psuhoffman

We pop a +400 ridge in the pad multiple times every damn winter now. You can’t hardly find any examples of that even in the absolute worst PDO winters in the past prior to 2000 so of course there are no examples.

There are some examples of +200-250 N pad ridges and snow…but a +250 ridge in 1960 is probably a +400 now! Heights are higher! So you won’t see that because a +400 ridge was unheard of in the past and would have been so anomalous for that period it would have dominated the pattern.

Omg we are talking past each other. Yes since 2017 -pna hasn’t worked. I’ve said that. But that’s one of the reasons since 2017 has been the worst 9 year snow drought in our history. You’re using the absolute worst 9 years EVER as your baseline! If that’s what you’re saying is normal we’re Fooked and I might as well find a new hobby. I’m saying I am assuming things go back to normal (or at least better than the last 9 years have been) at some point. Baltimore is only averaging 12” if snow since 2016! There are 2 reasons for that. 1) we’ve been in a hostile PDO pac regime. Past periods like this were low snow periods. But this one has been worse. Much worse! Why? Because we aren’t even getting the fluke occasions snows we used to get in a crap pacific pattern. You think that continues? You think 12” is what is normal in Baltimore now?

Most of our snowstorms with a hostile PNA were warm storms that were barely cold enough to snow with warm temps on either side of the storm. Lots of examples where it was 48 the day before and 47 the day after and like 55-60 within a few days either side. At least the Jan Feb ones. March we have more examples of colder regimes with a hostile PNA due to shorter wavelengths. But we have snowed in “warm” regimes before if we get a perfect storm track. Feb 1987 being the best example!

My kids don’t watch it! Have you watched some of the past shows? Or some of the stuff on MTV? I probably don’t want them seeing some of that no…but I don’t remember the outrage at this stuff that’s been going on for YEARS. It’s been like 20 years since the wardrobe malfunction and forget the mistake how bout the fact he was mock groping her which caused the malfunction. This is a lost cause and been this way a long time so why the sudden outrage now? I suspect I know why.

NAO is trending negative again toward the end of Feb. Pac ridge is becoming a WPO poleward ridge linking to the AO. Yea the pna sucks but in late Feb and March we should be able to overcome that. At least we have in the past. PNA is the most important index the first 1/3 of winter, equal with AO the middle 3rd, and dropped in importance once past Feb 15 in my snowstorm analysis.

Have you plotted them when there isn’t a strong PNA? A mean will miss anomalies or exceptions to a rule.

But you’re acting like we can’t snow with a shitty pacific. Early in the season the season that’s true. Back when I looked at every 5”+ Baltimore snow I did note there are almost no December or early Jan snows without PNA EPO help. None. But Feb and March have a ton of snows with a hostile EPO PNA. And in most of those it was a setup very similar to this. A split flow and The Atlantic helped suppress a pac wave that ejected from the southwest and it had to work with marginal pace puke air. None of them were cold storms. Some were storms where it was 50 the day before and after the storm and it snowed with temps of 33 degrees during the storm. But we had a ton of those storms. Now I have also noted there been extinct for a while now. And the last several examples of an attempt at these ended up perfect track rainstorms. One was that storm around the Super Bowl in 2023. These haven’t been working anymore. Lately the pacific puke air masses have been too warm to overcome even when a storm is suppressed under us. It’s just a 38 degree rainstorm. Maybe that’s the new reality. Maybe I’m stubborn and don’t want to admit this doesn’t work anymore because some of these storms were my favorites. Wet snow paste bombs in otherwise garbage patterns. Take a look at the Feb 1987 storm. The pac was utter garbage but the Atlantic forces that wave under us and we had a snowstorm with temps of like 32-34 degrees the whole storm! Also historically you can’t use the same heights the overall heights are much much higher now. A +250 ridge in 1960 would be a +400 now!

But what’s happening out in the central pacific hasn’t impacted the North America longwave pattern YET. It will. We are going to pay the price for that ridge out there eventually. The nao might mute it some but payment will come due. But what’s happening over N Amerca matters more. That ridge out there matters because it will cause the next pac trough to really dig and amplify into the west. THAT is what will jump a ridge in the east. There are steps. Because the antecedent pattern was good and there is some residual blocked nature to the N Amer flow the downstream impacts are delayed some, not as immediate as in recent years when things were already bad and that kind of ridge would torch is right quick. But there the location and depth of the trough our west is similar to the Hudson Bay high comp. Yes the central pacific ridge is different but they only matters once it causes the pna to tank imo.

But that comp would also show a massive -pna trough along the west coast. THAT is what causes the ridge in the east. It hasn’t happened YET there. It’s coming. A day later and then 2 days after that yes the east will ridge. Not every situation is the same. You’re ignoring that the central pacific ridge has not yet had the downstream impact on the pna that comes BEFORE what happens here. You’re just applying a general mean. Well if that was the case we might as well always say it won’t snow because snow is an anomaly not normal and not the likely outcome ever.

It’s not that different. I’m the comp the ridge is more in the wpo area but the downstream trough is very similar and that’s what’s more important. That north pac ridge has just gone up and hasn’t yet caused the deep -pna that will eventually wreck our pattern. I do think we see a warmer period than guidance is showing AFTER PD weekend. But you’re acting like that ridge goes up and immediately eastern US torches. First it needs to cause the PNA reaction then a couple days later we torch. There is a window first. We don’t have any arctic air to work with though it’s a split flow with marginal air so that’s the issue. The pacific hasn’t had time to impact us YET there. It will soon after. Then for how long before we recover becomes the next question and I agree with you probably by the very end of Feb.

Problem with that comp is there is no consistency. It includes some of our snowiest El Niños and some of the least snowy. The mean is just an average of radically different years. I don’t see a pattern that’s useful there. Could be 1964 or 1995 lol. Actually I think on the whole snowfall would be above avg in the subset

No no no. Nice try but you don’t get to own every permutation of fail. Of course it’s probably going to fail, almost all our threats fail because it’s hard to get a snowstorm here. Way more had to go right than wrong. You can’t say the problem is it’s going to be too warm then claim a win if the storm gets suppressed lol You might still win with the too warm idea anyways. Frankly every one of these Hudson high threats the last 10 years has ended up too warm. This look used to work. We’ve had so many awesome wet snow paste bombs in this type of pattern. But they’ve gone extinct and every recent example ended up rain. Does this work anymore? Because some of our best snows were in this comp but lately it’s been too warm for this setup to work

I mean like I said he isn’t my style BUT he’s been on the billboard top 20 artists list for the last few years and was even number 1 for a while last year and just won a ton of Grammys. So…these people acting like no one wanted this…either are unaware of the fact there are other demographics besides them that exist and watch the Super Bowl…or they are performing for reasons that will remain unsaid.

This. I’m not a fan, although to be fair I’ve never given him a chance. But I don’t get the outrage. Actually, sadly I do. But I remember a funny line comedian Steve Hoffstetter said once about people that leave nasty comments about art posted online…”instead of complaining about some random piece of art that no one forced you to watch you could just watch stuff you like next time”. You could have a conversation with someone during halftime if you don’t like the show. Frankly I haven’t watched a halftime show in like 10 years!

Is it possible that for once “what could go right” happens instead of…what we’re used to

I don’t think that’s the intent. CAPE can correct me if I’m wrong but genuine comments and questions are ok. But this thread is a place to actually analyze without 500 clown snow maps and bickering. This way those that want that kind of more “fun” relaxed but storm related banter have that thread and here we can do deeper analysis without wading through the BS. It’s a way to have both.

I was talking about grayhat

Here is the problem with what you’re doing. Yea…every single threat we identify at day 10 is likely to fail. And it’s not even close. Many of these we now are like 5-10% chances. So if you just follow climo and say it’s not gonna snow you’ll be right 90% of the time. But it also means you will miss every single time it does snow. You’ll never accurately identify the “threat” for snow. Think of it like a tornado watch. I’ve been under one maybe a hundred times. Only once did a tornado end up affecting me. Did they mean the other 99 were a mistake? No they were identifying the threat. If they went with climo theyd never issue a tornado watch and be right most of the time but catastrophically wrong when a tornado does hit! It’s also like sports. I could just say the Eagles won’t win the super bowl Every single year and I’d be right 95% of the time but what fun is that?

He is in southern Delaware. This next threat was never good for him. He is very transparent.

Yea for the lowlands to “win” in a thermal regime like this you’d need a true coastal track. The problem is the wave is de-amplifying as it hits the Atlantic flow. So I don’t see how that scenario is on the table. Ideally you’d want a weak wave initially that amplifies on the coast but that’s not on the table. The win for areas NW of 95 is a stronger wave to the west that transfers just in time. Maxes dynamic cooling to take advantage of the marginal cold we have. The reason that could work is there isn’t some deep phased trough to our west this time. There is a split flow with the NS out the FCKN way for once and a cut off system traversing under the NS flow. So there isn’t that screaming SW wind ahead of the wave to destroy our mid level thermals. A marginal cold can work here but the issue for SE is 95 is that because of the flow deamplifying we need a stronger wave to our west to get anything and that will wreck the low level thermals for coastal areas.

GFS is on Chucks team. It’s weaker with the flow and allows the pacific wave to gain too much latitude before transferring.

Except right now it’s not snowing for the opposite reason you said. But you don’t actually know enough or care enough for that to matter. For you all that matters is it’s not snowing. Not the why. Because you weren’t analyzing the specifics of this synoptic event you were just bitching about our unfavorable snow climo. And greyhat is a troll who is gaslighting everyone. You know how I know…he has made the same “mistake” a dozen times. He will take the warmest thermal plot he can find within 24 hours of a threat and post it. The warmest model in a cycle or a panel that’s 24 hours after the snow threat when it’s warmed up…and he keeps doing that! If it was an accident, if he just kept making mistakes because he is new, wouldn’t he sometimes accidentally post the coldest model or accidentally the right time? No…because he is doing it on purpose and acting like he is just some newb who can’t help it. And I’ve noticed he does it the most when It’s a storm that is worse for his area. This upcoming threat was never good for Delaware. Even if we get it to work out this is more a NW of 95 thing and so he is being a jackass and pissing in the pool because if he isn’t getting snow F everyone else. you both are transparent. He is a troll. You simply want snow and don’t care how or why and throw a tantrum when we go too long without it.

I don’t think this particular threat is high probability SE of 95. You’re right that area is in a double bind. Any stronger wave will initially try to gain latitude in the Midwest because there is some ridging there. It will get blocked by the Atlantic flow eventually but without arctic air in place not sure what the “Win” scenario for SE of 95 is. Even if things go the way we want it’s probably more a 95 NW threat. Even the snowier solutions were indicating that.

Yes it did. I was debating whether to say that or wait another run to see If it’s a blip