Jump to content

psuhoffman

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    26,578

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by psuhoffman

  1. psuhoffman
    I want to be in Utah. Alta kicks ass
  2. psuhoffman
    Pretty good day at Sugarbush yesterday and Killington today. Little thin but soft on the natural terrain. Kinda cold to start yesterday, about -17 when I hit first chair. Today was warmer, 20s, and snowed about 1-2” at Killington bottom to top. Driving home now. My Washington in the background whiteface in the background across the Lake
  3. psuhoffman
    I don’t get the obsession with Boston. It’s 8 hours away, same distance as Toronto, and averages 3x more snow than DC. Vastly different climo. Many of our storms don’t hit them either! Why do people get so upset when they get snow and we don’t? Isn’t that what’s supposed to happen???
  4. psuhoffman
    The look at the end of the ensembles looks transitionary to me. I certainly don’t like the +epo look. But the AO is going negative. Question is where does that go and we can’t see the other side yet and things are too unstable right now to make more than a WAG. I don’t think guidance is trending yet. What we’re seeing is guidance jumping around between various possible synoptic permutations based on subtle timing and amplitude difference is all the Sws involved. Once they settle on a common synoptic progression and stabilize then we might see stable trends one way or the other. You need to separate his satire from his topical posts. We’re in a NS steam dominant Nina pattern with no blocking. I think both know what the most likely outcome is here and should prepare ourselves for that. Doesn’t mean we can’t get a win here. It can happen sometimes…but Boston has much better odds than we do.
  5. psuhoffman
    Its not close at all. If there is no southern stream involved...its a miller b and we have zero chance. Horrid run It seems to be a timing difference. The slower NS solutions were better because they phased within a STJ wave that the slightly faster solutions leave behind. One of the previous Gfs and euro even even managed to phase the next NS wave with that stj wave. Problem is guidance seems to be converging around the faster solution for the first NS wave and it’s too chaotic to even speculate what happens behind that.
  6. psuhoffman
    Great so once a storm is inside 84 hours there is basically no down time. We all gonna be like by the time a storm actually starts.
  7. psuhoffman
    Sorry I meant that to him not you…hit the wrong quote
  8. psuhoffman
    Kuchera says 27” for you and 24” for me. I can live with that.
  9. psuhoffman
    In 3 runs it went from way OTS to 25” in DC. It’s 7 days away.
  10. psuhoffman
    Lol
  11. psuhoffman
    I’m actually due north from the eastern edge of DC
  12. psuhoffman
    Gfs done lost its mind at 186 lol. Gfs keeps spitting out these snow hurricane solutions.
  13. psuhoffman
    But most importantly it’s close in a way that can actually work for us. Southern stream wave develops early and phases. Not some late developing all NS miller b crap. It’s trending towards a synoptic setup that “can” work here. That’s the most important thing at this range Imo.
  14. psuhoffman
    I’ve seen enough at 156. Hit or not it’s totally fine as an op run at this range.
  15. psuhoffman
    I like the amplitude of the ridge out west better. Should help this dig more which SHOULD help the phase happen further south and avoid the NS miller b issue.
  16. psuhoffman
    Yea not sure how this trade off will play out. like: slower, west dont like: more suppressive flow, but maybe it’s just slower to pump ridging.
  17. psuhoffman
    Gfs is digging further west this run.
  18. psuhoffman
    Comparing 12 v 18z gfs runs is tricky because there seems to be a timing difference. 18z is slower
  19. psuhoffman
    Main thing would be better wave spacing. 12z Gfs would have been a hit except for bad wave spacing. A stronger NS or STJ wave would help with ridging in front which becomes a feedback loop. Having the next vort dive in and phase v acting as a kicker would did it too.
  20. psuhoffman
    @HighStakes pointed out this morning the long range guidance does not look bad for early Feb. this is the kind of temp profile we want to get a gradient pattern to work.
  21. psuhoffman
    Up at Sugarbush so multiple comments in one post. Randy, you’re right gfs was way closer to the type of synoptic setup that can work here. Details don’t matter but we want more guidance to move to keying on the stj wave as the main player. It’s symbiotic. I identified this period because it was when the ridge/trough alignment would likely be right for something to amplify along the coast before it retrogrades too much. Thing is the wave break from the first wave creates a window behind it for another. This isn’t an unusual thing. It’s temporary. Eventually the trough will retro too much and at that point we want boundary waves not amplifying phased storms. That can work too just a different pattern. But I think assuming the first wave does amplify, even if it’s too late for us, it will create the opportunity for the next wave before that pattern door closes. Ask psu what winter was better. Ask Winchester people I’m on a ridge at almost 1100 feet. And that’s different from being in a valley or a plateau at 1000 feet because I get upslope flow which cools me even more. So I’ll take a marginal temp blocked pattern every day and twice on Sunday. March 2013 wasn’t a fail up here as another example. In the urban corridor temps are always a concern. They really need BOTH to get an epic winter usually so you’re debating different poisons here. But this year with the cold probably gives DC a greater chance at simply getting snow from any given storm. Blocking only helps if it’s cold.
  22. psuhoffman
    Cause we don't have blocking for that kind of track Bingo. A lot of our big blocking snows actually happened with a ridge/trough alignment that wouldn’t have worked without blocking. That west of the apps then forced east thing only works with blocking. Otherwise it would continue to cut up west! Blocking gives us a huge range of tracks that work because anything that tries to cut gets forced to turn east and we’re at the right latitude to be under the frozen precip often when that happens. Any storm that tries to amplify north between the coast and Mississippi can work. We’ve even had snow with a primary to Chicago with blocking! But without it we need to thread the needle. We need the storm to amplify and turn north along the southeast coast. Any further west and it cuts. East and it’s a fish or Boston storm. We have a much narrower win window without blocking.
  23. psuhoffman
    People who just look at the blue pixels won’t like this but I wasn’t a fan of the 6z Gfs. Relying on a phase and coastal development at your latitude is extremely dangerous and fails 90% of the time. That’s a typical miller b tease scenario. The Gfs snowed on us simply by developing the miller b quicker and further west. It didn’t actually do what I want to see which is key more on the stj wave like it was doing in earlier runs and develop a healthy system in the southeast that can get captured and lift north. That “hybrid” progression is better for us. If this becomes a NS dominant miller b scenario those rarely work regardless what models show 7 days out! I don’t really care where the miller b develops on guidance what I’m hoping to see if a move towards developing an STJ wave earlier and phasing with it further south. A pure NS dominant miller b will end in tears.
  24. psuhoffman
    The last major NS buckling dug into KS. This time (on progs) it’s digging into Indiana. Somewhere in between is our sweet spot.
  25. psuhoffman
    There were really only 3 big hits. But they were slower. One of the 3 a full 2 days slower. I think that one was the “get the first wave out of the way and go with the next” idea.
×
×
  • Create New...