psuhoffman

The UK is a miss south...but in one way it's a win. We have 2 things we need here...precip and temps. The UK is colder! If the storm had tracked further north it would have been snow...no issues with that thermal profile as the storm slides to our south. That is important...the runs that are both weak AND warm are the really bad runs... I'll take the UK look...we would just need the storm to be slightly more amplified/north to win.

it's still over 100 out and things are close...stop over reacting to every run. It's unlikely but the solution we need is a minor adjustment still well within the margin or error of what guidance is currently showing. I think because this showed up 15 days out as a threat window...and we've been tracking it SOOOO long...people think it's closer than it is and are reacting to every run like we are 48 hours out and a trend means...thats it..this is the final solution. We are still 5 days away, time for things to wobble one away or the other. We need a slightly stronger storm that takes a perfect track. That is going to be difficult..we will need luck...but its not like we need some HUGE adjustment from what guidance is showing. Depending on where you're located of course...

We still have a thread the needle option for PD. It's actually pretty simple...strip away the mumbo jump technical stuff and we basically need a more amplified wave that takes the perfect track. That's it. Maximize dynamic cooling with a marginal airmass, perfect track to get heavy precip without any SE flow. Too weak and its rain. Too far north and its rain. We need both the track and the amplitude of the wave to be perfect. It's not complicated...but also not likely, but we're dealing with a marginal setup so we need everything to break out way. Time to get lucky! Long range... I was optimistic 2 days ago, but that was based on the EPS/GEPS look in the long range...I was tossing the GEFS...well because...its been hot garbage for a long time. Unfortunately everything has moved towards it the last 48 hours. It's not necessarily the absolute worse look...the Atlantic is still workable...the pacific is bad but its not the absolute worse...it would only take some slight adjustments here and there to turn it into a good enough look and adjustments that are well within likely errors...but of course those errors could be the other way and it ends up a total shutout look and winter is over. We will see. We need the NAO to trend a little more negative, we need that WPO ridge to extend over the top and put some pressure on that AK vortex. Those two things would take the current look the end of Feb and make it a lot more workable.

I have been crazy busy at work and don't have time to catch up at the moment so I apologize if this is redundant. But after looking at all of last nights data it's clear there is a path to a snow, especially NW of 95, but it's a narrow one. We need basically the 0z euro solution, or something close to it...0zGGEM. A storm that is amplified enough to dynamically cool the marginal airmass, and in the case of the euro maybe even amplified enough to draw down some of the cold that is just north of us. But this is a narrow path...but the reason that solution keeps showing up randomly across guidance is it's still there as a possible outcome. But the more likely outcome obviously is one of the many other options...either the wave isn't amplified enough and slides south...or we get light rain, or it amplifies but amps TOO much and ends up tracking too far inside and the snow is up in PA like the 6z Euro. There are several options left and only one leads to snow but it's still there. Maybe we get lucky this time! We're definitely due. For places SE of 95 they are in a bit of a double bind. We need an amplified system because of the marginal airmass. A weak wave will just be light rain. But an amplified system tracking in close enough would likely have too much SE wind component for those locations...and without any elevation...it's just a really uphill battle there. Not totally impossible but it would take everything going absolutely perfect...even in the good track amplified option.

We never have a good chance of an all snow event in any pattern

But that has nothing to do with my point. You’re focused on this synoptic setup and I’m focused on something that’s skewing the underlying pattern behind the synoptic setup

Depends on whether there is a storm or not. It will be a lot warmer if it’s sunny than raining or snowing.

We snowed with a -pna in the past. Not when it’s -4stdv you’re right. But why is it that when the pna goes negative it’s never -1 it’s -3 now? You’re beating around it.

Chuck even recently 75% of the globe is red. We just got lucky the tiny speck of cold was over us. But what about the rest of the time? How do we snow when we’re not lucky enough to have the rare cold anomaly over us when the rest of the globe is a hopeless torch of +anomalies too warm to us to snow. You said it. We don’t her marginal anymore. Because the whole planet is tiny pockets of cold surrounded by warmth.

You were sooooo close

You serious? Depends on the situation. For example I’ve been forced to advocate for positions I knew were weak and not clear winning arguments. What you do in those cases is very different. Then it becomes about minimizing damage. Attempting to deflect and exaggerate. But if you know the point you want to make is valid…1) focus on 2-3 points no more. 2) know how to articulate it clearly. 3) don’t let the other person deflect. When they try to take the debate off on a tangent redirect and reframe it back where you need it.

ok so why aren’t we getting marginal setups anymore!

Don’t

Yea but if heights are higher now, and the are, when the pacific configuration is hostile it’s more hostile. That’s my whole point. We don’t her marginal anymore. We get either good or hopeless which means the marginal part of our past snow climo is now missing. You’re so close but you’re twisting yourself into a pretzel to ignore the common threads tying this all together.

I know the answer. I’m asking YOU!

JFC I was starting to think I wasn’t articulating well enough.

That’s the period I am taking about Chuck. I said find me another period In the fucking past close to that level of warm anomaly

It’s like my points go right through you. It was cold because the whole other was perfect. I’m talking about when the pattern is not good. We torch anytime the pattern is bad because the pac is overwhelming now because heights are higher and so when there is a n pac ridge it’s not +100 it’s 400.

Ok then find me any 5 year period where the N pac averages +50m like 2020-2025. Fuck find me a period that was even +40. You can’t. Because it was never warm enough to get those kinds of heights before.

If we can’t snow without a EPO PNA ridge it’s a huge deal because a lot of our snow used to come withoit that. There was snow before 2017. And 2017 on has been our worst god damn snow period ever and your acting like that’s normal AND saying climate change is no big deal. You can’t have both of those takes they don’t coexist

We’ve had this same confluence of crappy Atlantic and pacific before. The 1970s were an almost identical phenomenon. But look at these two anomaly plots. Why is now so much more red. Why Chuck?? It’s the same pattern so why is it warmer? has it occurred to you that the reason it’s snowing less is because when we get a crappy pattern it’s even more crappy now. About 40% of our snowfall used to come in flawed patterns. And those snows were barely food enough 50 years ago. We couldn’t afford what those 2 plots above show has happened! Yes we still snow when the pattern is good. But when it’s not good it’s hopeless now and you’re ignoring that. You’re pretending it’s always been this way. They getting snow requires the pattern to be perfect.

Thanks for answering a question I didn’t ask. But still waiting for you to answer why we keep seeing ridges that were unheard of in the past?

You just deflected right past my point and launched right back into yours. Ignoring the “why do we keep seeing ridges that were unheard of 50 years ago commonly now”

You’re still missing my point. We don’t get marginally bad pac patterns anymore because heights are increasing. Ridges are getting stronger. A +400dm ridge in the n pac was freaking unheard of 50 years ago and now it happens multiple times every year! When the pac goes bad it doesn’t go a little bad it goes to hell in a hand basket and overwhelms the pattern with warmth. But you’re acting like that is normal and not part of climate change. You’re not supposed to see a +400dm ridge this often. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say this has nothing to do with climate change then act like something that was unheard of in the past is normal.