Typhoon Tip

I thought there was a 50/50 shot of that "give up and finally do it" look by the other models per the 00z's last night. That didn't happen... We did, however, continue pulling ticks off. That keeps the trend alive, but it also kind of smacks like a capitulation move may still be in the works. On to the 06z, still no fuller commitment, but yet more biting NW ticks. The only source that did not bite NW for ~41.8 miles of inflamed social media significance overnight was the 06Z Euro AI. Which actually tried to sneak a SE adjusting bum pump while no one was looking ( good luck getting that past this group). Until I know exactly "how" the machinery of these AI models work to produce their output, I shall remain dubious, either way. Having said that, the 06Z GFS AI finally brought the deep QPF as far NW as about me. I'm not necessarily taking that verbatim either. I don't know... there's still room to bodily bring this NW. At a larger synoptic consideration, the ridging component of this local time scale +PNA ( nested inside a longer termed -PNA as it is... I showed this yesterday), is actually anchored along a climo axis that has pummeled SNE to the point of punching breathing holes through the snow. This amplitude nesting into the trough east of that, is consummately biased on the eastern flank of the trough. That's possible... Basically, anywhere within with the trough is a non-lineary constructive interference, and it's like a wiggle room playing field. But, it does offer moves to the NW in a situation like this. It seems the GFS is the model system that is exposing that possibility - whether that actually occurs, notwithstanding. So... we might get that capitulation move. We might not. It may tick or two a couple more cycles and then all models have converged on a lock down testicle tickler for everyone but SE zones. Or it may not fully capitulate, but be enough so that we take a foot of reasonable return on investment. All these are still on the table, even at this range. There are two structural aspects I spent some time observing about the model recency, all sources. One, ...the lead space short-wave-ridging that rolls out ahead of amplifying troughs, is either erroneously under constructing in this, or, it is just going to be anomalously challenged. I kind of lean on the latter, because all guidance appear to have middling rollout ridge responses to this. That's an important aspect for getting this thing NW. Without it or a weaker version etc... we see this tendency to drift/bias E shortly after the RI phase of cyclogen captures the U/A via height falls and collocates. More rollout ridge, makes that move more NW or even stall so that said cyclogen can force it all more tucked. This doesn't end the story though. It's just that we'd like to see more rollout ridging. This could end up NW without out thru idiosyncrasy. Two, these models don't have very good 300 mb entrance fan jet situated NW of the mid troposphere height falls. I didn't not say 0. Is said 'ungood'. It's there is some of them, but could be better. It is a pretty important structural aspect that contributes to expanding precipitation NW of these lows. The NAM/Canadian and the Euro partially, all three have more of it... Curiously, the GFS has almost none. That's odd. Below is the GFS left, CMC right

I just be leery of the pivot point tho. This thing's going to move east but as it on whole crosses ~75 W longitude, it starts pivoting cyclonically... that's not a "stall" per se, but it does lengthen the time that a would-be moderate, albeit narrow band of production is caused to momentarily situate closer to the axis of rotation... probably southern VT/NH, then slides south while fading kind of thing. The sounding stuff is valid, but I see that drying aspect as being gradate steeply S of that W east oriented band.

Yeah, that trend W is probably not done considering that it’s oblong pulling n that direction and there’s all those dense members on that western semicircle

We’re in the midst of the whip back trend that would seem

NAM skill in this range is vaguely dependable at best.

I wouldn’t focus on the QPF That 500 mill bar combined with that surface there’s no way that thing isn’t causing major major snow problems, clear to Fitchburg

With that 500 mill bar in that surface depiction the way that series has it? I know you just meant in general, but that thing would have huge wind and snow problems all the way in But I don’t use that model anyway so just commenting to what that looks like. It actually kind of reminds me of the old DGEX

I’m actually wondering if the 00 runs just all come in like that… Maybe not that ferocious but you know full commitment

Bump

50-50 chance that 0Z is a full Monty

It’s a good approach… At this moment, I’m not really excited or disappointed. I’m really the same way I was this morning. Because it helps when you identify what’s going on I mean that protects you from that other shit I’m not sure what else to tellto tell people, but whatever.

that’s why it all strikes me as data loss… This is just to incongruently bad for that particular cluster. You don’t move that much this close in without there being a very significant systemic change and the best thing to account for that is missing data. If data shadowing somehow caught up with this particular model system, then I give it a pass because you’re only as good as the shit you’re eating

Not to steal his thunder but I made the money post about this this morning I did a very discrete comparison of the Euro and the GFS recent runs and isolated the difference between the two. The euro is now finding the short wave that the GFS has been tracking all along and suddenly this happens. As far as I’m concerned that’s the money post. I don’t care who makes the post. I’m just sayn’ for the sake of content question is do they both now en masse collapse out to sea ha ha ha ha wouldn’t that be funny just for shits and giggles I also described the phenomenon in modeling known as “data shadowing” , yesterday. I’m wondering if the euro fell victim to that. Though I would’ve assumed that would be a thing of the past it could be a good description for what went on this week with that model. interesting.

Well, that’s fine Ray. That’s a constructive criticism based upon years of experience or whatever. … It’s not filling the thread with garbage, which is frankly not fair and no pun intended, misguided I don’t agree or disagree… You could actually philosophically say that it sucks at East Coast cycle Genesis. It’s so persistent so maybe that’s telling. Just a thought.

yeah.. and can we please kindly ask people to stop with the GFS sucks routine. The not so kindly version, folks sound like psycho hypocrites considering what they were doing to the Euro with the same fang dango bullshit last month. Can, seriously.. all models score, all models blow it. It's just the status of the tech. Grow the fuck up. Will's right...this is reversal Feb 1 incarnate. Just stop Edit, this wasn't directed at you but it's annoying

Hugely agreed X 1,000% .... I wrote about this, this morning. This is really marvelous black and white competition/test op between the two front runner guidance types. Rumble on coastal .

Nah ... Euro just can't seem to constructively merge those wave spaces.

43, no wind, full sun through pristine clean air. After 5 weeks of cold drear ... I tell ya what... it's easier and easier to motivate against any winter on any chart.

In the end ... should the ECM/UKMET and any other east and/or smearing solutions prevail, the indices would have nailed this. From the get go, going back 10 days, the -PNA was establishing. It was actually partial ( at least) in discussion regarding warmth after the 15th. That's delayed ( perhaps ...). In fact, the operational pattern handling never really expanded the warmth as much as the indexes would statistically correlate, but there's always negotiation room. What we got out of that so far was a yesterday rain bust at 37 F. Where's my beach chair! 7 days ago when this started hinting, then getting pimped, I warned early on that deep lows crawling up the coast was not supported. The only reason this started getting more attention from me, is because there is a relative max in the PNA, while on whole, it's negative. The thing with the PNA domain is that it is very, very geographically large. One end of it can be positive(negative) and it may skew realities at the other end. So when seeing this, therein is room to negotiate an event, It's rising some 3 or 4 SD in three days there among the Can/Euro/U.S. clusters ... So, we'll see how the "negotiations" go.

It's an interesting time-dependent bust study. Relative to the 96-108 hour, if the Euro is right vs the GFS. For us that difference probably doesn't survive modern attention span's failing myelination and memory fixing ( LOL ), but down in the MA... talking the difference between a mere snow day vs regional halting of all civil modes. So for a D4.5 window, one of these models could bust impressively badly. heh. A compromise (mid way) impactor probably is sensible, but like I was describing earlier... this whole situation has a greater than normal short term adjustment potential to it. Whether that happens, remains to be seen, but the reason for that is notable differences, small yet crucial, are creating massive variance down stream - talking about the handling and identification/physical processing thereafter, with the ejection out of the Pacific/general W.

What ?

The last 3 consecutive runs of the CMC were progressively less

It's not extremely rare. Many massive events clipped shy of getting this far N. Just being fair

First time I've seen the sun succeed at 'eating' a morning cloud layer back quite so obviously. Almost 40, no wind ... kind of napey out there. It occurs to me that this thing coming up tomorrow night, is p-type a matter of contention? That sort of doomed the last thing, in that the BL was 3 to 5 too cold in the guidance.

The only issue I have with this analysis is that it negates ( or just doesn't consider) trend. Trend doesn't stop at the scalar moment of the modeling image. It implies 'reality' is moving toward a different destination than the still frame. Very important consideration in deterministic philosophy in this bidness. In this case, there's been a persistent ..albeit slow, trend NW recently. And there is also a little bit of reservation one could apply to your analysis in that these tools are not confidence-weighted evenly. There is situational awareness and bias that are unique to some guidance. So your blend approach isn't terrible ... it's actually rather good. But, we have to be careful because the application of that cannot drop trend, nor being aware of the constituent member's individual contribution.