weatherwiz

Something to be extremely careful with and I've seen a bit of this on X is you have to be extremely careful just using QPF trends as a means of seeking out north/south trends. Ultimately, that is a practice that shouldn't be used in the first place but that holds especially true in this setup. there are many other factors at play with this which will impact QPF...not just total QPF but northward extent of QPF. You can increase the dynamics and forcing aloft WITHOUT having a bump north in the sfc low which can result in both increasing the QPF and blossoming QPF north. There is room for a quite a bit of PVA into the region with favorable upper-level dynamics and we may continue to see increasing QPF into the region which is independent of storm track

There would be a good chance for a heavy band well north

Which I don't think should have been a big surprise. That's how these setups tend to typically evolve. This is a setup in which I am very curious how the AI camp would perform...there is alot of physics at play here and even the traditional modeling can struggle in that sense...not to the fault of the models but more of a product of just a lack of more powerful computing (que quantum computing). If I had to guess, I think we continue seeing more bumps...I don't see a whole lot arguing for keeping this too far south (big change from what I was thinking a day or two ago).

Where convection develops and blossoms too is going to play a big role in where sfc low either re-develops or rapidly begins to strengthen. If convection can develop rapidly off the SC coast and be more consolidated (MCS like) this would bode very well for pumping up heights northeast of it. I kind of think this may be in the ballpark of what the 0z Euro was doing...but there is also the whole northern branch to consider. There is just so many moving pieces with this and so many smaller scale processes which are going to play big roles.

Confluence is always a PITA to forecast but I think right now, I would favor a track more north. As modeled, the bulk of the confluence being more north I think favors potential for additional northern pushes. But we also have room to continue building the heights northeast of this. The degree and intensity of CAD into the mid-Atlantic may also play a big factor

Should also see some squalls move across the region tomorrow...particularly along the Mass Pike. Timing late afternoon and evening

The biggest challenge in all of this is going to be how far south the Arctic boundary can get before stalling. This is always a big challenge...the past several winters dealing with these scenarios I think there has been a tendency for models to be not aggressive enough with how far into the South the boundary gets. Also, in this case it is very feasible the sfc front gets deeper into the South while say front around 850 is held back as it pushes against stronger mid-level ridging from the strong ridging east of Florida. This would play a big role in where cyclogenesis ultimately develops but looking at the pattern over the Northeast I think we would stand a good shot at building this north enough to at least get a significant event to the coast.

One thing to watch too is this will likely heavy (heavy) precip well north of the sfc low...more north than you would typically expect

This is definitely concerning in terms of a widespread ice storm within the mid-South, however, with that the north trends that have been ongoing are very noteworthy and should not be dismissed. I would not be surprised if the sfc low actually developed a bit faster and farther west than what the GFS had (6z run). It might be difficult for interior but coastal New England could be in play for some significant snows

I need around 84-85” to hit 100” so really need these next few weeks to step it up

yup...iPhone weather app. He just told me.

I'll ask him. He lives near Boston so I'm guessing its for Boston area but for Sunday, January 25 it says 15-18" for total snowfall for the day

I had a friend send me a screen shot of this earlier saying, "wtf"

Leaning in the direction of suppression for here but holy hell is this going to be extremely high impact across the mid South and probably even to the Gulf Coast again. If I was in say Houston I would be very concerned again for a significant ice storm...seeing the GFS as cold as it is with that boundary nearby...raises big concerns. GFS has often in the past been one of the last to catch up to the extent of llvl cold down there with these Arctic fronts

my guess would be distinct amounts from both days since these were separate systems

I sure did...I was reading it while eating breakfast and making coffee lol.

I just want to de-clothe and lay in the middle of the yard

Everything is just caked and snow and has been since about late Saturday morning. Almost to the point where another probably 2-3 inches of this and we'd be seeing some limbs break off and probably power outages. I can't remember the last time it was really this photogenic outside...in fact, its like pictures don't even do the true justice. This is probably how it looks like in parts of Alaska all winter long.

My bad totally misunderstood. I was actually using cobb11 in that screen shot You're right...its not the max temp you can adjust, its the fixed ratio.

Can’t ask for a more wintry look then this

About 2.5” here from evening/overnight. 6.5” between the 2 days

Solid 700-500mb fronto setting up there

This was an absolutely confidence boost in taking AI more seriously in the medium range. Now, we can't assume that AI is just going to nail the medium range but the value this could provide is huge. Inside of 48 hours we just continue relying on the mesos and.

We'll see what happens. This is one of the more nail biting nowcast situations in a while. Hopefully that area of 700 fronto along Long Island is some indication of where we'll get better banding developing later and hints at stuff blossoming farther north and west. 850mb fronto is getting there so we should at least continue seeing precip blossom across the region later on

Yeah any warning amounts would probably be too isolated or localized to really justify a warning.