psuhoffman

I thought the 6z op run was ok but the eps was kinda ugly. A LOT of inside runners that track the low pretty far up the bay before the turn east. This was the first ensemble run where I cringed when I looked at the slp plots.

All snow here now

Slush bombs mixing here. 35

I wouldn’t worry about the NAM. I can’t tell you how many times in the past few years at 36+ hours it’s given me snow on the back end of a storm that ended up no where close because the system was way more progressive. Gonna get some sleep.

SREF looks good lol...I mean if were going to bring up a bad NAM run at range...might as well mention a good SREF

The main globals have been crazy consistent with only slight adjustments given the time scale for the last 3 days. Some of the meso models will bounce around like this at range. Now...if the globals were to shift to a NAM like inside cutter...that would be a major jump.

lol its pretty much a non event for our area. Even up here its about 1" of snow to rain to dryslot. It mixes almost to state college lol. Be honest...it does bother you just a little to see it go that far west lol. I am not overly concerned by an at range NAM run...but I would rather see it going the right way then the wrong way.

Can you just make 6-12 8-12. Sounds better You see where the lines are...your closer to the 12 than the 6...call it whatever helps you sleep

my best guess

One is avg precip rate over the previous 6 hours and the other is instantaneous rate (or like a radar depiction).

@osfan24 @Ji everytime in the last few years the GFS was significantly less qpf then the other globals it eventually caved. I’m way more worried about track then meso scale features that will determine 10 v 20”. Unless we see all guidance shift that way I’m just happy to have a solution that doesn’t go towards my fail scenario. And for me only getting 10” isn’t a fail.

So that’s why it suddenly gets colder right after...makes sense. Perfect correlation.

I don’t have a crystal ball on what the final track will be. My best guess is a 60/40 compromise between the most progressive gfs and most amplified euro leaning 60 euro. But I am fairly confident I would trust the colder thermals of all the other guidance. Not saying DC gets pummeled. If it tracks inside the colder thermal profile won’t matter as a warm layer blasts in. But if the low stays off the coast I think you will be colder then the gfs indicates.

GFS has been running warmer then all other guidance at the surface. I would bet if the gfs track verifies it would end up closer to the euros thermal depiction adjusted for track.

Plus I don’t see much of a difference with the SW coming onshore

But then it wouldn’t be so over amplified

Last 24 hours of EPS

@PhineasC not saying your wrong but the QPF didn’t actually match those crazy model output. I know the coop a couple miles from here recorded 19” in that 2009 Storm but on only 1.26”qpf. We actually had pretty good ratios in most of MD in those storms due to beautifully perfect mid and upper level low passes. ETA: BWI had 18” on 1.57qpf

Did models over estimate qpf more back then though. I know the high res models back then had horrible wet biases

Those maps.... the difference is if you are NW of 95 a lot more of that snow is REAL on the 18z and not some clown map fantasy. The thermal profile was 1-2 degrees colder and that makes a big difference when you are talking about these 1C warm layers at 850 during the height of the storm when a few hours one way or the other can be the difference between 5" and 10" of snow.

That really would be a "give me that and we're good the rest of winter" storm...40" lol We are in good shape I think. Even if this takes one of the more inside tracks like that one GFS or some of the euro runs, historically that track with a pretty stout high in southern Quebec would still produce a 8"+ snowfall up here. If this stays offshore we could do REALLY well. But for us I think it is more of a matter of how significant will the snow be not whether it will be significant. Assuming your bar for significant isn't Ji level. His zones are ok but somewhere in that 6-12 will be a 12+. I get that its too soon to nail down where though.

EPS is tightening the goalposts...as it should. But if you are from 95 NW odds have slightly improved each of the last several runs. trends mean more importantly odds of 3”/6”

That was just my snark

I have not dug into the members yet...might not for a while busy. But from previous runs the ens were always warmer on those mean plots because the handful of crazy cutters that run up the Piedmont were skewing the mean. The colder runs aren’t as much “colder” along the edges as the warm outliers are warmer. Plus I think the lower resolution of the ensembles makes them have a warmer representation in general. Not picking up the extreme meso features and CAD as well. I would focus more on track of the Eps and focus on the ops for meso details like exact thermal structure.

I’ll throw out a guess later today