psuhoffman

I totally get why most have given up and this setup is not a high probability one. There are lots of moving parts that we need to play nice. Those usually don’t work. BUT...a winning solution is still very much within the envelope of realistic possible scenarios with that trailing wave next week. But it’s unlikely to be the kind of thing resolved well by guidance at range so I’m ok with it just looking ambiguously close at this point.

Who cares. My final falling out with JB was many years ago when he used IAD snowfall to verify a DCA forecast...and even with that trick it was still several inches short and he rounded up and said “close enough”. Dude has no scruples.

It was closer to something from the trailing wave too. A split between the gfs and gem would work. One over and one under amplified.

The SE gets another one

Ggem is at least somewhat interesting.

So much for the QBO. It came in at -2.5 for January and it’s not helping one bit.

@showmethesnow things are trending somewhat better (minus the spacing issue) for next week...but it’s still a low probability threat. In a good year we likely wouldn’t even be tracking it. Lots of moving parts that need to play nice. After that, as expected, the look is degrading again. Gefs and geps totally lost the idea of any epo help. They reform the AK vortex Pac Ridge combo...yay. Eps actually still looks ok into March but how much you wanna bet this is when the eps is wrong!

Kidding but it was. Never gets the front east so it’s cutter after cutter cutter. But no way that could happen right? RIGHT!

18z gfs is a disaster

That happens sometimes in our total crap fail years... years with a base state bad for snow isn't that unusual...but even within those years to get a total absolute fail takes some bad luck, and often areas all around will have at least some snow. Even in the absolute worst years it is still winter and there will be some fluke opportunities, a trailing wave on a front, a transient PNA ridge. To get a total fail you have to have a bad pattern...but then also get unlucky and miss on the few fluke opportunities that do come along.

@showmethesnow the gem just did exactly what I was envisioning above. Gfs wasn’t that far off either. It might be a viable idea.

Yea...I assumed it was meant to be a parody

Wait that post was supposed to make sense?

If the pattern for early March is correct at least we would have trackabke threats. Still a long shot to get a big hit but all guidance is at least cold enough that it’s not laughable to think maybe...

We have fail threads now!!!!

I doubt 53 would run a fake name. He is up front with his stuff. I can respect that. He only changed back from Tenman with permission. Mersky on the other hand I am 99% sure is a past member with some axe to grind.

Our better bet might be to root for that system to phase into the NS and set up more confluence to try to force the bigger one behind it south. That one is getting closer on the EPS. It's still likely all going to fail but that one is the best bet of a sorry lot.

March 58 was way less of a "fluke" than March 93. We could repeat the 93 pattern 100 times and not get that result. March 58 was a legit awesome pattern that would produce most of the time if repeated. Of course none of that matters since March 58 is just one analog, most are actually crap. But a few did evolve into something but the ones that did the NAO tanked later in March...do we really see that happening?

Yea it will move out, it needs too or NOTHING can happen with that vortex sitting over Maine...but look at the limited spacing between the waves. By the time the NW flow and confluence relaxes behind that 50/50 the next wave should be approaching. The spacing there looks good, and if anything, too tight. But yes you are rightfully pointing out the flaws...its far from a perfect setup, but I am just saying its more workable that the crap we have been looking at 99% of the time. Low bar and all...

March 58 and 56 are in the analog package today...so I guess maybe... I am trying here....really I am

Actually with that 50/50 the system coming through the west there "could" be forced under us. Suppression is likely the bigger issue. It's far from a great look but its better than we have had a lot of winter.

Some is. The AO/NAO is very likely a cycle. But at the same time we are warming on a larger scale and the oceans are scorching. Could we have reached a tipping point? It’s obvious things are skewing warmer. How much is natural cycles? How much our fault? I am not getting into all that and I don’t know.

@showmethesnow problem with the day 7 system is we need to get lucky with a NS feature to suppress but right now the NS energy is coming in on top of the system or behind it. That might suppress the system but its also going to wreck the mid levels and also prevent any good closed circulation to form, thus no good precip shield just the showery crap we see right now on guidance. We need to see a trend towards getting a NS system to come across ahead of the system. I suppose it's far enough out that is still possible, and the ridge axis across Canada is good enough that if we had some confluence in front it could work...but we haven't had that kind of luck all year.

I think/hope some of the guidance bashing is just frustration. IMO the guidance has been magnificent this year. The NWP guidance nailed the overall winter patter from months in advance while some of the analog and SST based guidance failed miserably. Furthermore, for the most part 99% of the time the guidance has been showing us a total fail crap pattern, and that is what we have had. Any "hope" was only when we were trying hard and buying into an odd run or two that usually didn't have much ensemble support...or buying into some crazy long range day 15 fantasy that was only there for a run or two. From day 10 on in the models have pretty much shown the crap we have had all winter long. And even the rare fluke "threats" we tried to invent out of this awful pattern never made it inside day 5. With all the possible permutations there will always be the odd run or two of operations or minority clusters of ensembles that show a "threat" in the long range...but truth is there was NEVER majority support from both a longwave pattern AND individual guidance runs to say a snow was likely. I suppose if all anyone did was glance at the day 15 GEFS they might think guidance was not so good...but even the GEFS never looked great...and we KNOW the GEFS (as well as the nwe op FV3 GFS) has an extreme cold bias. So taking the day 15 GEFS at face value is user error not guidance error. That is like knowing your car alignment is a little off to the right and refusing to correct and complaining when every 100 yards you run off the road. Yea the tool was not perfect...but you still are more to blame.

No one wants to hear it (for a variety of reasons) but there has been a tendency for hotter EVERYTHING lately.