OceanStWx

This new formatter is so literal. It just takes the highest and lowest amounts rather than trying to pick a "most likely" snowfall bin. I usually hand edit to something more reasonable, like someone in Androscoggin was more likely to 6-10" than 3-11".

Welp, another 3.7" today brings me to 62.2" for the season.

700'? You're effed. Seriously though, I went "pessimistic" and used Bufkit max temp in profile snow ratios (since this will be a relatively warm storm). With that and compaction it still spits out between 2.5 and 10" at GYX across the suite of models. The wild part is that most of the damage is done in 3 to 4 hours across the area.

I'm definitely taking them up, the question is how far. It's going to be a really close call for GYX.

So I can't find anything besides the RAP that gives me less than 8" in AUG. And that's because the RAP cuts off after 3 hours of snow before 00z.

Negative tilt, left exit, a little warm season juice from down south...

I kinda feel like we're going to slapped up here. Someone just north of this low is going flash over to paste, and it could be GYX/LEW.

Western Maine mountains should get crushed based on the low development and LLJ.

Or later this week.

http://hudson.dl.stevens-tech.edu/sfas/ It actually overpredicted for BOS and PWM which a model almost never does.

Do you remember any specifically? We have National Blend waves now (which does include some Euro). They verify pretty well so far. Surge we're fairly limited in GFE (ESTOFS or ETSS) but we can see others on the web and adjust forecasts accordingly. The Stevens Institute SNAP-EX model does pretty well.

I can (have someone else ) create an AWIPS smart tool using 925 wind, LR, and depth to spit out a wind gust forecast grid. It's a lot harder to calculate pressure gradient across an area and do the same thing. So that's what made picking the variables tough. But those three variables got me to about 80% of the variance in gusts.

I IDed events using 850 > 50 knots, and then used the 925 wind to do the multiple regression. Because honestly we're never getting the 850 wind to the surface. Oddly the 925 wind correlated better at PWM than the 500 mb did. I figured the closer to the ground you get the better, but not necessarily the case. I also really need a level that models produce data for, because otherwise the regress is no good. I need something I can use to produce a forecast.

I think I grabbed 73 events with a CHH 850 wind of 50 knots or greater. I looked at 500 m wind, 500 m lapse rates, and depth. The multiple regression equation eked out 0.577 correlation. So those variables barely explained half of the variance in observed wind gusts (+/- 2 hours from balloon launch) at CHH. So there's something else factoring in for Outer Cape wind gusts. I think my method works quite well inland though, especially for near coastal areas (gets a little squirrely in terrain when 925 depths get shallow).

That's also at 115 ft elevation on an ocean facing dune it looks like. I see plenty of 50-55 knots on the Outer Cape though. The farther you get out on the Cape the steeper the LLLR are and the more penetrating the LLJ gets to the ground. I tried doing the correlation for CHH too (since they have balloons too) and let me tell you there is no correlation to wind speed and gusts really. They are just exposed from every wind direction and that really messes with the data.

I'm trying to see how my correlations at PWM/GYX work outside our local area, but they would suggest peak gusts around 45 knots for the Cape based on the 12z NAM. Really have to get the 925 winds over 60 knots to give HWW a real chance, especially in a stable environment. These NE flow events tend to have deeper boundary layers though, with steeper low level lapse rates.

Last WPC analysis was 976 (with a 1070 high over the Arctic!).

7.9" brings me to 58.5 for the season

Wiz letting the day 3 marginal risk sneak up on the thread?

Well looks like they've confirmed EF3 so far in East Nashville

Lead time is only good with proper dissemination methods. If people turn off phone notifications and/or don't have a weather radio it's unlikely they get the warning. Sirens are in effect an outdoor warning system, and not designed to wake you up in the middle of the night. And if you aren't already watching TV you aren't going to get break ins in coverage. Nocturnal tornadoes are a big problem. TDS height suggests EF3 strength.

They've changed the whole reporting and logging of ASOS maintenance so that I can't even get in and see what if any work BOX has done lately.

I was there last night...

I think they've been able to trace the genetics back to late October as a likely patient zero. I do think because we weren't looking for it that we definitely have many more cases than being reported currently.

Reporting today on the genetic testing suggests that community transmission has been going on for "weeks" in the Pac NW. So I'm fully prepared for a rapid escalation in infection numbers once testing capabilities are scaled up. It will likely be breathlessly reported as a shock, but I think that should be viewed as the reality right now. The failed test kit really cost the US on containment. They had to send samples to CDC directly, and since that was time consuming and expensive, testing was limited to people who had recently traveled from/through China. Never mind the goat rodeo that was HHS dealing with repatriating patients coming back from China on the AFB in CA. My sister was set to have her marriage ceremony/reception in Italy in April (actually justice of the peace next weekend in SFO). So that is pretty much toast and we're trying to recover as much of our deposits as possible.