psuhoffman

before people think you're being serious it does drop about .75 qpf across the area, which for the JMA is folks worthy. It actually only has slightly more QPF, about 1" for Boston.

That's a hard one... especially if you get stuck out in that kind of cold...things could get stiff

I still have stock left from the super bowl party

We aren't in super crazy unicorn range anymore...looking at the performance of the current models since their major upgrades, and I include my tracking of big storms for other places not just here, they don't miss major systems as often as they once did. Actually this is exactly when I would want a storm to pop up, close enough we don't have to stress through weeks of "its probably not gonna hold" territory but at just the right range where I don't start to panic why its not showing yet...if we get inside 140 without a storm showing...it probably isn't happening.

@Ji would like to talk about Dec 2000, March 01 and Boxing Day

Shit wrong storm...yay now we've brought up all 3 of our biggest busts of the last 30 years...awesome. But that storm has even less in common IMO. It was purely NS miller b, not hybrid. From 5 days out the models were wrong because they thought the STJ wave would be out in front and phase and there would be a hybrid system. Once they latched onto the idea it would be a NS only miller b it became more iffy but some runs still showed a hit because back then they liked to tease us with miller b's when in reality they almost NEVER develop fast enough, that one Feb 1996 one being the only exception I can ever remember where a pure NS miller b bombed in time to get the DC area into heavy snow. What are the odds this becomes like that? Not much imo. First of all the southern stream is way out ahead of the NS on this one so there is no mechanism to totally squash it. If the NS squashes it...there wouldn't be a storm because there is no strong NS SW to work with here. Also, models are better at day 5 then they were at day 3 back then. We don't see major errors on significant systems like that as often. Anything is "possible" but I don't see many similarities to this setup. Now can we stop bringing up every horrible fail we've had.

@stormtracker what's going on up in here...people talking about boxing day and March 2001? WTF

Before Ji starts a damn panic, I don't see any similarities to Boxing day The issue there was the northern stream wave was out ahead of the STJ wave initially and coming in much further east...so it acted as a suppressive not amplifying factor initially. Note the NS dropping down ahead of the STJ wave into the Midwest and OH valley here. Then the NS dug too much, forcing the system way down off the SE coast and squashing anything trying to come up into the TN valley Lastly the NS cut off but it did so to our south, coming in at a bad trajectory, then elongated N-S with two vort maxes rotating around ...which essentially slingshot the system up the coast but off the coast...and with the cutoff H5 right under us there was no way to get moisture transport to the west into the mid atlantic. If this fails it would have to be in a different way, because it's not that similar a progression on the guidance right now. It would take monumental changes to get that kind of thing.

Why do you hate yourself?

It was hard for me to tell, pacman ate the important pixels on my screen

Naw I'm all in on this one. That doesn't mean were all getting 20" or there is absolutely no way it could go wrong...but this one is different from all the others recently because the pattern supports this. This is what's supposed to happen. I've liked the pattern setup for this from way before any model showed anything like this. For a while I was wondering "why aren't the models showing solutions like this" given the pattern. When the pattern has major flaws I see them and point them out as reasons it might not happen, and often those flaws are. This time I am looking for reasons it will happen because the pattern is right.

I'm actually with you on this... this isn't the 90s anymore...the BIG ones dont just pop up and the whole "that's just where we want it" crap has never worked for us in the last 10 years. Around 150 hours out the models actually have done a pretty good job of getting fairly close to the right idea. That doesn't mean the details are perfect and you get the random hiccup runs and outliers you have to toss...but from 150 on in if you take the consensus of all the guidance its been pretty good at showing about what would happen with major systems.

Was this your "don't make me stop this car" speech?

This ones happening

@mitchnick don't let us down with the AI update

even the 50% snowfall is nuts It's been since 2016 that we saw these kinds of numbers from a single event at 5 days out. Yes I know this week at that range had similar totals but it was from multiple waves which is different.

It didn't used to be that way, used to come on more clean, something happened this year when its glitchy. There was another outlet, weathermodels or something like that with very similar graphics, might check that out after this season.

EPS!!!!!!!

I always look at the h5/mslp overlay first, when it got to about 120 I had a good feeling, the TPV lobe was disconnected from the Atlantic Vortex creating a weakness in between for it to amplify more...so I was expecting something good...but for some reason it then jumped to 150 hours, and I had to check to make sure I was looking at the right thing it was almost unbelievable. I didn't expect THAT

they look great... I'm not ignoring them, they support a more amplified solution for sure

+NAO

984 TUCKED off Delmarva

I know I'm probably behind, been actually working lol but if the surface looks anything like the h5 I just saw....HOLY FING SHIT!!!

GEM ens

Who has the UKMET ensembles?