psuhoffman

A model output isn't a forecast. It's a tool to be used to make a forecast.

Can we take the colder airmass on the NAM and apply it to the euro precip?

PNA values from that time period 1966 1 15 -1.725 1966 1 16 -1.642 1966 1 17 -1.534 1966 1 18 -1.542 1966 1 19 -1.654 1966 1 20 -1.739 1966 1 21 -1.622 1966 1 22 -1.402 1966 1 23 -1.269 1966 1 24 -1.26 1966 1 25 -1.204 1966 1 26 -1.255 1966 1 27 -1.369 1966 1 28 -1.562 1966 1 29 -1.333 1966 1 30 -0.903 1966 1 31 -0.927 However, I agree that while the numerical value is a -PNA there is a HUGE difference between a -PNA linked up with the NS in a full latitude trough and a -PNA due to cut off STJ energy crashing into the southwest with ridging over top of it. But technically it is still a -PNA. I was just trying to see if you think that setup can still work. It appears you do.

During most -PDO cycle ninos we still get a lot of -PNA, but with a block its supposed to overcome it. A -PDO can actually be awesome with blocking if the systems slide east under the block instead of getting stuck out west with a SER linking to the block.

It was kind of doing the same thing the last few runs too. The thing is, as it was coming in, even before that feature, I was noticing its simply warmer. I was toggling between different features. Better high, more confluence, low in the same location...then I would look at the different thermals and it was simply warmer than the GFS and GGEM. Yes that trough doesn't help but there is a hint at that same feature on the GFS also, the difference might just be the GFS is a few degrees colder heading in and so we barely survive it.

But that's like 80% of this sub lol

EPS 6z v 12z. mostly its tightening up the edges and pinning down where that band will be. Unfortunately 95 is right on the edge and might end up on the wrong side.

I don’t know how to categorize it. There is no primary really. It’s nearly identical to the gfs. Better high heading in. More confluence. Same exact slp track. 1-2 mb deeper as it passes us. There is a bit more of that inverted feature. That seems to jump the thermals quick right over us. But maybe in the end it’s just a few degrees warmer and that makes a huge difference here.

Not to be a deb but honeslty the Kuchera map is closer to what I expect based on the thermals. The 10-1 is messed up and counting snow when there are some pretty dubious thermals.

looking at the thermals I don't see how that is correct. There are warm layers everywhere during the whole event. I would be shocked IF the euro is right if anyone east of the BR got more than an inch or two at most. It's not all that dissimilar from the GGEM just warmer. One reason its warmer is the coastal is way less of a defined feature initially until it gets to our latitude. It's more just a wave along an inverted trough with a southerly flow up into our area at the mid levels.

That trend continues at 72, high is MUCH better located on the Euro than the GFS, however that might be offset by more ridging in front of the wave.

Euro has slightly better confluence and High location than GFS at the same time at 63 hours...but the SW is weaker and further north. Not sure which is more important at this point.

NAM had that solution. Ya I know the NAM lol. I think it's likely going to be something from A or B, or maybe a compromise between the two. But C is lurking if there is any additional de amplification trend in the STJ wave.

The models are not "trending" or bouncing around so much as the operationals are simply randomly popping out solutions that fall within the still existing camps if you examine their ensembles. One solution has now been completely eliminated and that was the phased amplified system with a primary into the Ohio valley. That idea is pretty much dead. But within the ensembles there are still 3 camps left. We want the middle ground. But it's well within probabilities for 2 or 3 operational models to pull a solution from the same camp (like last night) but its just random chance. The 3 camps still left A. A little too much amplitude and lingering primary and the main snow shield goes just NW of us. This is a messy one with not a lot of snow for anyone because the primary is weak, the phased amplified solution is gone. But this would take a lighter snow event up into PA. B. The in between option, GFS and GGEM op solutions from 0z and 12z. No primary at all, coastal is just amplified enough to produce a thump snow targeting just NW of the fall line C. A weak sheared out mess with no significant snow anywhere. This solution might target DC south with the best qpf but it won't work with the marginal temps. The 6z EPS took a move towards Camp B but there was still a mix of all 3. GEFS is still a mix of all 3. GEPS is all option A and B. I don't think the models have trended yet, they seem to still just be pulling random options from within these established goalposts run to run.

There was a SHARP cutoff with a storm Dec 5 2003. There was a WAA wave that came out first and thumped NW of 95, the costal developed a day later and mostly missed us and hit New England. But the WAA lead wave had some local similarities to this. I remember I got 7" in western Fairfax county and inside the beltway was pretty much all rain.

That is awesome. This is a pretty good took that has the whole country if you want to waste a lot of time. https://en-us.topographic-map.com/map-hqf3/Baltimore/?center=39.43478%2C-77.33712&zoom=9

Given the marginal temps a thump scenario is our best simplest bet to get an area wide happy result.

I love that WXbell finally added this to their package. I was calculating it manually for a while but that was annoying. The median and snow probabilities show a much better representation of what guidance is predicting that the skewed means.

If you look at both the gefs and eps members there is a mix of all 3 possible outcomes. A 0z gfs ggem type sweet spot solution. some phasing and a primary with a NW solution A weak washed out solution It’s not shocking to see the 6z ops pull out from any of these camps. But it does seem the EPS as a whole took a step towards the option we want. All 3 camps still have support within the spread though.

On second viewing I do like the euro better. It lost the oh valley primary totally. It’s colder just now as much as we want. But I think it was heading in a better direction than the last 2 runs.

1001mb as it crosses Hatteras 999mb just southeast of OC 994 east of cape may. it doesn’t start to deepen until it’s east of us. That’s fine. It’s just warmer than the other 0z guidance. It trended better with the high than the 12z and 18z euro but it wasn’t to the gfs/ggem level and that made the difference. We don’t need any adjustment to the track or depth of the coastal. We just need it to be a couple degrees colder.

Upon closer look it’s slightly colder than 12z. And a pretty good improvement from. 18z. The op only went to 90 but it was headed towards a train wreck and there is a reason mo one posted the 18z eps control. This was a decent step better than that. Slightly better than 12z imo. But not the big jump like the gfs/ggem/uk

It trended better with the high but in the end it’s still warm. Looks similar to 12z euro

At 83 seeing the same trends as gfs. Stronger high further west but it’s not as strong as gfs was. But euro was warmer to begin with.