weatherwiz

I think analogs are kinda stupid. I totally get the significance of them but I think they're misinterpreted or misunderstood.

The euro has tiny pockets of surface-based CAPE move across the region!!! not surprised given those lapse rates...wish Ryan's page had elevated CAPE but I would think we could be dealing with some weak elevated CAPE...could see elevated convection (especially in the "warm sector").

The progression between 108-120 is extremely odd regarding the ULL...very jumpy. So either a resolution type thing or just major uncertainty regarding where the closed circulation will actually be present...that blimp has major ramifications on the sfc product

Pretty much...this just adds another potential solution to the cards instead of zeroing in on any particular solution...which is still find given the range we're at. The majority of the diversion within the forecast models happen around Thursday or so and it's with how the trough/ridge evolve. Once this aspect is sampled and observed I think we should have a pretty clear idea of what to expect with the only uncertainties surrounding areas which are borderline.

The looks you get from people will be awesome

Could be a quite a bit of convection and convective elements involved...mlvl lapse rates approaching 8 with the mlvl low!!!!!

At least it warms into the mid 60's tomorrow!

That would certainly help with confidence here..obviously could certainly happen as there is still a large spread in wiggle room with this but seeing the GFS and Euro slowly with some ticks south is somewhat of a good sign. If the 12z euro comes in anything like the Ukie that would be a bit more concerning.

I would be extremely shocked if the sfc low ended up that far north

Not true...had to adjust my neck to see the date

Just realized the GFS goes into February...by that logic there is just two more full months to go on the models before we hit May

I would really focus, pay attention to, or even look at BL temps right now.

I agree...not very far off for us. Just want to continue seeing improvements aloft...will deal with thermals as we get closer. but at the end of the day...if we continue to see these improvements aloft thermals won't be of concern

The GFS is an absolute crush job up north...smoked with snow. SOme prolific totals with that

Not sure how much this means for down the road and for us but one thing I've noticed is the NAM (and even Euro) seem to be much stronger with this system as it develops and slowly moves through the Missouri Valley. In fact, both the NAM and Euro are indicating the possibility of a pretty hefty band of snow setting up across parts of MO, IA, and IL. Some definitive differences between the NAM and GFS begin to develop through the day Thursday.

Wind chill advisory for Miami, FL. wind chill there may get into the mid 30's tonight. Pray for them

I was actually just reading about that not long ago. Think it was within one of moduels on MetEd...was quite interesting to read about it.

That's a major problem...verification of 500 should not be that far off at 24-hours out. Is there a seasonal trend too within these graphs? Especially the first one....much more accurate scores up to 120-out during the summer and less accurate in the winter...which makes sense

This is a fantastic post! Obviously a significant aspect to model errors is now everything is initialized...but as you know just b/c an initialization is incorrect doesn't mean the entire model run should be tossed. But from what I've always understood is that the Euro's initialization scheme is far more advanced than ours and that makes a significant advantage in the accuracy of the model. I have thought if sometimes whether the models consider just too much...so in the end you're just including more variables and just relying on the mathematical equations to solve them and by running ensembles you derive numerous different outputs and just look for whatever the clustering is...good idea in sense but perhaps not as great as one would think. I would be interested in the scores but my wager is we've seen so much changes (even with large-scale) inside of 24-36 hours that even short-term forecasting has become rather erratic. Just think of how many storms (going beyond winter weather) have a high level of uncertainty until we're inside of 6-12 hours.

Absolutely... however, (an obviously) with that comes limitations and why of course sometimes ensembles are not always the best way to go...even in the medium range. If the mean is too smoothed then the ensemble may "eliminate" a key feature having significant ramifications of the forecast output.

This. I always wonder with so much emphasis now into higher resolutions if that is playing a roll into some of the model chaos we've encountered these past few years. There have been a tremendous amount of wavering between forecast models...even inside 24-36 hours. I don't have much knowledge with model physics or a background, however, from my understanding to incorporate higher resolutions and incorporate some mesoscale features there needs to be different sets of equations added into the model parameterization? Anyways, while it's great to be able to do things at such high resolution if the physics are being adjusted accordingly or improvements being made I would think doing things at higher resolutions could hurt more than help?

I'm starting to like this idea more and more and I think we'll continue hedging in that direction. Despite the marginal air mass ahead of this system the lower and mid levels actually start cooling ahead of it. I think my biggest concern with this system is going to be with occlusion and whether that happens too early which could lower the ceiling a bit regarding potential snow totals. But I'm not sold on flooding in much warmer air...even into CT with this system. I think this partly has to do with occlusion but after an initial surge of WAA we actually bring in CAA from the SW which I think can be contributed to occlusion...or singling it

It's great that there is the ability to very quickly views soundings (point-and-click) from various websites, however, bufkit still has strong advantages. For one, you can load up as many profiles as you want into bufget and with the click of a button you can instantly (well not instantly...does take a small amount of time to gather the data) view the most current data for numerous stations. One of my profiles has about 106 or so various stations...takes about 2-3 minutes to compile but it's all available on one display. Like what was stated above...very easy to quickly scroll through the soundings and you have the ability to see other information which isn't available on other sites. Also agreed...this certainly needs to be kept up with the times a bit more. I also wish there was an extensive "user manual" to go through everything bufkit has to offer and explain each feature...there are numerous products which I am unsure of the use, how to interpret them, or how to apply them.

At this stage the only importance when it comes to agreement is that there is agreement on a storm and agreement that it can be a rather significant one...when focusing on just those two aspects there is pretty decent agreement and a pretty strong signal. In terms of any agreement right now on any other aspect it's all minute and really insignificant. There are going to be subtle changes/differences over the next 72-96 hours that any agreement we see now (outside of a few features) really means nothing.

That's what has really been screwing with models looking in the medium-to-long range...the MJO has been on the active side and given the models struggle with the MJO it's yielded extremely uncertainty moving forward. Even short-term...there is uncertainty with how the MJO behaves before its signals weakens. Anyways...I think things are looking rather volatile moving towards the end of the month into February. I don't see any signals to lock-in cold for a pro-longed period...but this is something which I think is a bit overrated...especially given we're moving through the meat of climo. One signal which remains strong is how the Pacific looks to evolve with a very strong signal for a major EPO ridge to build across the NPAC. Would it be nice for the NAO/AO to be negative too...absolutely, but what I think to look for would be periods where they are "less positive" or becoming "less positive"...this signal can yield a brief influx of a colder airmas and then you just take your chances with timing with any storms...in which the pattern should be active.