Jump to content

SnowGoose69

Professional Forecaster
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    16,198

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by SnowGoose69

  1. SnowGoose69
    The NAO rise is sort of fake. The calculation used for the indices sees that funky almost west-east oriented ridge poking towards the Azores from the Caribbean on the ensembles after 2-10 which is maybe leading to the false calculation of a positive NAO because that ridge coupled with the Greenland and Baffin ridge is driving screaming flow over the Atlantic in between. The pattern though is still blocked up
  2. SnowGoose69
    The GFS is slowest to get rid of the SE ridging and shove the arctic air mass way south. The CMC basically does it by Wednesday. I’m not sure if I buy the GFS idea. I think the threats after midweek might be SE US snow falls
  3. SnowGoose69
    The models have been falling the last week or two going too strong on any SE ridging beyond day 4-5. Just 5 days ago models had highs in the 60s and 70s tomorrow across the SE US in SC NC GA and now they’ll be lucky to crack 55.
  4. SnowGoose69
    The 18Z ICON likes it for inland people
  5. SnowGoose69
    The GFS sometimes in La Niñas can win on these ideas like Sunday where northern stream dominance prevents a storm. I would normally toss this but in a La Niña winter I am wary of this sort of solution when the GFS is on its own
  6. SnowGoose69
    Its pretty amazing how Miller B type storms even into the early 2000s busted severely at times. I feel as if every busted forecast we had from the middle 80s to the early 2000s was some degree of a Miller B or those diving vorts out of Canada that the models always tried to blow a low up off the Delmarva or NJ and nothing ever happened. I must have been involved in forecasting every one of them or my memory is very good. These are several I clearly remember. In each case you can see the similarity and models in each one developed the low too far south or overdug the vorts. In some cases they were off 100 miles or more at 24 hours. Yeah, 1992 was a bad year. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/fxg1/NARR/1992/us0116.php http://www.meteo.psu.edu/fxg1/NARR/1992/us0228.php http://www.meteo.psu.edu/fxg1/NARR/1992/us1205.php http://www.meteo.psu.edu/fxg1/NARR/1997/us0217.php
  7. SnowGoose69
    Does anyone else find it sort of funny the normally cold biased GFS basically has had Op run after Op run the last 3 days with the trof digging the least and the most SE ridging the next 2 weeks out of the three major globals? Really strange. The CMC and Euro have been repeatedly keeping the thermal gradient centered in the gulf states run after run
  8. SnowGoose69
    They did okay, NBC made two incorrect tweets which confused everyone. Central Park used to always report at 4 or 430 for the climate report in addition to at 7am, 1pm, 7pm, 12am. I believe starting 2 winters ago they stopped reporting at midnight on some occasions and at 430 on all days for some reason
  9. SnowGoose69
    HAHA...We will know soon I guess...I think 16.3 is right
  10. SnowGoose69
    Now I'm really confused...is the total 16.3 or 18.3?!
  11. SnowGoose69
    It shows how even in a new climate for the Atlantic and East Coast that if the Pac is in 1948-1955 mode its pretty much impossible to get big snow events anywhere near the coast here.
  12. SnowGoose69
    The 15.3 was actually at 4pm, not 1pm
  13. SnowGoose69
    Initially I thought they meant 15.3 as if 1pm and that made no sense. This also shows their ratios fell down closer to 10 to 1 as we moved through late morning into afternoon which makes sense as well
  14. SnowGoose69
    Now the Central Park report makes sense...The NWS PNS has the 15.3 as of 4pm...not 1pm...that I can believe
  15. SnowGoose69
    15.3 seems off to me. They had 5.3 as of 7am...I don't know if that was 5.3 total or 3.3 today and 2.0 yesterday. They had only .55 liquid 12-18Z so unlikely they could get 10 inches out of that, nevermind 8
  16. SnowGoose69
    Thanks....I could not figure out why EWR was 2 inches too low from there 4 group of 4/015
  17. SnowGoose69
    5pm climate reports as of 430. EWR 13.0, LGA, 10.7, JFK 10.1, ISP 9.6, NYC does not measure again til 7.
  18. SnowGoose69
    83 I think had a much better air mass in place, 09 was pretty meh...both events the TSSN corridor was pretty much at the back edge where the 650-850 erly jet speed dropped off. In 83 that was NNJ and NYC, 09 it was SW NJ...today it should have been in the area bounded by ABE/TTN/FWN roughly.
  19. SnowGoose69
    Might need to see 00Z soundings to see how widespread warmth is...I cannot get any aircraft soundings today since there are practically no flights into those 3 airports. No model showed 925 or 850 getting that far west til tonight if at all so its likely random little layers here or there at 750-875 that are 0.1 or 0.2C
  20. SnowGoose69
    Just seems strange that the 12/09 and 2.83 events which had pretty similar setups in regard to that insane easterly inflow had widespread TSSN and this one did not...those were more in the Miller A type category however (not sure 83 was a true Miller A but it was not a B). so might be more involved.
  21. SnowGoose69
    I believe the lack of thundersnow might be the result of milder ocean temps. The east flow in the 600-650 layer probably causing warmer temps, less instability than normal. This is a storm that 20-30 years ago would have almost certainly have had widespread TSSN.
  22. SnowGoose69
    How warm is LI Sound this year? So warm NYC is 32 and LGA 33 while JFK is 30!
  23. SnowGoose69
    EWR at 15 now...NYC is likely around 16-17
  24. SnowGoose69
    The sleet line made it further inland more west than it did east. Parents house in Merrick LI never went over but places in Brooklyn did
  25. SnowGoose69
    Yeah I don't get the sleet....I said we might see a dry slot today but I felt any sleet risk was tonight once the precip was basically shutoff and 925 or 850s on LI went over 0C...the sleet now may just be rogue warm layers of like 0.2C somewhere
×
×
  • Create New...