psuhoffman

This is the adjustment we need to get a big storm from that setup...not impossible at that range.

I tend to agree but didn't want to be the one to say it (especially given my location). But the issue is both the lack of deep cold but also where the little cold is centered to our west combined with the suppressive flow to our northeast. That combination favors one of 2 scenarios...lacking a good baroclinic boundary and facing a hostile flow the system shears out or gets squashed south or the system amplifies enough to increase ridging in front of it and comes up...but that favors a track inside what the coastal plain would need given the antecedent airmass. Even up here, if the storm ends up phased or amplified enough to ride the coast rain is a threat imo. But...I think your time will come...things are starting to come into focus (and its following the expected progression frankly) down the line. Better threats for the coastal plain east of 95 will be ahead imo. I totally get it...and I agree. I would much rather be discussing the details of a specific threat...but we need somewhere to discuss the broad pattern stuff also...and this is the place. I do kind of agree maybe a split thread just for long range pattern discussion would be good and a thread for medium range day 3-6 type more specific storm threats...but we did try that once and people (intentionally IMO) mucked that up too. That look is kind of extreme and rare. Normally I would say it's not worth digging into an op at range but all the ensemble guidance supports that general idea. The ensembles favor the block more towards Baffin (which might be even better for us) but the idea of a severely displaced northern stream running across the CONUS under the block is there across all guidance. The thing about that look is the STJ would be pretty cut off coming in off the SW and normally that would be a problem (typical nina stuff) and we would need to get the NS to dig under us (normally a dead end) but that look is so extreme its actually possible we could get the pacific systems to dig down far enough south that it could be a west to east hybrid miller b type pattern which is a good one for us...provided the NS comes in far enough south. The danger would be if that shifts north some...and the NS comes across at about our latitude instead of across to our south...it becomes a cold dry pure miller b look. On a more general pattern note, stuff is coming into clarity a bit better now. There is a relax and that opens the door next week to a threat, but its low probability on the coastal plain due to a still crappy airmass. But after the blocking relax all guidance suggests it does not break down but reloads centered more towards Baffin to Greenland next time. This current round was actually centered too far south for us to be ideal for a big storm amplifying up the coast. It is incredibly encouraging imo that even during the relaxation period the AO/NAO remain firmly negative and the next attempt by the TPV to consolidate is squashed like a bug and we tank again. The look day 10-15 is frankly EXCELLENT across all guidance now. That look with blocking centered from central Baffin to Greenland with a displaced TPV over Quebec is freaking awesome for us. Its the rare combination of cold and promotes a good storm track. If that is where this is heading I would be incredibly shocked if we don't get significant snow in the January 15-30 period. I think one of the problems is we have become so strict and conservative about starting specific storm threads. We used to have a thread for a storm once it came into medium range but we decided the threads were why our storm threats died so now no one wants to start a storm thread until its like right on top of us and so for days we get medium range specific storm discussion in the long range thread. I am ok either way. I can multi-task in this thread. But imo we should either go back to starting specific threat threads once a discreet event enters medium range and forget this silly superstitious stuff...or if everyone is so convinced that will kill storms and its too annoying to start a new thread each time have a designated medium range thread to discuss stuff in the day 3-6 range.

Looks like a typical climo storm. 2-4” along 95 before change over. 4-8 NW of the fall line

Gefs after day 10 really goes bonkers with the NAO block but further north in a better location and this time wants to displace a TPV lobe near Hudson Bay! That’s a nice look. Cold and stormy.

Lol and where is this heartbreaking Miller b you promised. Not seeing it on the models yet Look at 12z euro. And it’s on a lot of ensembles. Gfs this run splits the trough and what would be the miller b wave rides way north then the southern feature rides up the apps. Still not a good setup for us. That northern feature is coming across way too far north. It could change. I’m not saying it’s locked. But I wouldn’t hold my breath and get bent if it doesn’t.

What did you do man???? And can’t you go to confession and fix this?

GFS is lol. It suppressed 3 straight waves south of us then finally amplifies a storm but cuts and rain.

Read my post to Wxusaf just now.

@WxUSAF if you look the h5 going back 72 hours and through the next 160 hours the flow is perfect with vort and vort tracking just under us. But nothing is amplifying at the surface. I’m starting to think part of the problem (other then just fast flow and crowded field) is the lack of healthy baroclinicity. There just isn’t much of a thermal gradient to fuel a surface system to amplify. The airmass is all blah everywhere. Do you think that’s part of the problem?

It’s healthier then it was. But it’s going to be close getting it amplified enough to be able to lift and survive the shred factory flow. But the setup is there! There are legit options. A stronger wave could just bully its way. Preferable get some NS phasing and NOT leave a piece behind that elongates the trough like the last couple runs and you get those monster euro solutions from yesterday. @Ji yes it evolved different at the surface but it was not really different systems. Same upper level energy just one version let the initial southern wave escape then redeveloped a new surface low.

Maybe it relaxes in time but that feels like way too suppressive a flow across the northeast. In general it’s a nice setup but stepping back the ridge and trough in the east are both still centered a little south of ideal. That’s why the system keeps deamplifying as it tries to lift northeast. We either need the flow to relax or get the NS to phase and help amp it up enough to survive it.

We just had 2 consecutive good runs of the euro yesterday.

Me too

http://wow.americanwx.com/gg/ all of Gary Grey’s discussions the week of Jan 7 1996

Shocking

18z eps was less amplified with the wave compared to 12z. It’s just one run. It’s pretty far out. Don’t react to every little fluctuation run to run.

Wrt Friday...most guidance tracks the surface low over the outer banks and the upper low across southern VA. That’s a track that normally would get some snow into DC. And you can see hints at that on the moisture and RH fields. But the NS is nowhere to be found. A rotting airmass with a crap weak baroclinic zone so very little lift and no organized precip outside the convective banding under the upper low just NW of the surface low.

I think people are a little distracted.

That wasn’t a prediction. I still bet this works out to some degree. But DC is below where I would have expected right now based on the dominant pattern Dec 1 to now.

The surface low gained some latitude on the coast but the upper level low went w to e. It was snowing in parts of S VA while the low was still near New Orleans. You can get that kind of sprawling WAA snow shield when there is a true cold airmass on top and a better baroclinic zone.

Yes

He isn’t wrong that our results for having a +PNA-AO from Dec 1 on are pathetic. If the pattern does flip in Feb to a hostile one the fail will be that DC somehow failed during 2 months of a very decent to at times very good longwave pattern. No it wasn’t perfect but before people point out how this or that feature was slightly off from ideal...my retort is it shouldn’t take a freaking perfect pattern to snow. A lot of the warning events in our past were in good but slightly flawed patterns.

During a storm it’s dicey but they get the roads good pretty fast after the snow stops up here imo. Good luck!

It wasn’t really more powerful from a wave amplitude POV. The surface low was deeper and it had a huge precip shield because it had a much colder airmass to its north which meant much more baroclinicity (FUEL!) and more lift in the WAA to the northeast of the low center. But from a ground truth POV you’re correct even if this took that same track it wouldn’t produce the same result.