Jump to content

snowman19

Daily Post Limited Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,064

  • Joined

 Content Type 

Everything posted by snowman19

  1. snowman19
    I’m 34, very light drizzle in Sloatsburg. The new NAM and HRRR are very unimpressive for snow with the next round here in Rockland
  2. snowman19
    The new HRRR, NAM (12K, 3K) are nothing burgers south of Orange and Putnam counties. Rockland and Westchester may not see more than an inch out of this and it looks like it’s going to turn to rain for several hours
  3. snowman19
    Yep also weak and disjointed. It has it flipping between rain and snow here in Rockland and what snow falls is light. This is trending into pretty much a nothing burger
  4. snowman19
    I’m sorry. 84. Totally misspoke. 84
  5. snowman19
    This is going to be an ugly NAM run for snow it would appear, still running
  6. snowman19
    Areas north of I-87 should do ok. South of 87, Rockland, Westchester, Bergen.....this is probably 1-2 inches of very wet snow at best, which is a gift given the putrid airmass, and I think those areas may fight rain at times. Bad boundary layer, my highs up here go into the upper 30’s tomorrow. As far as ratios, those 10:1 ratio maps are going to be way off. It’s probably more like 5:1 ratios tomorrow south of 87 Edit: I meant I-84. My apologies
  7. snowman19
    Not trolling. That 10:1 ratio map is severely overdone and wrong. It incorrectly counts sleet as snow. You aren’t getting 10:1 ratios, it’s going to be way lower than that and the boundary layer is really horrible. There is also a mid-level warm punch, the NAM has it going to all rain even up here
  8. snowman19
    That is map is way overdone. This is the more realistic one: https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/models/?model=nam3km&region=neus&pkg=asnowd&runtime=2021010118&fh=60
  9. snowman19
    36 here in Sloatsburg, down a degree from 37 an hour ago. This should be about as low as we get for this one. This mid-level warmth has already punched in, not expecting much more than rain from this one, maybe a few sleet pellets at the start, but this is going to be mainly rain for us
  10. snowman19
    Agree. This is an 84 and north event. I’d honestly want to be north of 84 for this one
  11. snowman19
    Problem is the 10:1 ratio snowmaps, first off, those ratios are not happening, they will be much lower, second, they count sleet as snow. The boundary layer is going to suck. Highs are approaching 40 degrees that day even up here in Rockland County
  12. snowman19
    Not saying it doesn’t look good for storms, if you want cold, it’s ugly, real ugly. @MJO812 for the 100th time, ugly for getting arctic cold
  13. snowman19
    That is a very ugly PAC. EPO floodgates wide open
  14. snowman19
    Yea, +3 in January can snow. I’m really at a loss to explain where the twitterologists are getting this super cold arctic pattern from. Is it possibly a snow pattern in January if we can pop a +PNA? Yea. Arctic, “polar vortex” death pattern? Not even close, there’s no cross-polar flow. Wishcasting galore right now
  15. snowman19
    The new NAM solution doesn’t make sense, it’s absolutely torching the mid-levels and still printing out snow. You ain’t snowing with mid-level warmth like that. I’ll sell that run
  16. snowman19
    It may even be just slightly after mid-month but I agree with you guys. We definitely need a favorable PAC side, period, or we will have issues. Then the question becomes do we go into a classic canonical La Niña February as the tropical convective forcing moves to the maritime continent? We’ll have a better idea around mid-month, I think
  17. snowman19
    How exactly will it definitely improve the PAC? And how does it not matter at all if all the cold ends up on the other side of the pole?
  18. snowman19
    If you think Monday is a snowstorm setup, I don’t know what to tell you. In fact, it may actually end up being a cutter
  19. snowman19
    Agree. The GFS has no credibility whatsoever anymore. This is a horrid antecedent airmass and everything would have to literally be 100% perfect, flawless, to get a snowstorm in the metro area. I’ll sell on a snowstorm for Monday
  20. snowman19
    Besides the bad PAC, we have this fact, Don warned that this SSW may end up benefiting Eurasia @donsutherland1 @bluewave...
  21. snowman19
    Good post. Horrible PAC side with the block trapping the garbage. Not the results you want to see. I don’t care what Eric Webb says, he’s the same guy who arrogantly forecasted massive, historic -EPO blocking for this month back in November, which obviously has been a monumental bust.
  22. snowman19
    Agree 100%. It would need to be the definition of thread the needle for the metro area to get snow. The airmass is putrid, the wave spacing isn’t that great and yea, the PAC sucks
  23. snowman19
    The last storm it sure didn’t. It overdid the confluence/cold and suppressed the storm so severely that it had areas which got 40+ inches of snow barely getting 4 inches. One of the most epic busts of all time. It also totally missed the mid-level warm nose over the metro area
  24. snowman19
    He’s extremely arrogant and condescending. Back in November he was hyping a “huge”, “historic” -EPO coming for December. He actually had an attitude towards anyone who questioned it. That turned into an epic fail. Not surprisingly that he’s back on the hype train for January. Everything is historic, huge and epic to him, and don’t you dare question him.....
  25. snowman19
    The GFS is very likely too cold as usual, i.e. the last storm. The fact that it’s colder than all other guidance is a red flag. It’s bias at play again
×
×
  • Create New...