psuhoffman

If you look at the eps the members are all over with where to put that NW band and the screw zone in between. This op run was just one of those random options from the permutations because it’s not capable of actually nailing the exact location of that feature. We could get one of the solutions that death bands us with 5-7” or we could get one of the 3-4” in between solutions. Just how it is. That’s why you forecasts a range and not an exact number !

Euro did a split and now sticks a huge part of our area in between the two good qpf bands. Could happen but guidance would struggle to nail those details even at this range. Hopefully lol.

I’ve been running around all day so I haven’t been able to make a map but it’s in my head and it looks a lot like this. Maybe a little less liberal with the 4-8 but I’m gun shy after busting high last time.

I wouldn’t mess with those roads around there in snow.

We seem to have the dumb angle covered

I think this is right but I think there is a small band that could get 8” in places but very localized and hard to pin that down. In general 3-5 probably will characterize the larger Max band well.

OMFG regarding the gfs qpf panic. 1. stop letting that damn blue/purple color change on the map influence your impression of the run. Yes green to blue is this dramatic change but if the actual qpf went from .53 to .47 that’s noise. It’s a .05 qpf difference. And that’s what it was for most places on the gfs. 2. the kuchera snowfall map took an additional hit because it looks like it reduced the ratios a little bit NW of 95. Maybe it has a warm layer it didn’t have. Maybe the VVs in the DGz are less aligned. I haven’t looked and probably won’t because going from a prediction of 7” from .46 qpf to 5.8” from .40 (Westminster) is Fucking NOISE!!! Both are within the same predicted range and neither would be a bust and if you think that level of change run to run is a big deal you’re in the wrong game.

It was never as bad as the rgem with the NW over amped thing too

It’s an analog based model at very low resolution that smooths the edges so be careful using it to define things like that. It’s a great look. Just saying. We are in the game for the NW band for sure. We’re not in danger of being in the rain screw zone our only possible disappointment is if we end to between the band that likely hits just NW if the rain snow boundary and the band further NW that’s often where the best moisture convergence hits where the mid levels are conducive for good snow growth and banding. I think we get into that one but that kind of thing is a nowcast thing. If you’re near Towson Mt Washington is south of you. Chill.

This run yes. But to be fair it (along with parent ggem) was the first to see this storm at all and while at the end it did cave to where the euro and gfs are now if you go back 72 hours they trended toward it like 80% of the way before it came the final 20%. Remember the gfs and euro were weak OTS waves when the ggem had the storm. I’m not telling anyone how to grade and what to weight when doing it but I don’t only look at the final 24 hours in my analysis.

It dropped me from .51 to .47. I’m infuriated. Crap model.

North side like Mt Washington definitely.

My main concern now is for who ends up between the bands. That area is still 2-3” but will feel screwed when 5-6” totals are on either side of them! That’s a nowcast thing.

Also the euro looks to have won the mjo war and the mjo is not going to take a super amplified traverse in the MC. We might get a weak warm phase traverse but not a month wrecking mjo look imo.

The storm around day 13 on the euro ai is snow to ice…1-3” around DC to about 6” mostly snow along the PA line. But way too early to worry about that. It’s a decent looking setup. Lots of CAD. Overall…. It’s always possible the waves next week trend north but the trough is more positively tilted than I want to see and the baroclinic boundary is really far south. I said a week ago I saw 3 chances and I doubted we got shutout on all 3 and we won’t but the snow looks to be tomorrow. I’m not saying stop tracking next week but they so favor south of us unless the trough trends significantly more amplified and negative. I think our next good chance is around Jan 26-30 as the TPV pulls out but there is a lot of cold left over. We would need any wave not to amplify too soon and bomb to our west to work but that hasn’t been the MO this year. The PDO flip is helping there. We will be close to the boundary again and I could see something like this weekend replaying in that time period but like this weekend it won’t be seen until inside 100 hours! Super long range I don’t like the long wave look early Feb. But it’s not that far from something better. If the pacific trough trends east just a few degrees and the ridge in Siberia ends up more poleward to depress the TPV on out side it’s a good pattern. But as is it’s a zonal pattern with us on the wrong side of the boundary. But cold will be lurking close and it would be a quick flip back to good if either of the things I mentioned happen. And there are going to be errors at day 15 so it’s very possible if not likely it ends up better in reality.

Nothing wrong with the placement of the qpf but it’s missing 40% of it. WTF.

I’ll take a look at the long range when I get home in a bit. Been focused mostly on tomorrow.

I know the 12k NAM is having convective feedback issues. But other than “it sucks” anyone have a theory why it is having so main trouble with this specific storm v others? It doesn’t do this with every wave. Yea it sucks in general but why is it having so many issues now that are above and beyond it’s just typical suckage. Just curious.

It was snowing nicely and 31 when I left state college an hour ago.

I think 5” is a reasonable over under for you.

I lived next to frying pan park just south of Herndon from 1994-2006. I noticed in marginal temp storms there would often end up being two sharp gradients. The first was often the true fall line near McLean. Many times there was a big difference in snowfall west v east of there. Then there was another just NW of me somewhere near sterling where snow would increase again. The NW side of Dulles would do better than me a lot. If both those lines failed in marginal setups the next was along the blue ridge west of Leesburg where elevations go up near Pirceville. Round hill often did good. you’re west of the first 2 so you better be ok because if not that means everyone east of the blue ridge is screwed lol.

Anyone know how the fv3 is with placing VVs? Trying to get an idea of ratios and the GFs has lift centered ideally in the DGZ but the fv3 has the lift oddly centered very low for much of the storm. Would make a huge difference in ratios. Is there any data on which is better? I am leery of using the 3k NAM because it doesn’t really have that deform band at all which I think is wrong. And I can’t get euro soundings. Thanks.

I think the rgem has now adjusted qpf to reality it’s just too warm in the mid levels. But if you take that qpf and apply 10-1 snowfall from 95 NW that’s probably close to reality now imo.

The NAMs almost never impact my opinion. I’d still be more worried about over amplification then under