid to trend towards pneumonia has always been the pathogenicity. If susceptibility to pneumonia goes up, I suspect it does too for a whole host of other viruses/bacteria. And yet there’s still more unknowns I believe contributing…

Liebniz's chaos theory distills so much. Just running a model with slightly different initial conditions; it's mind blowing the first time you see it. Especially when taken in consideration with the inherent error associated with measurement and interpolation. I believe there are complementary ways to improve weather forecasting accuracy but the bulk of short term "growth" is outside of NWP. NWP will see further improvements as we get more data (measurements over time and throughout the globe at different levels of the atmosphere); and find better ways to incorporate this information continuously into weather models. But this is an under-taking much bigger than one person, which is why I say the individual forecaster should look outside of NWP to improve forecast skill.

Nah there's a big difference between me and you. One of us is learning the inherent limitations of NWP (in some cases the hard way), while the other still pours their heart and soul into something that NWP was always fundamentally unequipped for. The devil is in the details. And we all should foremost respect that, as weather enthusiasts and meteorologists. If we don't the field loses credibility. It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble; it's what you think you know that just aint so... (Every 10+ day detailed forecast)

@40/70 Benchmark That is a forecast. Some details to deduce skill. I can respect that, even if I disagree with the methodology. Analogs have value, but at a very high level. Details, likely still to be burnt.

It's really funny to me people looking out 10 days plus using NWP, when the fundamental underpinning to NWP is CHAOS THEORY. What that means is, if you get a detailed forecast right, out 10 days+, it was a result of luck, and not any skill. And so the next time you attempt to use the same methodology (it worked last time!), and we get a completely different result, you're flummoxed. Worse, still, you're not gaining skill either.

What does this mean? Specifics? This is fortune teller level detail here. C'mon.

Still didn't winterize the moped. Glad I followed the Newington geese crew. Took it out around town today. Noice.

Sun is really impotent from say 12/1 to 1/15. It’s easy to understate how important this is to pack building, and getting that prolonged wintery feel. I think if there’s any frustration it should be that—we will lose out on at least most of this window. Also, while our climo average temps are warmest in December vs January and February, I believe the chances of a pack annihilating warm up go up significantly after 1/20. The threshold to hit 65+ goes up despite lower averages, most of this having to do with the relatively stronger sun in the southeast and the ability for warm sectors to fan this up the Apps.

12z NAM MOS you posted yesterday was pretty damn well spot on with a high of 48 MHT. 47 high currently. But yea, you’d think we could do better given how warm 850 on up is. Testament to the solar min more than anything, I suppose. If we avoid the clouds, it’s low 50’s tomorrow. Should feel nice.

Yea. That number makes a lot more sense. And I'd take 50 for MHT before 45 given the overall setup.

meso guidance for tomorrow's highs is suspect. Too cold. Reading a cold tuck, with the warm front into Bangor ME, and a stronger HP to our south, than to our north. Strange. Been noticing this a lot lately for the short term mesos - it's as though the data assimilation has been to correct for cold tucks this time of the year; but it has "over-corrected". 850's are cooked. The 6z euro is 5-10 degrees warmer than the 12z Nam at 18z Thursday. Sun is out; no easterly/northeasterly winds. Buy the euro, sell the Nam.