weatherwiz

I was going to do some errands around 6:30 this morning (may day started at 4:00 cleaning a dog pee/poop party ). I go outside and everything was glazed...I was not chancing driving anywhere. Errands weren't that important.

This is a big flag right now, IMO. At least the HRRR (haven't checked the RAP) doesn't seem like it gets any banding going. Or if it does it is nothing to sneeze at.

I think there are alot of little nuisances going on. But this is continuing a common trend we've seen with storms within compressed flows these last at least few winters. We get some really amped looks and everyone gets excited, there is an expectation there will be a cave geared towards the more amped models we we start to see say this around 48h. Then we get inside 36 hours and its a collapse and trend towards the less amped. Let's say that is the result when all said and done here...then clearly there is something within this 0h-72h window that forecast models struggle with mightily. There is something within the physics that models seem to be extremely sensitive too.

I do think there will be some 10-12" totals but outside of the banding I think we're looking at the lower end for snowfall ranges. It's still going to be a decent event...I would anticipate still a widespread 5-6" for most.

This is going to be a total nowcast. I am really not sure what to make of the QPF outputs. I feel like outside of the heavier fronto banding the QPF is going to underperform. The NAM has me really nervous too with what looks like the idea of two bands (one centered around Albany and the second northeastern Mass into northeast CT/far northwest RI maybe?). The GFS also kind of hints at this too but seems to phase the bands together and CT into northeast MA gets smoked.

And I get to go forth with my May 1st thread

The other reason I hate snow maps is they aren’t stimulating. There’s nothing like loading up bufkit, clicking the overview tab, hitting reset, checking off snow growth, checking off omega, checking that box next to omega, going into the precip panel, clicking snowfall and precipitation and setting snow ratio to Cobb…now that is one of the most stimulating sequences there is.

I’m nervous that ratios are going to be subpar outside of the banding. Probably barely 10:1 despite the airmass

It was at ORH…at least 12z gfs was. Beautiful crosshair…rip of clothes type stuff

Ratios should be great but going to need to get some good lift to do so. I’m worried that outside of the banding the lift may not be all that great and ratios won’t be the best. I debated going 4-7” but I do think at least part of the state gets into banding

Threw this together earlier. While there is a strong idea for one (maybe two) fronto bands, it’s nearly impossible to know where they occur right now. I do think you’ll see 812” where it happens but not enough confidence where that occurs to highlight on a map. Also worried for some subsidence zones where snow growth and rates will be awful and that will hold totals lower somewhere. Of course any last minutes ticks in either direction have huge implications too

Let me know how Lysell looks

ORH will be getting thunder tomorrow!!

GFS bufkit remains pretty impressive looking at ORH.

Verbatim they could be in the jackpot zone. I'm curious though if the Euro is a bit too far southeast with the heaviest banding. Not just saying that because of the known bias that the heaviest banding tends to be northwest of what models show but because the evolution of the storm makes sense for the banding to develop well northwest and then maybe collapse towards center, but not sure that happens in this case without lack of H7 development. I still also wonder if we see two bands develop. One well northwest that smokes Berkshires and northwest Connecticut and a second which would be from about BOS through ORH to Kevin and in between gets kind of screwed. I am a little nervous about this scenario.

does anyone have any H7 VV maps they can post. weathermodels blows

I just edited the post...the wording was horrific Hopefully anyone who read it understood what I was trying to say. Haven't finished my coffee yet.

One thing to be careful of when using QPF to diagnose trends in the track is an increase/decrease in QPF can also be related to mlvl evolution. Yes that is also influenced on track but there are other factors to consider.

One of the few times we can probably ask NYC

I have a deal...if guidance doesn't collapse towards the Euro then I will not make a May 1st thread. So for a compromise, if the compromise isn't Euro favored then no May 1st thread.

Well if the Euro was the only model showing a big hit and every other model was a strung out POS...everyone would be tossing those other models and siding with Euro...

The GFS knows how to suck people in and once it has...there is no turning back. Once it shows a big hit, especially for multiple runs, it becomes a game of doing anything possible to justify why the GFS may be right. Been there and done that. No more

I hate when you see this because there is absolutely zero way to tell if it is correct. Sometimes guidance that shows this ends up being out to lunch and other times the guidance that had this ended up nailing it...but there is no way to know until basically now time. I was thinking that convection wasn't really impressive enough for that to happen but idk.

I don't know. I don't really have a good answer for that. But all I know is there have been many instances of being burned, even inside this range because of discounting models or solutions and for various reasons. Some of the reasons include; 1) Because the solutions aren't showing what we want, 2) the solutions go against original thoughts, 3) it is very difficult to separate emotions from a forecast I'm speaking from personal experience here but there have been way too many times I jump on the "big snow" train because the NAM and/or GFS + ensembles are coming in hot and heavy...the Euro isn't quite there but "I'm expecting it to come aboard". So I go big on the snow. Then as guidance starts to collapse, I let emotions get in the way of reality and I try and look for anything...something that justifies the snowier scenario, even though its clear and evident its not happening. Yesterday I thought this was going to be a pleasant surprise and even today I've made some posts saying I think a foot could be possible where the heaviest banding occurs. And I can sit here now and try to find anything...something to justify that and just run with it because it fits my motive...but the reality is that just isn't there. When it comes down to it we just have to ask ourselves, in this type of setup, what warrants a solution which is more amped versus less amped? Off all the pieces at play here, historically what is the outcome? IMO, how quickly that front drops south and east is going to be huge. The more amped solutions are slower with the south and east progression of the front but it is from my brief experience that guidance can often be too slow with this...this would leave me to believe that amped/northwest is not as likely. I am also very nervous with the indications of the stronger convection well off the mid-Atlantic and that playing some role. This is something which has been discounted in the past but often times becomes a bit player. Too many flags right now and if we expect there will be some last minute miracle...well that doesn't happen often

Well something will be caving at 0z. I'm sure we'll see some sort of compromise but its probably going to be mostly geared towards the Euro. Been burned way too many times on this before. I've had so many situations I get all amped up over crazy NAM/GFS runs at this stage, disregard the Euro, go aggressive on snow maps, only to be burned. The old me would be throwing out 6-10'' or 8-12'' today. Tired of making the same mistakes over and over. But this is depressing...time for a 3rd rum and coke soon.