weatherwiz

Yup...often times guidance can be too quickly to break those types of patterns down. When you're getting deep troughs and potent lows into the GoA and that becomes reinforced, it is very hard to overcome that. You figure out peak winter climo for snow is like mid-January to mid-February...not a good look to see as we start to approach that period.

With the way things are looking to evolve for the end of the month moving into January...not a good sign at all. That isn't something that is just going to break down in a day or two either. Both the PAC and Arctic don't look to be doing us any favors...not a good sign to see moving into January.

meh I don't really buy into that whole ice growth/snow pack stuff. That is more of a reflection of the pattern versus something that is more of a pattern driver/builder.

Obviously this is just one piece to everything, but it can't be great seeing the PV becoming stronger and bottled up right in the Arctic. The entire northern Hemisphere virtually becomes above-average temperature wise and guess where the most anomalous warmth looks to occur...ahhh southeastern Canada. Almost looks strong Nino like upcoming

I am hoping to get to read this today. Want to read it on a day when I can read it and digest all of it without distractions.

Not going to lie...I've actually watched several videos

It’s chilly out. Was just outside with the dog checking for drones. Probably go out a few more times during the first and second intermissions…assuming I stay up that late

When I was outside with the dog last night and looking for meteors (I did get to see a few) I am fairly certain I saw a drone in the distance. My initial thought that it was an airplane, when planes land on BDL, depending on the wind, they will make a north arrival so they overshoot BDL and then turn over Springfield and not being terribly far from the airport, they are lower in the sky. Anyways, this was very low, just above the horizon and moving way too slowly. I have zero clue though how nobody knows what these sightings really are. Actually, I think it's total BS...there is much more that is known that what is being presented to us.

It’s what I expected but doesn’t change the fact that it sucks

This cold sucks. I miss the 60’s and 70’s from last month

Also looks like you have the system going negatively tilted down into Alabama/Georgia...huge change from what we've typically been seeing.

Too add on to that statement as well, I feel like if we're going to get a region-wide solid storm, it isn't something that is going to be well modeled several days in advance. It will be a product of subtle trends leading up to the day or two before. Perhaps this will such a scenario.

I actually agree with this statement. One key to watch I think is with the front Tuesday. It's a weak front but that could set the baroclinic zone which could come in play for the Thursday ordeal. There has been some signals for cyclogenesis to actually occur closer to the coast versus inland over the mid-Atlantic.

yeah this may end up being a solid storm for up that way.

I think this is a product of literally being controlled by the models. It's all good and fun looking in the fantasy range for storms but some take it way too seriously and close to heart...so naturally when these don't verify the panic button is pressed because it seems like, "we're losing opportunities". Or on the other end, when the OP looks "dry" in the long-range the panic button is pushed.

It's definitely a concern, no doubt. But we have to start somewhere. When you're in such a rut like we're in, often things have to do perfectly....that philosophy even extends outside of weather. Look at sports, when teams are rolling sometimes it seems no matter what they do it works out beautifully but when you're in a rut...nothing can seem to go right.

Would like to continue seeing this as we get to our climatological peak period. Get this pattern to remain and we we continue to see wavelengths change in response to the season...sometimes that can be all the difference.

Comparing model runs beyond 180 hours and coming to the conclusion that the models "lost" the storm because 0z had a storm coming up the coast while 6z is 300 miles offshore is a head scratcher. I also don't understand how the OP can be defined as "bad" just because the SLP maps don't show something. But I think people know that and well...this is a good place to vent frustrations But when that bleeds into interrupting good discussion then it gets old.

Been assessing that this morning. I wouldn't be surprised if we see another scenario, particularly in the valleys where it takes an awful long time to mix out. Hell, there even seems to be enough to keep some colder air wedged in even at 925. Some pretty strong WAA going on too so I wouldn't be surprised if the degree of QPF is a bit underdone too.

Portions of northern New England could get a nice event at the end of the week followed by another round of epic LES Friday/weekend.

If that snow map were to verify I will cancel all May 1st threads for good, never make a severe thread again, or ever mention the word thunderstorm or severe ever again.

Oh how we pray

It's been soooo long since we've seen a storm form off the Carolina coast and move up the coast far enough offshore to pound us. This is what I want to see...tired of seeing these storms blossom in the TN Valley or interior mid-Atlantic.

See what 12z GEFS show but at least looking at 0z I think I would feel a little better if that trough axis was modeled to be positioned a bit farther east into our region versus into the Ohio Valley. Until we shake this ridiculous regime of trough axes digging into the OV with cyclogenesis occurring well to our southwest we're going to risk cutters. But the position and orientation of the PNA ridge does seem encouraging at least

Terrific post. There is alot to be desired on how weather events are communicated but when it comes to relaying uncertainty, it's a whole new level of challenge. When it comes to most of our weather events (maybe this can apply across the country too) they aren't textbook setups. Most of our winter weather events are textbook KU's, most of our severe weather events aren't associated with EML's, and with our synoptic rainfall events...there is just too much with local terrain that influences flooding. I'm sure this is done behind the scenes but when forecasting these type of events and assessing the potential, just like you said, you can't dismiss because of past failures but you want to understand why the events that failed did and why the ones that produced ended up producing. But this is easier said than done because these setups aren't that textbook and more times than not they come down to how things evolve in the mesoscale.