Jump to content

Always in Zugzwang

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Always in Zugzwang

  1. This...thank you! Sure, it's nice (and fun) to see a great-looking ensemble mean. But if the spread is all over the place it doesn't "mean" a whole lot (pun slightly intended).
  2. Yeah, we can hope for that I suppose! Actually I was surprised that BWI had relatively little as areas not far from there got a fair bit more. I got about 2.3" here, DCA had a meagre 0.2", but there were a lot of reports to the north and west of DC of 5-6" or so. Guess it depended on the banding and where they ended up, as I think most areas had a similar temperature profile for the most part if I'm not mistaken. Actually, another storm comes to mind, Feb. 25 ( somewhere around that date?) in 2007. Got a good period of heavy, wet snow that ended as drizzle, about 5" or so of snow accumulated. Surface was barely at or below freezing but it was snowing hard. I heard later on that we had essentially a rather deep isothermal layer.
  3. Just occurred to me, but could this almost be similar to the Dec. 5 snow from last year? I know, the set-up and other aspects are not (necessarily) the same. But in that case, it started with fairly heavy rain in the morning that changed to heavy, wet snow. It was above freezing when the snow began and it only stuck to rooftops and grass, but it did finally start to accumulate pretty well once the boundary layer cooled sufficiently. (EDIT: By "last year" on Dec. 5, I'm of course referring to last winter in 2009, not 2010!)
  4. In a way I agree. But my concern is that it's simply going to be too warm east of, say, the Blue Ridge, unless some cold air at and just above the surface can wrap in awfully quickly while the precip is falling. I can see wet snow falling at some point, but if it's 35 or so at the surface and just below freezing above there, I wonder how much it would really amount to. If I recall correctly from various previous posts yesterday, the idea of a front-end snow to rain to possibly snow is more or less gone...and we're hoping for enough cooling to change anything to snow after rain at the start?
  5. Yeah, well regardless of what happens it's great that New England already got knocked out last weekend!!
  6. BL is not looking good. I guess it would be a cold rain possibly turning to wet snow near the end before it's gone.
  7. Yup...in a situation like this, very true, when there are a wide range of solutions or a couple of very different ideas that "average out". But in a situation where there's decent agreement, they can be more informative. If I'm not mistaken, ensembles are best used for the medium-longer range to get an idea of the overall longwave flow, and in that they excel much more (EDIT: I'm talking more the global ensembles here).
  8. Damned if we do, damned if we don't?
  9. Oy! So I wake up this morning only to find yet more uncertainty especially after the 06Z GFS!! In a way, this is almost amusing and all you can do is shake your head. What's the old joke about some unstable Central American governments...something along the lines of, "if youd don't like the government, it'll change by tomorrow!" Seems to be the case here, if you don't like the look of one model run, wait until the next cycle for something completely different! It seems the only remotely consistent thing being shown is that this storm is occurring later, more like late Tuesday night into Wednesday night, or there about.
  10. Well that's a good point, didn't know the same lettered area is not necessarily an exact "continuation" (and interpretation) into the other region.
  11. Actually as I understood some of the discussion earlier, the 00Z NAM wasn't half-bad if you "extrapolate it out". Temperatures cooling as the precip arrives, 500 center south, etc.? So it might be more in line with the GFS than the GGEM. But I could have misinterpreted some of that.
  12. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for DC to get a foot of snow...
  13. You'll notice also that the description given in region "C" (which includes DC-Balt) is fairly different.
  14. They've had almost no positive effect yet on this winter. But what the hell!
  15. HA! I'm assuming you meant to include a "snark" tag on that statement!!
  16. Huh, wadda you know...another foot for NYC-BOS! I'll be!
  17. Well that looks interesting! Though how in the hell our thicknesses here are still well above 540 with the low bombed out off the coast of Maine, I have to wonder.
  18. I definitely agree with this...though I'd add interesting and aggravating. Heck, it's like a baseball game where you're hammering the ball, tons of hits, lots of scoring opportunities, but you strand runners at 2nd and 3rd all the time, and have barely scratched out a run through almost 5 innings. Or if you prefer, like racking up yards in a football game but you've only scored a field goal by the half. Any other sports cliche comparisons are welcome!
  19. Good point, that's true now that I look back and recall the past several cycles. That's always a concern, as is the case where you've got one great solution that skews things. I think with every model and their ensembles for this event, we've just about run the gamut of possibilities in the past few days!!
  20. Yes, the mean does look great. However, what are the individual members like that make that up? That is, are "warmer" solutions the reason the mean QPF is that high (but not necessarily good for snow)...while perhaps colder, offshore solutions are relatively dry? Not trying to come off negative, but an honest question here. I'd be curious if there are two camps of solutions in there.
  21. That's what I was about to say...extremely so, in fact.
  22. Interesting...though a little hard to tell exactly where the freezing line cuts through and exactly where the low is centered with all the other stuff on there. But it does look a little east.
  23. I can relate to that! Hence, my quest for that fine bottle of single malt I mentioned earlier...
  • Create New...