Typhoon Tip

I think the NAM coup on the last system - I snarked that the night before if in jest but ...heh There are inherent limitations in these compression/fast stream patterns that we go over, and over, and over again ..., but no sooner do the models show something that's above the phenotype for those limitations, there's this elided perception that takes place. Ha haha .. ... I guess the court yard rabble has always demonstrated a willingness to operate within the confines of restraint, huh - I don't know. Maybe the NAM is wrong this time. Just because there are limitations doesn't mean it can't be overcome - knowing when that is can be art.

Yeah, I'm not sure I disagree with this bold... I mentioned to Will yesterday that I thought this was 4-6" NoP and 6-8" SoP, but that could be generous by the time we get to S NH. I'd also add that this is done in 6 hours - speed of the system and low residence time . However, I also wouldn't be surprised if what Scott's saying might distort things... This is going to be 20:1 under the clouds so if the DGZ doesn't then pass through some elevated warm layer, this system might "lie" about the significance of it by stack efficiency. LOL

Oh shit I'm never disagreeing with that in a CC canvas attempting to usurp a fantastic winter stretch: the collateral damage of that epic war is probably messy systems ... just in principle. Also a manifestation of the war is the compression that seems to be predominating every base line/winter hemisphere since the 2000s, too - but that's going down rabbit hole.

I'm just citing what the numerical teleconnectors are correlating as of recent days. The -PNA underpinning with a strongly negative NAO over the western limb, does not permit ( typically ) low positions moving through the Lakes. But I suspect you're just being euphemistic lol S/W don't bounce of ridges ... ? They are either absorbing into the flow by destructive interference, or being emphasized by the flow due to constructive interference. This behavior is manifest by S/W attenuation, such as moving the wave space through a compressed medium ( for example...). Conversely, it may look like a ping ponging but what's really taking place is the S/W is taking pathway that is constructive interfering wrt to where the L/W axis really is anchored. And this can all be partial too - which becomes a head game of how much so... I've seen weird interference patterns where the models look to attempt to send S/W against the larger wave space mechanical layout, but where that usually morphs/corrects is the old squeeze play. Low moves up Michigan and slams to a halt and starts vomiting smaller waves along the east extension, and/or if the primary is BUF ... a Miller B is an option. This is all idealized too - I'm sure there are anomalies relative to anomalies, couched in yet bigger anomalies like a Russian Nesting doll of misfortune, too.

I suspect that is in error... I think we're talking about the bigger event the 15-17th? The numerical derivatives don't correlate very well to early left turning. In fact ... they are opposite. That source implies an east, and by virtue of that also means somewhat south, correction in time. That may not be the case ...it's not a declaration. I wouldn't be surprised. Beyond that, I also think the 13th is a "trap game" storm. It may become that there is a bigger dawg on the 16 or so that's too tempting to captivate the audience, while the 13th sneaks in as a player. Before the big dawg's in Jan and Feb 1978 there was a 1000 mb low up the coast with 19" at Logan in 24 hours. This is interesting because it is more of a Miller A origin, as is suggested coherently in all 3 ens systems... By virtue of that, it will have access to a better moisture source - that is reflected already in the 24-hrly QPF means > .75" even from 160 hour lead - that's a pretty wet signal to be moving headlong into an antecedent air mass that still gripped by 1030 mb polar-arctic PP, N of our latitude when that one arrives. 13th becomes a candidate for over-achieving relative to climo low strength if these synoptics formulate in kind. This paragraph could be the thread opener on that imho - but in deference to the weekend gig ...

This run was an improvement. N of priors and more QPF

Ha if this were circa 2006 I would at Eastern, with title of ‘possible but above normally ‘ in a heart beat IF we didn’t have possibly two other thread able events after this weekends to consider first.

I hadn’t realized that … was heads down at work save what time I spent was focused on the weekend But the 15-17th bomb on the GFS I consider a nod to the EPS ensemble. Btw, the GEFs have above normal coherence too, just 1/3rd of the coherence … which is still above normal for this range.its just that the EPS is exotic

all indicators included suggest for me that that is an important period to watch in that midmonth

The next couple of frames after that have a clear tendency for bent cyclonic -PP with an extraordinary number of members below 970 mbar considering the range…

For ensemble mean consideration, it is very rare to get a signal this coherent at this kind of time range… this also has a positive PNA pulsation occurring in tandem

Storm of the season may be the 15-17th

yeah honestly ... I'm not seeing differences here that matter from anything when blending all. Moving some parts around inside the average doesn't change the average, in principle. Still looks like a 4-6" NoP and 6-8" Sop deal, but if there is a change in future runs than I'm happy to adjust. One other thing, NWS may have some cross sectional jazz they're using but I'm not sure I see ( otherwise ) where 8-12" come from in this very fast moving open wave. Some attenuation, even if only 5 to 15% is also typical in the final event approach in compression

It's actually a tick S at interval 72 compared to the 00z 84. May not be enough to matter.

Just being persnickety re Euro but the 66 hour position of the low and PP layout is almost identical to the 00z depiction. It's the QPF field that's a little S, also ... perhaps 10% less Didn't compare the 06z in this -

The GEFs did trend N of priors this morning by enough to alleviated some deterministic uncertainties. Another tick and it'll be on par with the 00Z EPS.

GFS misses with a real big one on the 15-17th potential... Just moving the interaction timing a CH and we're correcting any perception of this winter in the absolute sense. Problem is ... the fast flow should really prevent the phase so ..it's like a baked in face smack limitation. haha

Is that real tho ? I mean I don't doubt that it is but I just went over to NASA's interactive page that runs the map request for GHCNv4 Tv5 and it says it's not available for Jan 2025 Do you have another link ?

Basically that’s metaphorical to us having won a cold raffle …

Hahaha ! how enabling -

kind of aggravating ... because it has hindered matters without any room for doubt, for years now ... This is not the first discussion over this. Forget that, we should all have PHD's in this awareness just by proximity to life in this shit-show by now. Plus, some of us here have clearly been wasting our time instructing this stuff for the course. I'm a pissy cynic about it... but I cannot help but see it sometimes that people filter out/elide/ignore contents if/when they don't sense that it is what they want. It's a good thing no one's getting graded in here. HAHAHA. Anyway, yeah ... the whole pattern has the caution flag baked in for compression and fast flow limiting curvature and zonal forcing circumstances. yup.

6" is too much given unmistakable and objective trends. That said ... trends can reverse. That's what we're hoping for a winter enthusiasts. If that happens...sure. Part of the problem is not just that the system is trended(ing) S... The problem is in understanding the structural limitations of a compressed field and fast flow, limiting the N-S extend of any system for that matter. Then adding consideration that this one is not a strong one. If I were Brian and Jay ...this is already a modeled a dim sun cirrus smoker Realistically... ? there's nothing wrong with keeping the higher ends down.

Ha. That QPF field is probably just a virga event for NoP in that run.

It's safe. I mean, protecting one from the unsavory circumstance of having been d-dripped along by bullshit is a very adult thing to do. Heh ... that super hot flirtatious waitress isn't really that into you Seriously though, conserved approach when there are so many valid reasons to be conservative -

Actually ... I'm also a bit skeptical on the higher amounts of the 8" range just looking at the ensemble means. This is not a very intense storm. We want it to be on the N side of the climo track now that I'm thinking about that; while not being too close to where it starts going the other way.. This is what it means to negotiate needle thread circumstance. That's exactly how one has to fiddle with the guidance implications ( btw). If the storm were slower it would probably be stronger by virtue of having been born out of a less compressed field ... so it would spread its goodies over a larger area. The GEFs are just flat out too far S for a 998 mb low frankly, to really correlated more than 4". If the QPF is saying otherwise given below ...it's destined to tone it down as this nears. The EPS is better ... *HOWEVER*, the entire Euro cluster has been too far NW with modeled cyclone tracks since this pattern foot became established. That could be a caution flag for which team has error in its favor. Having to compound all this with storm speed and lacking duration and this and that it's dicey for higher numbers. So ... we'll see if there are any future short term wiggles that help.