JC-CT

1 minute ago, Ginx snewx said:

Yep

Crushing? I'm sorry, I just don't feel that description fits the verbatim model output vs the upper ceiling of this event.

2 minutes ago, weathafella said:

 CMC is a crushing.

pretty colors but it maxes out at about an inch of qpf for e mass and less west. I wouldn't call it a crushing.

I'd also feel pretty good right now east of 495.

Aren't all the runs based in part on the previous run?

4 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

I don't believe the GFS 18z run gets the full compliment of data,... and is in part initialized off the first 6 hourly solution of the 12z guidance to fill any holes in the initialization.

That was the case up through 5 years ago - Walter Drag told me that some four or five years ago.  Not sure if that's till the case.. 

IF so,  ...that makes it about as good as any other ensemble member; granted, that doesn't mean things can't exactly evolve, but the problem is, the 12z was really only step two along a trend - so it appears. That means that the holes were plugged by a solution in flux to begin with...

Somewhere in that complexity exists the notion not to trust this solution is really in keeping with said trend because it's based on a melange of estimates and computations combined.

If it gets the full compliment of original and unique sampling... I still wouldn't be certain that as the mechanics enters the NW Territory from out of the Alaska sector ...if it's just not temporarily lost a bit. 

I'm still putting money on the biggest threat being SE zones... but also would not be shocked if this till gets farther NW in the end.

It gets airplane data but no balloons.

Either way, it gets only satellite data over bumpfk canada.

1 minute ago, EastonSN+ said:

I will be honest the GFS taking a step back has shaken me a bit. 

shaken? Do you have money riding on this?

3 minutes ago, EastonSN+ said:

To my untrained eye 18z GGEM looks better and stalled.

I always forget they started running that.

1 minute ago, Ginx snewx said:

By saying it's not out of the question I implied probability,  hope people understood 

Lol I meant uncertainty, but yeah.

4 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

I think I answered your question 

Uncertainty really makes some people uncomfortable. Not the hobby to be involved in then.

1 minute ago, Ginx snewx said:

Amazingly the 12 inch progs are higher than the last storm 84 out

Thermals, especially in the BL, are far better than the last go-around.

12 minutes ago, Bostonseminole said:

do u? seems not, go back to reading.

Everyone knows blue = snow and green = rain. What was he thinking?

9 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Early thoughts moderate powdery snow 6 to 12 outside 95 128, Stout heavy snow inside with a foot plus to the coast. OuterCape blizzard 

I agree, I think right now, caveat obviously could change (not for you), the consensus of best available guidance is what you describe.

I can't even find a town where the northern s/w is located at 18z. Fort Simpson? lol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Simpson

The southern shortwave was actually pretty robust this run. That is what I initially saw early in the run. It was the northern energy that wasn't as sharp, hence the more rounded turn.

The fact that the southern s/w is looking good is a good thing, considering it was over Wyoming at 18z.

1 minute ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

We should start stabilizing at h5 soon which indicates the nw halt has been capped. Sound the alarms out east, though.

18z tomorrow. Our canadian energy actually gets into a decent sampling area.

lol three times too

3 minutes ago, Bostonseminole said:

GFS ends the trend

I dunno. I actually like the main l/w trough this run, but the timing of the s/w was off.

Just now, weathafella said:

Happy hour less robust not still decent.

Positives and negatives to that run for sure.

I do wish that southern stream s/w wouldn't drag its feet so much

3 minutes ago, Baroclinic Zone said:

You couldn’t tell from init?

I think you know the answer to that question.

Just gotta look where those isobars are pointing.

Based on hour 9, I would be surprised if the GFS didn't show something pretty good. I guess I'll allow the run to continue though.

5 minutes ago, Sugarloaf1989 said:

WSW for West Virginia and Virginia. This is for snow Sunday and Monday. Is that related to this storm?

Yes

5 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Just so's we be clear yo -

I'm not talking about the NAM in comparison to other guidance.   I'm talking about the 3, 12 and 32 KM version of the NAM. 

But like I said, ...just my experience.  I must admit that I do not look at those finer meshed variations of the NAM on every event- it is entirely possible that the times I have, happened to collocate the low position similarly albeit coincidentally.   But I was aware of this... I was thinking ever time, well... they're not likely to place the low differently, just the attributes ...and seemed to always be the case.

In this situation, the finer the mesh, the more west the low position.  That may be completely understandable from a physics perspective/convective loading and so forth .. If so, could be a sign of where this thing is head in other guidance.  The Euro tonight is going to be pretty heavily sought after as a guidance source to put in nicely -

No I got you. I'm saying I've noticed the 3km will sometimes show a completely different solution than the 12km, to the point where you scratch your head and wonder if they are really the same model.

1 minute ago, NorEastermass128 said:

“We River East”

DIT 101

NAM was fine through the berks. 3km even better. 

Just now, Typhoon Tip said:

From my experience, usually, these higher resolution models don't really change those types of aspects; they're better for things like storm component/detailing, such as winds...QPF .. etc.

That's not my experience with the NAM.

Just now, Damage In Tolland said:

We R E

What?