Jump to content

psuhoffman

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    26,480

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by psuhoffman

  1. psuhoffman
    This enough blocking Chuck?
  2. psuhoffman
    EPS trended south with the SLP but not snowfall. Thats likely due to the thermal issues south of the PA line. Even with a better track there is diminishing return to a point unless things trend colder.
  3. psuhoffman
    Yea I’m not trying to argue why it’s not colder. I’m just making the observation that compared to past periods with a similar pattern the temps being shown aren’t as cold as I expected.
  4. psuhoffman
    That’s what I said. Given the long wave pattern it should be colder than what guidance is snowing. That’s it. Not sure why that seems to have been controversial
  5. psuhoffman
    Or something else also
  6. psuhoffman
    It snows in Mexico at elevation.
  7. psuhoffman
    And I said I’m frustrated. I expected colder. Something similar to 1958 and 2010. I didn’t said I’m throwing in the towel or changing anything yet. Sometimes people overreact to every random thought I post.
  8. psuhoffman
    I waant using the gfs. I’ve been looking at the euro control and ensemble members. They have been consistently showing underwhelming temps. A couple runs ago the euro had a storm that should have been a big snow for NC/SC but was just rain. Not even close really. And the reason the snow mean isn’t lighting up more than it is for the Feb 21-24 period is that there are quite a few perfect track rainstorms within the ensemble members. The eps h5, slp, and precip look amazing. Then the snow output looks blah. The reason is the temps.
  9. psuhoffman
    Ignore Ji. But given such an extreme -epo, -nao, -AO pattern the temperatures being shown on guidance are pretty underwhelming. I didn’t expect it to be arctic cold. But even with a good flow we would need a damn perfect no wiggle room wave pass with some of the thermals.
  10. psuhoffman
    I’m getting a little frustrated that temps look so marginal even during a period with extreme blocking with a monster 50/50. Case in point that’s a great setup for a Deep South snow but they aren’t close on temps. Even when the storms are suppressed they’re just rain to our south. I expected to see much more cold.
  11. psuhoffman
    The gfs keeps running that NS wave over the top of the PD STJ wave. We need that to either not be there or further south and phase.
  12. psuhoffman
    Dude he is curled up on the floor in a corner babbling incoherently right now.
  13. psuhoffman
    Correlation with no causation is just random chance. First of all, there is a very clear sweet spot between Feb 5 and Feb 18. That 2 week period contains an inordinate amount of our big snows. 11 of the top 25 came in that period. Obviously those 2 weeks are our best chance. But outside those 2 weeks the other 14 storms were scattered throughout the rest of the winter pretty randomly between Dec 10 and March 30. But it’s only 14 storms. And some are clustered on top of each other like a couple storms that happened mid Dec and a few in late Jan. A couple in early March. So there are naturally going to be dead zones also just by chance. There was no top 25 storm from Dec 20-Jan 6 but you don’t obsess about those weeks. No storm Jan 10-Jan 21 either. There was no storm Feb 1-4. You think that means anything? Why is it only the last week of Feb that you obsess over and not all the other random periods we haven’t had a top snowstorm yet? Second, PD is Feb 19 this year. It’s late. All those storms ended by the 18th. The storm were tracking for Pd would start on the 19th and carry into the 20th. That’s after all those storms. We’ve never had a top storm after Feb 18. So explain why just because it’s PD that somehow makes it more likely? Why does the weather care it’s PD. Even if the PD3 storm hits it breaks this silly rule you’ve constructed because it’s a day after all those other storms in the dead zone.
  14. psuhoffman
    Chill. It won’t even really be Pd weekend anyways. The initial wave we were tracking for over Pd weekend is gone now. Squashed to nothing. The wave of interest now wouldn’t really hit us until Tuesday after PD anyways. It might start that Monday evening if you want to count that. With the timing changes of the waves I’m no longer sure which is the one. But I was pretty sure that wave we were initially tracking for around the 18-19 wasn’t it. And sure enough that’s totally gone now.
  15. psuhoffman
    Guidance is slowing down the STJ wave which gives it more is a chance to catch a phase with the NS. Actually Im not even sure it’s the same wave we were tracking a few days ago. That one gets totally squashed around the 18th. What was two waves after is now one stronger wave on the GEFS.
  16. psuhoffman
    Yea control confirms it’s squashed everything and retrogrades the block all the way into central southern Canada. But eps looks much better.
  17. psuhoffman
    This has my attention. EPS trend since 12z yesterday
  18. psuhoffman
    Yea if you look at the better guidance than the gfs they all are way more aggressive with the blocking and thus have a further south boundary for the period. That is bad for the PD threat unless there is a phased bomb. But it sets up Feb 21-24 period nicely.
  19. psuhoffman
    I’ve been absent in here because the GFs has been so awful that frankly until something else joins this club I just cant get excited. That said the other guidance has kinda been trending towards it. Maybe once in a while the gfs can stumble onto the right idea.
  20. psuhoffman
    The gfs is slowly getting to the blocking the other guidance has. So it’s shifting this weird solution south. In the end once the gfs adjusts to reality I don’t thing this evolution can work for us. The boundary is going to be much further south than the gfs thinks because it’s not resolving the block correctly. In the end the only way I see the PD threat working is if a NS wave can dig in behind the stj wave and phase/buckle the flow and bomb it up the coast. There are a couple NS waves that could do it. Euro control was very close last night but missed the phase by a hair.
  21. psuhoffman
    Guidance hasn’t even resolved the Feb 13-14 wave yet. Were a long way from having any clarity on this one.
  22. psuhoffman
    Once it missed the phase with the NS it was game over. The stj wave can’t gain latitude with that NS flow right over top of us. We need a phase for this to work at our latitude. It’s why I pegged the next wave as the better chance. Because by then the NS should be relaxing and maybe a stj wave can work without needed a complicated scenario. But this has huge huge potential if it does in fact pjase. Gfs was super close.
  23. psuhoffman
    This has huge potential if it phases. It’s not as simple as a straight Nino stj setup though so don’t expect stable solution to snow at crazy leads.
  24. psuhoffman
    It misses the phase. Slides the NS over the top instead of phasing in.
  25. psuhoffman
    2018 had great Atlantic locking but a mediocre pac due to the Nina. Shorter wavelengths mitigate the Nina central pac ridge in March which is why often if we get a snowstorm in a Nina it’s March but it’s still not ideal. There haven’t been many ninos where the block set in this late. You have to go back to 1964 and 1958 to find a comp March Nino pattern.
×
×
  • Create New...