weatherwiz

It's really not a big deal for most. I still think there is going to be a strip of 1-3'' (localized 4'' amounts) but it is going to be very narrow and be confined closer to the coast (though not the immediate coast).

These Arctic fronts are a giant pain in the ass. Not only is this a major forecast challenge for up here but pretty much along the entire front stretching down into southern Texas. Models have been wavering back and forth since last Friday about the wintry potential across southern Texas. 18z NAM even looking a little juicer down there for tomorrow night...thankfully they get above-freezing Friday

One thing to really watch too is some of the 6z bufkit soundings actually indicated a very brief period where there's actually some pretty decent lift getting into the DGZ. Despite the initially warmer temperatures, we cool off substantially rather quickly (especially above the sfc). Ratios could really help out with pushing towards the higher spectrum of 3-4''. If precip can hang up a bit someone towards the coast (but inland from the immediate shoreline) may be able to snag 4'' for sure.

The strip of any heavier banding is going to be so narrow tomorrow. But there also may be a bit of re-development or I guess rejuvenation towards the coastal plain. NAM does get a secondary push of stronger frontogenesis through. I could see some max snowfall totals pushing 3-4'' in spots. Might see a pretty sharp cutoff between like 0.5'' and 4'' of snow.

It's early but this is already the post of the year

It goes through his backyard in winter

Was thinking of maybe doing a strip of 2-4'' but overall think the majority of higher totals will be more in the 1-3'' range. Really like the signal for some stronger llvl lift moving across southern Connecticut. Regardless, the Thursday morning commute is going to be quite slick.

That's where I get a little fuzzy on, but I believe in these type of setups that doesn't necessarily matter much. If the llvls are sufficiently cold and you're relying more on llvl dynamics than mid-levels you can still get heavier precipitation rates and decent snow growth. It's an instance where the majority of the focus is within the llvls. Sort of like with low-topped convection...you're really utilizing the llvl of the atmosphere and not very worried about mid/upper levels.

looks like there may be a little meso-low that pops along the front...that would help with keeping precip going a little longer. These things are always super challenging. Once out of every like 20 setups you get an overproducer.

We'll see widespread light snow over a large area but the best chance for any accumulations IMO is going to be within a very tight and narrow corridor where llvl convergence is maximized. seems to be heading in that direction. And for the front as a whole...even moving across the Ohio and Tennessee Valley's this is looking a bit juicer for them. Often times it's a race between dry air and precip cutting off but there's a quite a bit of moisture on the backside of this front.

Actually...I could envision a 2-4'' deal from southern CT through RI and into SE MA tomorrow night. That's some pretty impressive llvl lift along a narrow corridor. Ratios may start a little poopy but should improve relatively quickly.

I'm not entirely sure we see much accumulation from this but there continues to be a pretty good signal for a narrow zone of enhanced convergence right along the front. Some different signals though how quickly the system moves through. Could have best enhancement along the coastal plain

That's a pretty strong Arctic front coming through Thursday. These are always a challenge because they often tend to come with a bit more precipitation than initially modeled but it's always a question of the race between cold air and precip. ending. There does appear to be a very narrow zone of enhanced convergence so there my be a nice little band of precip which materializes. Don't think it will be anything to give anyone accumulations but could be a possibly near the coast where convergence may be higher.

didn't mean to imply that it was any warmer or colder than the 12z run

18z NAM coming in toasty. Guess I should drop the idea of thinking we could see a colder solution. This is going to blow here. Time to start thinking about May.

This is quite challenging. I'm not totally convinced yet we just full on torch down this way. It's certainly a concern but the GFS has been very persistent in wanting to pop that secondary and ever so slightly jogging southeast with everything. Meanwhile the NAM/Euro definitely want to go west. Looks like all the models are actually handling the main vorticity pretty consistently...looks like the bigger differences overall are with that shortwave digging through the Ohio Valley.

We're only a few weeks away from the May 1st thread!!!!

Can't disagree with that. I guess my argument is that is the degree of lift and moisture ahead of them. But in this instance....precip may also be more banded in nature which is fairly common with very strong systems. And if this turns out to be the case...good luck to all forecasts

Well I think by 0z runs tomorrow night we'll have a much better idea. Not sure what this means for us but one thing I noticed with models is they have been trending wetter (as in more QPF) and stronger with this system as it dives into the Missouri and Tennessee Valley. They may get absolutely smoked in parts of KY/TN into the Foothills.

Wish I remembered that event

This is going to be a very fun storm to watch evolve. Some will get screwed and some will get nailed. This is where you just appreciate meteorology at its finest

The high retreating would mean a wind flow that has less of a northerly or a northeasterly component which can be a source for advecting drier air down from the north. But I see your point regarding the impressiveness of the WAA and the one event which sticks out to me is Valentine's Day 2007...an event I'm sure Tip has a sorrow love story about. Sure the retreating high allows for stronger WAA (especially in the llvls) but this is where secondary development is important and there are the signals secondary development may happen in time to reinforce the colder air in the llvls. And that's what I'm looking at...and combining with the dynamics. The moisture inflow with this is going to be ridiculous but what really transpires will come down to some mesoscale aspects and that's what leads into your mentions of waiting until later in the weekend to fine tune.

Your thoughts and thinking are certainly incredibly reasonable here which is always par of the course with you. It's always best to go conservative and you can always adjust towards a more aggressive scenario. I believe if the high was staying pit we would be getting dry air entrainment and that would significantly hurt things. This setup...this is extremely unique. There are certainly several red flags towards higher-end snow, but there are also numerous signals for some significant snow. As Ray stated, this will likely come down to mesoscale time but given the degree of dynamics at play and the airmass ahead of the storm..,I think the ceiling is high. But that comes with caution b/c there will likely be an extreme gradient between coastal/inland.

You're absolutely right here. Totally agree with this. I certainly wouldn't communicate this publicly. Just something to throw out for discussion here.

Well that's the thing...I think there is. I know some aren't in favor of looking into specifics this far out but at least on the GFS there are several bufkit soundings showing 50-60+ units of omega into the DGZ. If that were to verify we'd be talking 3-5'' per hour snowfall rates. There are certainly some flags at stake but there are also some pretty impressive signals indicating such potential. I actually think the high sliding and hauling ass to the east may actually help here b/c given the initial airmass we would be super dry aloft...so it hauling reduces the potential for dry air to contend with.