OceanStWx

We await further guidance on that. What makes it extra ridiculous is that it is only the continental shelf waters of the US to the seaward boundaries of Mexico and Cuba. So it's like less than half of the Gulf of Mexico would change names, and the rest stays the Gulf of Mexico.

SNINCR 2/3 at MSY.

The best we can do is a 1 km by 1 km grid. Just ask @alex, pretty sure his forecast grid goes from like 1500 ft to 2700 ft.

I was definitely on the southern end of the dry air up by @tamarack. Between the bands @dendrite and @tunafish were in. I can see the weenies on CoCoRaHS though. We have the same liquid but everyone is an inch higher on snow.

Not often I get beat that bad by the “Jetport”

Final total of 4.6” on 0.36” liquid. As we expected.

Congrats?

Start times are different. This one is 7 am to 7 am, the other is 7 pm to 7 pm.

A little more than I thought 7.7”

High end advisory/low end warning is going to double my season total. No complaints.

It’s because it’s not an arctic front anymore, otherwise it would’ve nailed it.

The ground is warm? We’re actually making some real frost depth up here right now with the lack of snow cover and cold temps. Ground temps aren’t going to limit anything.

I just bake them into the forecast. It is pretty routine to see models overamplify in the short term (days 2 or 3) and then in the last 24 hours just slide a little or flatten out. So then I am left sitting at the WFO with the snow totals...

Scooter might let his kids out of the basement, it's starting to converge on a nice forcing signal around his backyard.

In theory you don't have to have a meteorology degree, but there is a list of required coursework that more or less means you would have received a BS in meteorology or atmospheric science.

Speaking not of ALY, but the NWS more broadly, I think there is a tendency to get sucked in by the QPF. The pressures of short staffing combined with added duties beyond the forecast are leading to more and more step by step building of the forecast. It's great for duplication and amending the forecast, but it can lead to less critical thinking at times. For instance, does the QPF max location make physical sense? Is the storm moving slow enough for widespread double digit snowfall? etc. That's why I like coming here and talking about the weather. It forces me to think about why I'm doing what I'm doing in the grids. And when in doubt I can always start high and adjust higher based off the KFS.

I already have the hair.

If you take a look at the latest NAM/GFS in Bufkit, even out Scooter's way it's like an hour of maybe catpaws and then it starts ripping.

That's more or less where I drew my max amounts too.

I capped the max around 15:1. One thing I definitely am not comfortable with is having a third of an inch of QPF and using 20:1 ratios to get me a warning. That's John McClane on the runway stuff right there.

I am a little worried I'm maybe too heavy near the coast, and that the best banding ends up inland a bit. I'm also not quite as bullish as my neighbors on snow ratios (closer to BOX than anyone else).

Okay, I updated the snowfall. Probably going to piss off @wxeyeNH and make @dryslot happy.

Poor guy just wanted to make a better snow ratio. I actually wouldn't hate the equation if it just capped ratios on the cold side. You could have a scenario where the lower end of the DGZ (-12C) is the warmest temp in the column, and the forecast ratio would be like 22:1. We know those single digit snowfalls can often be Arctic sand.