psuhoffman

It’s kinda funny I haven’t even looked at anything past 90 hours yet. I’ve seen enough posts to know it goes on to show a snowstorm but I’m still parsing the 72-90 hour panels and comparing with the euro to try to figure out what’s causing the divergence and see if I can ascertain which progression is more likely. The details “after” are less important since they won’t be correct at that range anyways. But one progression gives us a legit chance at a big snow and the other does not. So figuring that out is all I care about right now. Wish I knew the biases and tendencies of the new GFS. Dumping too much energy into the west is an old school euro bias but I don’t know if that’s true anymore either.

Forgot to add that the major differences start relatively early, I could notice by day 3-4 that it was different from the euro and icon. So this “war” probably ends relatively soon as one camp is going to have to figure it out pretty soon.

The Gfs is still bringing the tpv east under the block and only dropping a piece in behind. The details may or may not work out but it at least still has a progression that puts us in the game. The TPV dropping wholly into the west is a game over scenario for anything other than a cool arctic front type deal.

No one extrapolated the NAM

The key is what the TPV does. Icon is back to the euro idea of 48 hours ago dropping the whole thing into the west. That pumps a ridge that links with the “block” creating just a full latitude ridge in the east. The solution we want is the tpv to side under the block and just a piece to drop in behind.

Yes but upon further inspection the trend toward a more northern stream dominant system continued. That’s a big problem for us. We know how a northern stream dominant miller b ends for us. 24 hours ago the trend was towards more of a hybrid. If this ends up northern stream dominant history suggests we end up on the losing side. More than any other feature the trend I want to see if back towards less northern stream dominant and more STJ interaction. It’s been going the wrong way recent runs. Still plenty of time for more changes.

Minor differences for that range but it’s more amplified and digging slightly further SW at 144 v 0z. I’d take it as a slight improvement.

It would be nice to get a big early season hit because I’ve noticed the forum is a lot less volatile and reactionary in seasons where the snow fix has already been satiated somewhat.

Icon has no western ridge Bigger issue is it retrogrades the block too far NW allowing the system to slide east instead of digging.

It outperforms any one model at shorter ranges. I have no idea what or how it calculates at that range. An average of wildly divergent solutions isn’t that useful.

If we can get it inside 5 days sure. But we’re way too far out at this point. I wouldn’t mind doing just a general pattern overview chat at some point either though. I’ll be honest though I don’t have as much time as I used too. So if I’m ever unable to host and anyone else wants to take over I’m great with that. But I’ll try to fit them in when warranted.

Mdecoy hacked your account

The dumb angle is always a problem.

Details like the double barrel thing are useless at this range. From a pattern sense, west NAO block, 50/50, western ridge, TPV under the block that rotates a lobe and dives down to our SW, yea this setup resembles lots of our big snowstorms. But also a lot of close misses. It’s similar to December 2009. But it’s also similar to December 2010! I posted the h5 of 6 storms once and 3 were HECS and 3 were total busts and you couldn’t tell the difference. The pattern is great. We need luck with the details now.

Feb 14 2014

I think some don’t realize that due to time dispersion at that range any low signature will be diffuse. Also often biased east because of outlier members that have a weaker solution along with the fact the low generally gets deeper as it progresses east. That’s a hell of a signature for that range. If it was 3 days away looking like that then we can worry.

Worth noting that. That’s all.

I almost said something then figured Naw let ‘em squirm a little.

@dtk or anyone else…did they ever update the gefs to be run off the new operational or is it still the old gefs?

It does look VERY euro like but a little less strung out and more dominant with the “second secondary” so a little better result. The double barrel structure still limits a top end outcome a bit but no one (except one persons) would complain. I still kinda doubt it ends up that way. Maybe. It could. But I’ve seen this look a lot at range and 90% of the time it ends up a more consolidated system when we’re talking about this kind of upper level feature involved.

Nice to meet you. I found this screen name laying on the ground discarded. Figured I’d pick it up and try it out. What’s up.

Why is this thread littered with mentions of every god awful bust we’ve ever experienced. Is this some kind of snow god reverse jinx or something???

It develops a double barrel structure because the initial wave escapes and a second secondary low develops near the better mid and upper level energy. Ratios would be VERY high for our area as all the snow comes associated with the upper level energy. 5-8" across most of the area. If that was how it played MOST of us would be happy...but I actually think if that H5 pass is correct this solution is faulty and the more likely result would be a more consolidated system further south. But none of those details matter at this range...just another pretty picture to look at while we wait a few more days for more clarity.

safe travels

Since we finally have a legit tangible threat I think its worth noting a trend I have observed the last few years wrt the guidance. There has always been a general time period when guidance was likely to converge on a consensus and then from that point on its only the details that usually need to get ironed out. Where the fringe ends up. Meso scale banding. Exact rain/snow line. But the large scale features and general track is locked in. Obviously there are exceptions where a huge across all guidance bust happens but thats rare. The old timers remember in the 90's and early 2000's when that "convergence" didnt typically happen until 36-72 hours out. More recently that convergence on a general solution has been happening between about 100 and 140 hours. We are still outside that range where guidance will shotgun solutions within a very wide permutation of outcomes every run. Trends in the ensembles are still way more important at this range then any one op run. Once the various globals begin to converge on a solution, likely not for another couple days at least... then we can start to worry about details. And once convergence happens it still doesn't mean there won't be changes...just that those changes likely wont be 500 miles! Until then it really doesn't matter what any one op run says. Once we do see that convergence around day 5...we don't want to see a track that is hundreds of miles away from what we need. The old "NC bullzeye is fine day 5" thing has not worked for us lately. The error from day 5 isn't what it used to be. But we are still way outside that range. On a more specific note regarding THIS setup... The pattern is absolutely loaded heading forward. About as good as we can hope for. There will likely be multiple threats. But even with the blocking this is a more difficult setup for guidance to resolve because we are at the mercy of stream phasing. These are not STJ dominant systems. This is a MUCH better pattern than a typical NINA but its still not fully a split flow STJ dominant Nino pattern where guidance might be able to pick out these storms from 10 days out. When dealing with the kinds of multiple interactions we are here its unlikely the final solution is known from as far out. Reminds me of January 2000 when we knew the pattern was ripe but the guidance was keying on the wrong waves from range and we ended up getting a few nice storms but none of them was well resolved until the last minute. Guidance has improved a LOT since then so I highly doubt we get any last second surprises like that but it wouldn't shock me to see something we previously "gave up on" sneak back up on us in the 3-5 day range. But I think it would take monumental bad luck, even for us...to get through the coming 2 weeks without any meaningful snow.