psuhoffman

I think that’s accurate. There are more ways to get some snow from a multiple wave solution but less chance of a huge storm. A more amplified wave introduces a MECS+ potential but a total fail if that one wave misses. I’ll take my chances with an amped up monster storm. Another 3-4” of snow won’t change my opinion of this winter at all. But a 10”+ storm definitely would.

The biggest issue I think the guidance has to resolve is how consolidated the pacific energy ends up. Guidance is split between multiple weaker wave solutions and two wave (lead weak wave followed by a more amplified follow up) solution. There are ways we could “win” in either permutation but until it’s known which we are dealing with the details can’t be known.

lol

Yea I think the idea is legit. But where the snow zone ends up, whether this ends up one stronger wave or multiple weaker boundary waves…major details that determine whose backyards get snow won’t be known for a while. But I agree confidence is increasing in the general flavor of the period.

@mitchnick but at this range I’m not married to any idea. I think this is a legit threat but we need to get closer to 100 hours before I’ll even try to get specific about it. And even then know further adjustments will happen. We’re still in the “this is interesting I’ll keep an eye on it” range.

At this range it was teasing us. But this is not the same situation or setup. It’s more similar to the Jan 25 storm and the AI did very well with that.

You don’t see the setup this clear on an ensemble this far out often. The crazy thing is the blocking is all that makes this work. Similar to Feb 2010, the pacific longwave pattern would normally scream huge SER but the displaced TPV and 50/50 there won’t allow it. The fight between the attempt to ridge in front of the approaching wave and the blocked in cold is what will create the threat. We’ve got snowstorms from this exact setup many times.

The median increased also!

You mthr FCKN ninja

AIFS EPS still very interested. Save yourselves time and don’t look at op runs past 100 hours. Not saying this is going to happen. There is uncertainty even among the various ensembles. But worrying about the op runs at this range will just add confusion and noise.

Who TF said the AIFS lost interest? It’s was the strongest signal across all the 12z guidance. mean more importantly the median is improving

All the models have that lead wave but it’s been mostly weak and way north so we weren’t paying attention. But given the seasonal trend it could shift south. And it will impact what happens after so we should pay attention.

I know, I've said this numerous times. I actually find your performace to be entertaining...but I know some do not. The bigger problem is there are now 100 others trying to do what you do...and it's hard to moderate them when one of the board OGs is doing it.

The thermal profile of the storm is fine...the track is just a slight bit inside what we want...adjust track of the secondary 50 miles SE and its a huge snowstorm 95 NW. I could waste my time digging into exactly why the track is slightly inside perfect but I am not going to because we are going to see way more error adjustment than 50 miles at this range...the whole thing is going to change...timing will adjust some, the thermals could get colder and then this track could work...the track could shift 100 miles either way...and those would be considered extremely minor errors and a huge win if thats all this adjusts from 200 hours out!

Who are you and what have you done with Ji

I would prefer the euro to be over amped and a little warm at this range...it's not far off synoptically from what we want. Not for that range.

It definitely seems like trolling...but the sad part is he probably is being serious

I tend to agree with this

after all the complaining of a torch and end of snow threats it's going to be funny if we end up worrying about suppression and a NC snowstorm again.

That's the front runner wave that's north of us on all guidance...it suppresses the actual threat and squashes it into nothing.

that reminds me a little of PD2 and I was just thinking...yea I'd love to get an all snow flush hit...but imagine if we got another QPF bomb that includes a significant amount of sleet...we'd have snow OTG up here into April! lol

I like to set my emotional compass based on what the 200 hour GFS op run shows. It's a stable way to live your life!

I held on to snow another couple hours up here but the snow started a couple hours later so it was a wash...the sleet was definitely dryer up here and less icy after the flip and I think that allowed the sleet to pile up a little bit more...it does seem like the snowcover is slightly thicker up here than in the Baltimore area for example...but honestly snowfall distribution was pretty uniform with this event until you got NW of Harrisburg where they stayed all snow and snowfall jumped up to 15" plus... but no one really got prolific snowfall totals because the best QPF occurred in the zone that ended up flipping to sleet which isn't too common but there was a really strong SW fetch at h8-h7 and it really blasted a warm layer much further north than typical when the boundary is that cold. Glass half full analysis: we managed to get an area wide 6-10" snow/ice storm despite a trough in the west and a system phasing way to our west Glass half empty: we only got 6-10" and flipped to sleet despite having one of the best arctic airmasses in place in a long long time

one of these years its finally going to happen and he will take a victory lap. BTW, if you include storms that happened before the holiday was changed to "Presidents Day" we've actually already had 4 major snowstorms that weekend. If you stretch it to include the Friday before a PD weekend it would be 6! The week of Feb 12-18 does seem to be a hot spot for major snowstorms. By far the greatest frequency of 10" plus events is that week. Other than that one week they are pretty evenly distributed randomly between mid December and mid March...but there is a weird spike that one week.

~10" if you include the sleet but the depth ended up around 8 after compaction. I know technically that gets recorded as 10" but it feels cheap since the depth never got above around 8.