eduggs

Averaged 500mb anomaly charts of perturbations of the 0z GFS and CMC operational runs would look really encouraging. But what looks good through the vagueness of long-range time and averaging can be ugly when crystallized into a discrete event.

I agree that it will be worth the wait if we can get a good snow event or even string a few decent ones together without a rainer to spoil things. But I would not be at all surprised if we go through December with little or no snow.

We're a little bit behind schedule for the first trackable wintry threat. We're not really behind in snowfall to date locally, just something tangible to get excited about.

Good patterns are recognized in hindsight not foresight.

The 12z CMC shows an unusual scenario with rain approaching the area from both the west and the east at the same time around 240hrs. That's certainly uncommon. That specific depiction is unlikely to occur, and a wintrier outcome is definitely possible.

Well we do have 2 or 3 rain events to track. It would be fun if this December could end up being the first month in a long while with more frozen liquid equivalent than rain.

GFS, CMC, and EC are all still basically snowless out to 10 days. As we move into December we really should start to see some discrete threats within that time period. The reliability of modeled patterns beyond 10 days is somewhat tenuous. So we shouldn't get overconfident about long-range 500mb anomaly charts. Snowstorms are really about well-timed features at the regional-scale more than continental scale patterns. The large-scale features are typically a prerequisite for big storms, but we still have to get lucky.

There looks to be some longshot potential for something wintry mid to late week next week. Some encouraging hints on the op runs, but nothing specific to get excited about yet.

It would be nice to at least have something trackable as we head into December. The polar jet remains pretty far north even in the extended on the ensembles despite the blocking regime.

Let's get the "potential" comfortably inside 10 days. Otherwise we might just be wishing for something fantastical or ephemeral.

The 18z GFS abruptly lost the 50/50, but GEFS, GEPS, and EPS all look pretty sweet. Can't ask for too much more in mid November, 8+ days out.

The 12z GFS looks tasty for Friday. Unfortunately the 12z CMC and 0z EC squash the key southern s/w along the gulf coast. There's some potential if all the waves can align favorably. But the majority of ensembles are still against the wintry threat. It's still exciting to have something to halfheartedly track after a long hiatus.

Looks like possible flakes or sleet Tue. evening, esp N&W of 287. It's too early for any confidence, but not too early to talk about it. GFS and NAM forecast soundings show wetbulb temps near freezing Tue. evening as precip. arrives. Entrenched cold, dry air between 850mb and 950mb could start things off frozen if it doesn't get too warm during the day. You never know what can happen - isolated parts of southern IL picked up several inches last night in an overperforming band... and now a few inches into IN this morning. It will obviously be harder to maintain a frozen column east of the mountains, near the Atlantic, but seeing flakes in November is always nice.

This is the first wintry looking sounding of the season. In fact, the wet bulb temps could almost support wet snow in the highest elevations of the southern Catskills. And it would possibly only take a model error of a few degrees Celsius to get some sleet in parts of NEPA and NNJ. Realistically we're not that close, but there's a feel in the air and a look to the model charts that is reminiscent of winter!

You argued for days - dominated the forum with your viewpoint - that this event would wind up cold and snowy. And you were wrong. Best to just man up and admit it.

6-7 for ALB and sleet at least as far north as southern ALB county. https://forecast.weather.gov/product.php?site=nws&issuedby=aly&product=pns

The NAM was really good. Models should be expected to shift around either side of the final outcome. And it really only went too far north for one run. And sleet did briefly into the southern Capital District.

Weather modeling has literally never been more accurate. Over reliance on vendor snow maps, ignoring of synoptics and forecast soundings, and unrealistic expectations of model accuracy create a false impression of model unreliability.

To borrow a previously used phrase, the GFS, Euro, and UK were out to lunch. Sleet surged way north. Good job NAM. Sorry you missed out on another snowstorm. Lousy winter.

Nobody should be the slightest bit surprised. Unless they ignored the path of the mid-level shortwave through Lake Ontario and the past 6 runs of the NAM. The GFS gets sleet to ALB now. Probably briefly to SVT too. Should still be decent snow up there though.

I don't think you should focus so much on ptype interpreted accumulation maps (e.g., 3" at ALB). They can be very misleading. Yes recent NAM runs had a slightly stronger and longer-lived primary surface low. But there is broad inter-model agreement on the synoptic setup. The difference between 3 and 8 inches of snow could come down to a degree or two in the warm layer.

This looks like a pretty typical SWFE to me. The SWF refers to mid-levels, not surface features. The high doesn't "retreat" because the mid-level shortwave approaching through the midwest is dampening as it approaches, so the area of strongest upper level convergence stays in approximately the same place. This upper level convergence (converging height lines) results in an accumulation of air aloft, which is forced to descend - hence high surface pressure. The dampening wave allows a quicker weakening of the surface low and prevents a complete torch. But if you look at h5, the shortwave is traversing Lake Ontario and northern NY on Friday. That's classic SWFE, and why we have a mix event on tap while areas north and east will be snow.

It didn't correct as much as you think. You are talking 3rd party interpreted snowfall accumulations, not model output. In reality, the modeled column cooled a degree or two near 800mb. The overall depiction is still the same - weakening primary in WNY associated with a dampening shortwave, transferring to weak coastal SLP. We don't have a strong mid-level low or a bombing coastal low - just a modest southerly mid-level flow and weak to moderate surface CAD. That sounds like a recipe for a broad area of mixed precipitation. Snow vs. sleet will come down to whether it's +0.5 or +2 in the warm layer and whether dynamical cooling can partially compensate. With a strong primary I would always take the warmest solution. The NAM often leads in cases like this - in fact as others have said, sleet frequently ends up further north than modeled. And I wouldn't be shocked if BGM and ALB mix for a time. But in this case the warm surge is muted, so I'm not so sure. That's why I'm not completely writing off significant snow (i.e., 4"+) in Sussex, Orange, and Putnam counties.

Anybody ignoring the NAM is wishcasting. The GFS and UK have the same basic idea. This could still go either way along the area of sharp snow gradient. But it's hard to see how the mid-level feature in WNY and southerly flow near 800mb doesn't push sleet pretty far up the HV. North of I-84 and east of the Hudson seem to have the best shot of damning in just enough cold air.

I like the southern Catskills to the CT-MA border for the jackpot zone. But if the model consensus is a hair too warm, you might be golden where you're at. Max QPF may end up just south of where the max snow is currently forecasted. If that lines up with a snow column it's double digits. I'm rooting for you because your area is due. If and when you mix with sleet you may not change over completely since mid-level warming will be weakening over time and there may be a dynamical cooling element to ptype with a shallow layer above freezing.