Jump to content

psuhoffman

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    26,480

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by psuhoffman

  1. psuhoffman
    If I didn’t have kids I’d be with you. But they want to make a huge snow fort like we did 3 years ago. I used my snow blower to push all the snow in the side yard (can’t F up the aesthetics) into a huge pile and we made a big castle. We need about 4” to be able to set it high enough not to wreck the grass and move enough snow. So that’s my bar. I need a 4” storm. Less is a headache because they will be driving me nuts wanting to do it and whining when it’s not enough. ETA if it’s dry snow it probably has to be more like 6” to work.
  2. psuhoffman
    For our purposes the 3rd wave was the most likely to produce a snowstorm. The 2nd was ok. The first was problematic because the front hasn’t fully cleared meaning if it amplified more than just a smidge it ends up north of us. Unfortunately in the last 24 hours everything has shifted towards what the euro saw first. That the waves would split the energy and the first wave has even become dominant again which was the idea 3-4 days ago! We still could luck our way to some snow because there is an arctic boundary stalled through our region but the ceiling on this setup is now very low.
  3. psuhoffman
    No we saw that fail a few times. But never this close in! Honestly when i realized this morning what the issue was and why the euro was doing what it was doing I had a suspicion it was right. It was opposite its two normal biases and it was due to resolved a very delicate play between two waves. That seemed something the better physics model was more likely to be resolving. But all the models seem to be too snowy in general. Im march 2018 every model showed me getting 6-10” 12 hours before the storm and I got nothing! I remember a storm in 2007 where the NAM was on an island snowing no snow when everything else showed 3-6” the day before and the NAM won. If anything shows a bad solution that’s the most likely one. And if everything shows snow they might all be wrong.
  4. psuhoffman
    Yes. Some of them have already been annoyed when there are posts implying this year settles is, because it will NEVER be that in their mind. They won’t even like when it’s brought up!
  5. psuhoffman
    Why not. He does that 20 times a year, is never ever right, but obviously it doesn’t affect his business so why stop?
  6. psuhoffman
    lol
  7. psuhoffman
    None of us are gonna make it
  8. psuhoffman
    2031. But 2003 and 2010 will still be in there. They will come down. But if things don’t turn around 2041 is when they might fall off a cliff once 2001-2010 age out.
  9. psuhoffman
    If you had a gun to your head right now and had to predict how many years before DCA/BWI/IAD (yes all 3 no fluke year where one spot just gets lucky) all record an above avg snowfall season. What would you say?
  10. psuhoffman
    Yea I was thinking 1966 and 1987 were top analogs and both had a January 10 day period very similar to this pattern where a tpv got trapped under a block. And both lead to back to back snowstorms here. But I wonder based on recent results if it’s harder to get the NS to dig enough for that to work. Seems whenever we need the NS it’s typically not digging far enough south and it’s got a million fast moving vorts running interference. Those 2 are related. But I think we would be better off without the tpv. Of course then the not cold enough issue might come back.
  11. psuhoffman
    Fair enough. I’m getting pretty numb at this point. I’m getting a kick out of all the posts by people trying to convince themselves when deep down they know. Last time it was trying to convince themselves that the typical north warmer trend that happens 90% wouldn’t. This time it was trying to convince them the complicated NS play nice and phase solution would be the right one dispute the best model saying no no no. But we all knew. I don’t even get that upset anymore. I’m almost relieved. It’s more stressful knowing the rug pull is coming and know knowing when. Now it feels like freedom. Miserable snowless freedom.
  12. psuhoffman
    This looked good But I guess it depends what your goal is. If you just want to maybe see a coating it looks ok.
  13. psuhoffman
    I didn’t realize we all moved to the VA capes!
  14. psuhoffman
    I’ve never liked the tpv on top of us. It guarantees every threat is complicated and needs NS cooperation
  15. psuhoffman
    I always thought “next” was partly in jest and meant to mean this run says next. No further analysis of this run needed. Never bothered me. The fact it meant the run sucks bothers me. It not whatever adjectives we use.
  16. psuhoffman
    For the love of god everyone put him on ignore
  17. psuhoffman
    I gave up on the idea of a bigger snow when I saw all guidance trend towards the euros idea of keying on the lead SW (or second if you count that weak front runner) but hope we can end on a compromise that leaves us a light event. Avoid Jis 8 to 0 scenario. But we’re living dangerously now with how this is trending.
  18. psuhoffman
    This isn’t an easy storm to make early model run projections because a lot of what goes one early with the lead wave is just noise. It’s how 2 and 3 interact that matters and that happens late.
  19. psuhoffman
    It's almost identical to the 12z GGEM at the same time
  20. psuhoffman
    Time for the ICON to forget to load the only 3 panels we care about
  21. psuhoffman
    yea it is what it is... we all know who the JV players are, but its still better to have them on our side than against. Preponderance of evidence and all that jazz...
  22. psuhoffman
    had a lot of blue!
  23. psuhoffman
    Comparing the NAM at 84 to this mornings 12z Global runs...it is most similar to the GGEM, not quite as amplified but significantly more amplified than the GFS. It was likely about to look good in the next couple frames IMO.
  24. psuhoffman
  25. psuhoffman
    We were talking about snow
×
×
  • Create New...