Jump to content

psuhoffman

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    27,488

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by psuhoffman

  1. 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.
  2. 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!
  3. 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?
  4. psuhoffman
    lol
  5. psuhoffman
    None of us are gonna make it
  6. 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.
  7. 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?
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. psuhoffman
    I didn’t realize we all moved to the VA capes!
  12. psuhoffman
    I’ve never liked the tpv on top of us. It guarantees every threat is complicated and needs NS cooperation
  13. 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.
  14. psuhoffman
    For the love of god everyone put him on ignore
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. psuhoffman
    It's almost identical to the 12z GGEM at the same time
  18. psuhoffman
    Time for the ICON to forget to load the only 3 panels we care about
  19. 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...
  20. psuhoffman
    had a lot of blue!
  21. 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.
  22. psuhoffman
  23. psuhoffman
    We were talking about snow
  24. psuhoffman
    The "other side" of whatever slight warm up we get is now on the GFS and its wicked cold. This is much closer to a Feb 2003, 2015 look than 2010 which is fine, just a different way to win. The ideal progression would be that dumps the cold back down...then the NAO tanks again with cold trapped under it. That's how we roll through into March with threat after threat. And its actually what the guidance suggests.
  25. psuhoffman
    I don't love the current look, BUT I do like where it's heading. It was all NS before today, which is why we weren't getting any good looks at all. The euro is kind of a hybrid now, it does activate a weak STJ wave and begins to amplify it while its still in the TN valley. I would love to see it become STJ dominant v a hybrid but its already a much better look that a pure NS miller b and its trending towards more STJ interaction today. If we get one more trend the same way as the last 24 hours suddenly we have a big dog look. IMO its already moved towards a progression that is at least unlikely to miss us completely, but the threat that it is only a modest event here and more significant further north is real.
×
×
  • Create New...