vortex95

That's the issue w/ AI models. They can't handle outlier events or set ups well, so they underdo things. Also, AI overdoing it is possible as you noted above. Not a one-sided problem I bet (non-linear factors). I keep hearing, "AI will get better." Well, isn't that the case for all types of modelling w/ time? And the notion that AI is improving so fast acting like it will solve all problems? All the AI advancement in the world is meaningless if you don't have many outlier events/analogs for it to pull from! And since outlier events are rare, progress in AI forecasts should be very slow. I would argue physics-based models will advance faster as in situ/remote observations get better globally for improved model initialization, along w/ better direct simulation of the atmosphere.

In any given situation, the worst-case scenario is the least likely to happen in the mean. The notion, "better safe than sorry" is a weasel line to give an excuse to always go w/ the worst-case scenario. Also, "we are saving lives!" Forecasts and awareness has become so good in recent decades, one can't hide behind that as an excuse anymore. Lives are lost now more IMHO b/c people have become numb and apathetic to the relentless hype. They have no idea what to believe, so many just tune it all out. That ends up costing lives when a truly exceptional event (worst-case) occurs, and it's made even worse b/c the exceptional events are greatest risk to lives. I admit though this is an extremely complex social issue, among other things, and no easy way to figure out what works best. One thing I will stand by solid though. "more [warnings/alerts} is not always better!"

Snowfall measuring practices were not completely standardized until the mid 1990s, even for long-term climate sites, and NYC is not immune to this issue. I think I have said this before, but generally, snowfall was underestimated prior to the NWS MAR in the 1990s. Some sites would only measure new snow *depth* once the storm was done, and call that the total. Other would melt a column of SOG, and then multiple by 10 for the snow total (blasphemy for the uber weenies!). Of all primary wx measurements we do, snowfall is by far the most inaccurate and variable in our record. Even today, there are fundamental challenges that make it hard at times to get an actual accurate amount.

That 34" in NJ. That's only, what, 1" from the record for the state set in the Bliz of 96? Blasphemy the 1947 event is called "Boxing Day Blizzard," at least for Scott. All he ever talks about is the 2010 blizzard for Boxing Day! LOL.

Also, the RRFS apparently can "see" intense mesocyclones! Look at the 972 mb "low" in nrn IN 01z Thu!

For Thu... I am impressed w/ the very strong WAA early on Thu in the NEUS. Atypical for summer. That looks to produce some sig tstms in itself. Thu afternoon is tricky b/c CAPE is lacking, but the shear is through the roof, as high as 85 kt 0-6 km and 45 kt 0-1 km. I can't think of any event in the last several decades w/ warm sector shear so high here this time of year when a strong sfc low passes just to our N. The 00z RRFS show a number of discrete storms Thu aftn w/ CAPE as high as 1150 in spots. I know the RRFS can get carried away and I don't have a good feel for it yet, but overall given the existing anomalies for the wind fields, I am quite concerned. I don't like that the sfc low is lifting/weakening as it moves across srn Quebec, but that may not matter in the end? Given such setups as so rare here, using the very limited past analogs we have for sig tor events in the NEUS, we don't really know the full spectrum or what can happen here b/c of that rarity in itself! I can honestly say I do not have a good forecast "feel" for this upcoming event in the NEUS b/c of the low CAPE, otherwise, it would be easy. It looks really nasty for the Midwest Wed -- off the charts for parameters. So how will that translate E? Not just in the NEUS, but in the Mid-Atlantic. Not every high-end svr event in the Great Lakes/OH Valley/Midwest this time of year ends up being big the next day to the E. I say "this time of year" b/c in the cool season, it is rare by default. In the NEUS, everyone often thinks of the June 8-9, 1953 outbreak sequence, but it doesn't always work like that. SPC DY3 outlook seems to focus on straight-line winds. That does seems more likely given the very fast storm motions and wind fields.

"Just give me 90, dews, and the beach." Incorrect, it should say, "just give me S+, S+, and S+!"

Crofton MD MB 6/11 (I think). Video never can capture the roar of the wind well, at least not the same as actually being there! https://www.facebook.com/reel/1658094618796584

*Any* wx anomaly or deviation now is news and hyped. Inane. As if everything should be exactly normal/avg all the time? Guess what, normal/avg doesn't exist as many think it does! And hyping how the planet works normally (that's what it has become now) and acting like something is wrong is pure drivel. You can make a living on-line now just finding anything going on across the globe to the smallest minutia and hype it as if it is significant. Basically taking the fact that "something is always going on" and making a big deal out of it no matter what. Have to have that CONTENT for clicks/likes, engagement bait, drive the algorithms, and monetize! It has become a sideshow within a sideshow and race to the bottom.

But Cape Cod!!!

Glad you pointed this out. ECMWF was unrealistically showing tropical deepening well inland from MS to the Carolinas. 18z backed off and looks more reasonable. And now the GFS has the same idea. Excellent point about how this may play a role in the SVR later in the week. It seems up until now, rich deep moisture was lacking as noted by not so high CAPE even in the Mid-Atlantic, but this tropical low could make a huge difference as to sensible svr wx, esp. NYC to DCA.

Rather meh for NNE today. Not a single svr wx report and one SVR from CAR. Seems like the overnight stuff will end up better. RRFS and HRRR show this well for ern CT/RI/SE MA. Li'l finger of CAPE quite apparent. RRFS LTG density solid (as a rock).

Moving from Brockton to GHG to Dorchester headed farther N, then back S of Weymouth? Does a snow weenie in SNE do that?

Yes. absolutely crazy LTG shows. Probably tied to the EML and having "fat" CAPE at mid-levels, so the charge separation is ideal in the mixed phase layer.

Not according to CoastalWx!

Are their systematic issues w/ sonic anemometers? W/ all the new mesonet sites in MD the last few years, are we seeing wind measurement issues often?

Will this convince WxWiz that an EML is not required for SIGTOR? Scott still be like "MEH!" I have a hard time believing that something solid will not occur w/ those dynamics in place in mid-June in the region.

NNE looks good for short bow segments and supercells today. What is interesting is 2-5am Mon in eastern SNE. Nice theta-e noses at 925 and 850 and wind fields 700 and below ramp up nicely just ahead of the well-defined trough axis. 00z RRFS and to a lesser extent HRRR show decent tstms firing ern MA and RI. LTG density is solid. So maybe CoastalWx can get shaken out of bed w/ a +CG super crash! LOL.

Yes. I see that. Noted on the 00z ECMWF, very strong WAA occurs on Thu during the day with the passage of the WF (that's classic for a big tor day). Nice nose of above avg 850 temp 00z 6/19 (attached). Winds at 500 as high at 95 kt (attached) and 300 winds as high as 115 kt? Tell me something big can *not* happen w/ these kind of wind anomalies and such a strong sfc low in srn Quebec in June! Derecho instead of Scott spinners here perhaps. Looks better to SW of the region. Since set ups like this are rare here, we don't know the full range of possibilities. We may be surprised.

I'm originally from just NW of BOS, and the biggest thing I recall locally from that 6/1/11 was the nasty +CGs coming out of the supercell anvils overhead. The storm cores were 30 mi to my W. Don't see that too often in New England! Then another supercell just missed me in the evening that crushed BOS. Here is video (not mine) taken about 10 mi to my N in Lowell MA. This is telltale supercell lightning. Very frequent, quick flickering pulses in the upper part of the CB. You can actually see short cloud-to-cloud bolts at times, known in chaser slang as, "anvil zits!"

June 1, 2011 was the New England tor event w/ the EF3 Springfield-Monson MA. This is the last high-end tor event for New England, About every 10-15 years New England gets a high-end tor event, so one could say, "they're due!"

When I posted, I thought of it this way, in a overall synoptic sense, you don't track a 990 mb or deeper sfc low across southern Ontario/Quebec this time of year, and *not* have something big happen convectively! What that is exactly is and where? Way too early, but all the main pieces are there, so that's the first step. Work from there. What is really cool now is that modelling and knowledge have come to the point we now can reasonably see high-end/record-setting events potential well in advance. The first time I really took l note of this was a couple days before the Oct 29-30, 2011 snowstorm. I noticed how cold the short-range ensembles were showing the 850 mb temps, and I said, "this is going to be epic/really bad," and look what happened. Then a year later, we saw what the ECMWF was doing w/ Sandy (even before the system was named Sandy!) 9 days out, and again, look what happened! Now we had advanced enough to see high-end svr convective potential days 4-8. From a wx passion standpoint, it's really cool to know such things in advance now. Growing up, I recall the uncertainty factor seemed always so high, and so many surprises (snowstorms over-performing was a biggie). And from a societal POV, us knowing ahead of time is a tremendous benefit so we can prepare for them and mitigate impacts.