Welcome to American Weather


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About wxsniss

Profile Information

  • Four Letter Airport Code For Weather Obs (Such as KDCA)
  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location:
    Brookline, MA
  1. Definitely sacred ground... I was doing the same... unfortunately my meteorological experience was extremely limited back then and it was before everything was captured digitally You or someone should start a thread for the approaching 20th anniversary... any archived model runs, AFDs, charts, radar images, video, photos...
  2. Good way to sum it up. We did have some fun storms, at least exciting to track which is better than ratter seasons. Maybe my post sounded like a complaint, but it's more of a mood set up by wasted potential. I remember some posters here even hinting that Feb 2015 might be walking in the door based on some EPS runs beginning of March, which was silly to expect anything close, but we did have potentials that either fell >50% short or completely vanished. Watch we get a bowling ball to make this all moot.
  3. 45.8 vs 39.2 in Boston Other than a spectacular 4 hours on Feb 9, this season overall feels disappointing. Was it the decent start in December followed by a warm Jan and Feb? Was it wasted BN cold in March with 2 modeled potentials ultimately disappointing? Are we too spoiled by the last 10-12 years and are just feeling regression to climo? All of the above
  4. This threat never felt that compelling. Progressive trough, s*** streak, stale cold with weak rates in March. That said, 12z NAM+ 12z Euro + 12z RGEM jump NW is a hard trend to dismiss, especially for this time range. Ensembles were clustered NW of OP, and this was substantiated with realistic upstream changes at H5. Add to that the 18z RGEM had a suspicious looking piece of vorticity that drove the system too east. Disappointing while we're looking for the bookend to the season, or something interesting to follow.
  5. My bad... I assumed that had changed with all the 72 hour URL-hacking RGEM posts... Apples to apples: the 18z RGEM 42 hr is further east compared to 12z RGEM 48 hr But... there's a suspicious intense lobe of vorticity that is spawning a farther east surface low in almost a dual-low structure at 48hours on the 18z... take that away and the main vorticity associated with our low did appear to tick further west compared to 12z RGEM
  6. Compare this 54hr 12z panel below to the 48hr 18z panel Will posted above... pretty sizable jump northwest, though way out of RGEM's best range
  7. RGEM + Euro trends being significant and consistent, will take that over everything else at the moment 18z RGEM (at 48 hours) vs. 12z (at 54 hours): SLP is consolidated significantly more northwest vs. a more stretch out SLP further southeast at 12z
  8. Trough looks broader and slightly more progressive than 12z NAM... close but not as good
  9. This and other gems of 3/14/17 post-mortem today, great stuff guys. Copied CT Rain's post from other thread. "Machines making these decisions for us..." As a regular lurker, the quality of analysis here and elsewhere has declined steeply in the past 2 years with the wide accessibility of clown maps. Part of why I don't post as much as I used to. Mets (here, on TV and social media) are increasingly rip-reading rather than relying on knowledge and experience. Lay public has access to them and uses them as a replacement of human expertise. And it's not just the profession of meteorology that is feeling this threat. Other pearls from 3/14/17: - low SLR and crappy snowgrowth should have been expected from soundings: drying in the column + best omega 850-700 rather than in DGZ. I think Wiz raised this repeatedly (as well as frontolysis) but there was a group "blindspot" / momentum that WAA would overproduce. - overdone WAA qpf... there was skepticism voiced, but others countered that it can be done and this was the perfect 6-hour setup for it AND just about every piece of guidance was showing ~ 2+ qpf - H5 / H7 lows too far west, very tilted system... we saw it on guidance, but again we also saw ~ 2+ qpf over SNE, so "machines making these decisions for us" was big here. Ultimately mid level lows tracked even farther west than guidance predicted All in all a fascinating study in group think blindspots. And as CT Rain and other said, even for NWS, wanting to avoid flip-flopping on a forecast where a few uncertain but hugely impactful variables were "right on the edge".
  10. Interesting When you think about baroclinic instability for cyclogenesis: 1) What atmospheric level of thermal gradient is most important? 2) Do you look at steepness of temperature differential (like ∆T over distance), or is there a better way to think about it? 3) Is there a particular temperature point in the gradient that is most relevant for cyclogenesis, or is it simply the part of the temperature gradient that is steepest? Sorry to barrage with questions... and there might not be easy answers to any of these... feel free to ignore or PM. I did some reading online but it's lots of non-intuitive math equations that are not practically useful when I look at a map. I also don't want to elevate this to a new critical variable we must analyze with every storm... it's probably built-in to guidance so why should we independently think about it... but since it was raised it made me curious.
  11. Yeah it's odd because RAP soundings seemed pretty saturated most of the morning, but snowgrowth was meh not great, except for that band around 11:45-12:30 And soundings for 18z-20z (I posted 18z earlier) looked plenty saturated and cold with excellent lift, but it seemed like the plug was pulled at 2pm. In fact the only layer that looked too warm on the soundings for much of the storm before 3-4pm was like 1000-950 mb. Anyway I gotta check out for a while. Thanks for all your comments this past week!
  12. As an example: the snow depictions of the 0z Euro (not just clown maps, the meteogram soundings + qpf) with 12 hours leadtime for Boston were about 200% reality. Maybe the synoptics were drawn correctly, but in this specific setup of a complex partial phase / tilted system / eroded antecedent airmass, it busted bad on what's happening on the ground. Definitely not it's best performance. And let's not bring in other locales... it was an absolute disaster for Philly. I'm curious what guidance performed best. Looking at runs yesterday, I'm thinking RGEM ?
  13. Well Noyes numbers... stuck out like a rip read off a clown map from Sunday's guidance, was clearly ridiculous by the 0z suite Monday morning. But we have seen heavy WAA produce a foot in 4-6 hours, and this system was widely discussed here as having that potential. Gulf connection, healthy PWATs, and almost all guidance showing exactly that. Wiz did mention dry air in the DGZ and frontolysis, and I don't know if those were factors. Let's not forget posters in eastern SNE who expressed concerns Sunday (me included) were dismissed as premature bridge jumpers. Not trying to boast, this was a PITA system and it threw off pros at NWS on down. My own call to co-workers in Boston: 10-16 Sunday, changed to 8-12 Monday night, and still busted high. Thankfully there were still policy impacts of schools clinics etc closings to spare me the "meteorologists are terrible this was not 12-18 like they all promised".
  14. Re: #1 model failure: That's true. We were commenting what an incredible consensus there was for a significant coastal as far back as 4-5 days before. But still, I feel like we've encountered complexities of a partial phase and tilted lows before... I'm surprised how lost guidance was even 12 hours before onset. The one blockbuster solution we had (all-timer at least for eastern SNE, but really a huge hit for most on this forum) was Euro 12z Friday. It was a slow discombobulated downhill from there.
  15. Actually was thinking about this last night... we were already around 30F in Boston last evening. Another sign that we were toast. Any "buffer" we would have had from that cold air mass 24 hours prior was squandered.