msuwx

16 minutes ago, HornetsHomer91 said:

@msuwxAs far as your post earlier or the ppl on top of RAH office .... would it not be easier (especially in a situation like this where tiny tweaks could mean 4-5" and Trace -1, with more mixing over there) to just post the WWA and what you thought your floor amounts are, then tomm wake up and look at downstream and radar when its within 200 miles of the CWA? IDK I remember Panovich saying one time " No one will remember if you bust low, theyll destroy you if you bust too high". So just do WWA and tomm if you think Radar would equal WSW move up the totals then ? Thats a long winded way to say I agree with what theyre doing. So many ways this could change 

 

Gulf Coast Convection (Robbing or adding liquid if oriented properly)

Slower transfer to the Coast 

Warm Nose ect. PPL can be upset but no reason for anyone to show more than 1-3" for now minus extreme NE-NC/ VA Beach area who are prolly 4-6. 

I won't speak for the NWS, but WWAs and WSWs have specific criteria that go along with them, and therefore, verification associated with their issuance. So, when you put one of those out, it's essentially a forecast. Don't know if that totally makes sense....my brain is fried.  

Just now, NorthHillsWx said:

Imo yes. Watch means warning level wintry weather is expected advisory means it’s not it’s not going to reach warning criteria 

That isn't how the NWS views it in terms of being a 'downgrade' 

2 minutes ago, PackGrad05 said:

Was it downgraded if it was never really a winter storm warning

No

There's a very intentional reason I never publicly put out accumulation ideas before 24 to at most 48 hours in advance. Think back to the pre-internet era. If you were Joe Q. Public, you would be thinking this event was extremely well-forecast since the messaging would have pretty much been spot-on by TV mets as well as the NWS to this point. But because everyone has access to all of the modeling, social media and click-bating leads to a proliferation of terrible, single images from deterministic model runs. 

And since the general public has no idea how to weigh (and usually discount) what their phone weather app tells them, it gets even worse.

Often times, I long for the days where all of this model data wasn't so easily available. Never has the need for human meteorologists been greater. We serve as the buffer between the endless barrage of model data (which, by the way, is actually way more accurate than it has even been, but is often quite wrong) and the public. As Spann says....all model data is wrong, but some is more useful than others. The general public has no idea how to sift through mountain of incorrect data. 

2 minutes ago, wncsnow said:

Is there anyway to view the GRAF model for free? It must be only available to meteorologists or through some sort of subscription.  

It's owned by our weather graphics vendor. 

FYI, the GRAF model has been keying on that same concept of a deform band-like feature filling out near and west of CLT and into the Upstate late afternoon and early evening, similar to what is now seen on the 12z NAM. Hope for the I-85 corridor probably largely depends on that feature becoming a reality. 

3 hours ago, NorthHillsWx said:

Looks to me like our stretch of Fail Februarys will continue

Punting on an entire month a week before the month even begins is a bold strategy, Cotton. 

This storm is yet another example of why I never issue my own accumulation forecast, post, or publically show any model accumulation maps on air until at absolute earliest, 48 hours ahead of an event. 

In many ways, I miss the very old days where all of this data wasn’t available to all of the masses. Just opens the door for fear-mongering, hyping, and click-baiting. 
 

I honestly don’t know if I would have developed my love for weather as a child as I did in this current environment as it is today. 

13 minutes ago, lilj4425 said:

Why do we have such issues with warm noses? I don’t get it. Like why it can’t it just snow six+ inches for once like it used to back in the old days without all of these mixing issues? And how Atlanta got more snow than I did is absolutely baffling. 

Don’t have a great scientific answer for you about the warm noses. It’s just been very difficult of late to get an old school true Miller A type of system. 
 

Regarding Atlanta, they got lucky that the forcing set up where it did. Good for them. Just absolute luck of the draw with how this system unfolded.

As a weather nerd, I always find it fascinating watching the various processes at work in the atmosphere causing varying precipitation types and the changes between them. 

7 minutes ago, sarcean said:

Raining in Charlotte area now yet it's 29 out. I can't imagine the ice mess this will cause once it all freezes. It might be freezing rain already but its coming down as mainly rain.

That is freezing rain. Rain when the temp is below freezing. 

3 minutes ago, burgertime said:

Yea you can really see those storms line up vertically which IRRC (I'm a bit rusty these days) is what does the robbing. If you see the storms in a more horizontal alignment that enhances. So keep an eye on the live radar for that. 

 

 

From my experience, Gulf convection that is 'positively tilted' like that can actually enhance the moisture transport northeastward. What you don't want is the convection to race out ahead of the system and it take on more of a neutral or negative tilt orientation. Don't know if that makes sense or not. I'm tired.

14 minutes ago, Brick Tamland said:

Is there a model that you think is handling it best so far?

HRRR hasn't been bad. 

That leading band stretching from ATL into SC will mean a lot. Latest NAM completely dissipates it as it tries to push into NC. 

4 minutes ago, QC_Halo said:

@msuwx When you get reports such as these, does that effect your thoughts on the forecast locally?

How about those Basketball Dogs?

Best start in a couple of decades!
 

Yes, you definitely take notice. Even though there are different geographic processes in  play here versus there, if the model’s initialization and early frames are already off by a significant amount it has to translate to some extent in the later hours.

There was a storm a while back in which the NAM was way, way more pronounced/ aggressive than most other modeling with the warm nose. I largely discounted it, got badly burned, and vowed to never discount it again. So, here we are again. 

I think the RGEM is a very good winter weather model with a good track record around here, so I will keep leaning my forecast away from the NAM as long as it holds sway with its colder temperatures aloft. 

But it's concerning. 

1 minute ago, snowmaker13 said:

Example: Asheville went from 3.1" to 2.8"

And many other places in the GSP FA went slightly higher. But yes, it’s all negligible and well within the noise range. 

1 hour ago, TARHEELPROGRAMMER88 said:

Looks like the low is further NW and close to cutting through the apps before transfer to coast. This is almost time to throw in the towel for everyone outside the mountains or upper Mid Atlantic.

27 minutes ago, TARHEELPROGRAMMER88 said:

GEFS pushed snow totals further NW, following OP on showing less snow overall for most in the SE. 

Just a big bowl of no. 

12 minutes ago, SnowGoose69 said:

We used to have a rule forecasting for ATL and it still applies today as the GFS wedge resolution still is not great that if the GFS could see a wedge beyond 72 hours in ATL you were in big trouble.  In this case it not only sees it but has it almost to the metro.  The CMC which tends to have better resolution on that feature has the mixed precip back into Bama

Agreed. CMC is a very good model with CAD situations. It’s idea has some validity even if it might be a touch over done.

I think more important, or at least just as important, than the shear is the exceptionally dry air over the western Gulf. So far, Milton has largely fought it off. See how long it does. 

I also am interested to see how quickly this weakens. A lot of mesoscale models really show this thing dramatically falling apart as it nears landfall. Big time. 

Interesting dichotomy between radar presentation (which still looks quite healthy) and the significantly degraded satellite presentation. 

8 minutes ago, NorthHillsWx said:

Per chasers on the ground in mainland Mexico this doesn’t sound like much of a hit at all. Haven’t seen anything yet approaching cat 2 from video or reports. I wonder if Cozumel took a harder hit while that NW eyewall was still intact, but sounds like this thing really fell apart coming in

Not surprising. You can usually 'subtract' a category from the intensity impacts for a weakening system. 

It will be interesting to see how this survives. I think it is going to emerge quite weak from the Yucatan since it was weakening and hit land at the 'wrong' time. Yucatan can often take quite a toll on systems. I always think of Isidore (2002)..... it lost its inner core of the Yucatan and never got it back. 

4 minutes ago, MN Transplant said:

Catastrophic for where, though?  Take a look at Google Maps for Jamaica.  There doesn’t seem to be many places that would be significantly impacted by a surge from an E to W moving storm.

Port Royal/ Kingston could take a really rough hit from storm surge I would imagine, especially if the center tracks near or just south. Shape of the topography would only hurt in this scenario. 

2 hours ago, eyewall said:

Hard to believe we already have to write off January. This is looking like last year.

Writing off 21 days with tons of arctic air in the pattern is an interesting position.