psuhoffman

Gfs is ejecting more of the pacific wave and not absorbing it as much into the pacific NW trough. Thats a good step towards what we want

I think the true thaw lasts about a week and by the very end of Feb we’re tracking again. Keep in mind by then though a “typical” regime with snow chances will still be in the 40s or even 50s. We’re probably done with sustained cold after the next few days. Not saying we don’t get some truly cold days. But not weeks of it. But a regime wit a high of 45 when it’s sunny in March can be plenty cold enough to snow

I actually agree with this but without the crazy stupid 1960 comp Dude can’t just make a projection without comparing it to the most extreme example of what he is talking about.

18z AIFS was our win scenario. all ens guidance now shows this at day 5. This general idea seems locked in now The decaying nao block X has retrograded to Hudson Bay. There is a strong 50/50 feature Y from a strong wave that was forced under the retrograding block. The pacific wave Z is entering the southwest. The flow in front of it will prevent it from gaining too much latitude so long as it ejects quickly. Yes the pacific has gone to absolute shit. But because the antecedent pattern was good we have a window of opportunity here. We want a healthy wave to eject and as quickly as possible imo. The 18z AIFS did this. The 18z EPS looked like it was also but doesn’t go out far enough. But I’ll take this… the gfs products are washing more of the wave out and absorbing most of it into the approaching north pacific trough. This means a weaker delayed wave. that’s a loss BTW a “Hudson High” regime actually used to be a cheat code to a snowstorm here absent other features we typically look for PNA, NAO… historically I found numerous Baltimore snowstorms where a high there seemed to be the main feature and it snowed despite flaws elsewhere. But I’ve noted those have gone extinct recently and that some recent examples ended up slightly too warm and “perfect track rainstorms” A recent example was a storm around the Super Bowl in 2023 I think. This will be a good test to see if this can still work! Assuming a wave ejects.

It’s out. Targets central and southern VA the most but still a good number of hits up our way. It was a colder souther run than 12z. Same as the op.

It’s not a 60 day lag but yes what’s happening there has a downstream impact on us. The impact is much faster than 60 days.

Aifs trended colder too. Most of the misses are to the south not north.

There is a lag. I’m worried about CAPEs 18-20 window. I think that might end up too warm. I think we have a shot for the 15th threat if it ejects a healthy wave in time. The longer it waits the worse it gets.

The AI models don’t resolve those kinds of details well. They’re not trying to. They are good imo with the synoptic level setup. Track is major features. I wouldn’t worry about its thermals. This run was a snowstorm. Some of the past ones were rain and the funky snow map showed snow and I didn’t feel like arguing about it.

@Stormchaserchuck1 one thing though, legit point of contention, isnt what the nao is a few days before the storm more important than the day of? By then the tracks are set. So many of our storms the nao was near neutral the day of but was set up by a -nao leading up to the storm.

This was a colder run and legit snow. Some past runs were showing snow on the clown maps but had questionable thermals

But you’re missing Grayhats analysts over in the other thread

Dunno the euro stuff actually improved the Atlantic presentation leading into next weekend with a monster 50/50. GEFS went the other way. Mixed messages. AIFS just dropped pretty good run. Im Not saying I think a snowstorm is likely but I’ve seen this setup work. -pna with cold in front of an ejecting pac wave and a 50/50. It’s happened. Could end up warm. That’s definitely a threat. But I could see it work. That’s all I’m saying.

You aren’t super annoying. He is. We debate with you logically and with respect. Just because I sometimes argue with you doesn’t mean I don’t like or respect your analysis. He is just wrong. It might end up too warm for the storm next week but all he keeps doing is cherry picking the warmest op model each cycle and in most cases not even using the right time period. You make legit arguments. He is trolling.

stop gaslighting I saw multiple people give you constructive criticism over the last couple months and you just keep posting garbage. Which means it’s one of 2 things You’re trolling in which case you should be banned Or you’re just incapable of being better in which case you should stop and learn instead of posting all this crap Back in the early 2000s I was a lurker for years in various weather boards before I started to try to contribute