Typhoon Tip

Just adding to your philosophy ... anyone that opposes anything in reality ( really), is not "right" if/when they do not provide logic to support their basis - which seldom happens. That's a red flag - insufficient corroborative evidence to frame lucidity. If/when they are providing proofs that at minimum ...withstand basic arithmetic of clad meteorological concepts and application, others would be more accepting of their position. Somewhere in the pessimists of this red flag ilk, there may be a semblance of persistence based reasoning - but it's a default that fails if that's the case. We just had two 10-15" snow events: Jan 7 ... Feb 13. Collectively, those of fair/objective outlook correctly ferreted those events out of the various guidance and techniques therein. I don't recall any other storms this year that failed as badly as the pessimists failed to correctly claim they would not happen. The score is 2-0. ... So they are not righteous, out of box. It's obvious that they have some spectrum related problem relating to other's and group modes of thinking- and this unfortunatley provides them some sandbox within which they can constantly experiment with their own dysfunctionality. Simply stop engaging with the red-flaggers. You don't even have to set them on ignore. Just do that anyway... problem solved. You'll know when you are encountering worth-while con, or pro... either way. That's what you engage with. I realize there are some post adolescence maturation types in here... but a lot of this garbage back and forth is coming from middle age and elder users that seem to have trouble with this.

By the way ... I agreed with you yesterday ( whether you were just being snarky or not -) re the tail end of the month. To preface that potential ( on the warm side ), we live now in an era where the planet has proven, time and time again over recent decade(s) that it is "spring loaded" so to speak. Any reasons for a region's temperature anomalies to become positive, they do so tending to exceed both leading modeling indicators ( synergistic heat burst phenomenon ), and/or no problem above climate (relative to season) just in general. This could fade ... but it might not: A positive +EPO --> toward a -PNA ( which sets in as whatever on the 24th is heeling out of the continent), in tandem after the 24th, that would appear to be in the least excuse imagined opportunity for exceeding. I will note... some 4 or 5 of the Feb and Mars going back over the last decade.5 have hosted an absurdly warm occurrence. Day time temperatures some 25 to even 35 above normal. Objective acceptance of all factors above, I don't have a problem with attempting an early guess at warm anomalies over the eastern continent from ~28th - the first week of March. Furthermore, if one is looking for a table-set pattern for igniting a synergistic heat burst ( absurdness ), present longer range telecon projections, which show up nicely in the ens spatial layouts, too ... Well, one can fight these queues if they want. But I choose not to be a f'ing idiot biased nimrod manic user of modeling dope, because I've created some sort of escapism in this chart surfing web realm, where such reality offends my construction. Lol There are two aspects ( to me ) that are notable about the next 3 weeks. -- Whether an important system continues to emerge ooa the 24th -- Whether a daisy pusher warm up sets in thereafter, and whether this might even prelude a "warm burst"

Very early of course so taken with the usual caveat emptor - This is an unusually clear suggestion from 10 days in advance. Also, looping this (leading to -), it's interesting to see the entire ens mean actually performing a Miller B behavior with such coherency. Whether that comes by way of subsume mechanics, or just a regular Colorado low type transit ..etc, we have a lots of time for that to emerge.

A week in advance we started a thread for a storm potential, and the storm occurred. Don’t conflate poor modeling performance after the fact. I understand yours and other peoples frustration, but the models jerking people around has nothing to do with what actually took place. And what took place was ferreted out using long lead techniques; turned out to be correct enough. I wouldn’t read too much into the 24th anyway… We’re not starting a thread here just mentioning it. Think of it as meteorologist at the water cooler. No skin if it doesn’t materialize.

Really close to going ker boom! ...Heights over Miami and adjacency below 580 dm, with pre ambient wind field < 50 kts, while heights are rising west of 100 W no less ... All we need is for that latter aspect to kick just a bit more and this thing's digging for Hades and bringin' the apoclypse back with it. This quickly would become the season definer -

Well ...the immediate and obvious answer is a variant -PNA. But you mean it shouldn't be happening in general I suspect ? Mm... I've frankly become more and more convinced we haven't truly/fully coupled any of these ENSO events to the hemisphere ... going back some 15 years of them. Too many non-correlating field/hemispheric modes -

pretty much.

OH, wow ... I did not see the GGEM did that - yeah...that may not be just noise. NOT per se, mind you, but in principle - me likely. I reserve the right to stop liking ... but as we set right now, it's like seeing the first sign of legs in mid first trimester checkup.

Brooklyn' and Will and I were bouncing ideas back and forth last week ... we'd targeted 20th and 24th back whence. But back then, even the 20th was out side said coherence horizon - (expression I invented that just means the average range in which signals tend to take better form...). The 24th was 'analytic imagination' on where things would go... which believe it or not does have some non-zero value provided it isn't too Georgian in construct ( lol ) The GEFs have a really impressive 500 mb evolution, showing that the 20th actually sets up the 23rd/24th.. .There is an ephemeral trough deepening between HA and California around the 20th ... that can preceded/transmit a trough signal to West Va-ish ..the original 20th notion, but, it actually take a day and half to complete the transitive wave space forcing.. Thus, blah blah-blah blah popsicle headache later, said deepening results over the eastern continent, and is pretty nicely illustrated in the GEFs mean. You can even get a semblance of a negative mid tropospheric well lifting up along the eastern seaboard; from this range that vagueness is important because if/when fits the Date Line to west coast argument, which it does. I like the notions also put forth by the MJO desk yesterday, too - that can add some idea to the correction in the 12z to elevate the PNA, as being something that may be emerging and will positively feed back on this... interesting

Which by the way, after these critters move past later this week the 23/24th is now just emerging through the long range "coherency horizon"

Doesn't look very spring-like through the the 25th anyway - We'll see afterwards, but it is possible we'll see the hemisphere correct more +PNA as we near. As of recent telecon projections from all three sources, the PNA sags and go negative 25th + however ... as the MJO folk pointed out, there could be corrections in the making, "... there is some question as to whether this weakening is reflective of a disorganizing MJO or the removal of the 120-day mean which is strongly skewing the MJO signal to the right in RMM space. Upper-level velocity potential anomaly forecasts suggest the latter, which depict more coherent MJO moving forward...." "Western Hemisphere MJO events during late winter typically favor the development of anomalous mid-level troughing and colder than normal temperatures across many parts of central and eastern CONUS." There has been tepid success in coupling the MJO to large circulation manifolds... but, the latter season Nino climatology favors the left side of the RMM. It's some speculation, but if the wave is actually going to be stronger around the side ...that may begin/assist in modulating. We might be seeing that in the ens spatial layouts already - at least in the GEFs. There's a lowering hgt retrograde on this 12z mean back N of HA along the 35th/40th

Yeah it's going for that NJ model low idea ... perhaps biased slightly N of typical. It's when a flat wave/wind max at mid levels crosses over the native instability along that part of the M/A coast - it helps is there some identifiable baroclinicity in the region when that takes place. The result is fast moving quick developer. They can sometimes evolve into major events if they are rigorous enough, but usually they're limited to moderate but headline-able snow amts. 6" -ish ...maybe 8. That's what that looks like. That model had that idea on the 12z yesterday. Weakened/too late on the 18z ... But then it comes back even more impressive looking on the 00z. Back to weak and too late on the 06z. Seems there's a data sampling constraint going on there. Not sure how the ICON's grid is populated - they may not "pay for" the full suite. We have to remember, Euro and GFS ...these models purchase their sounding data from foreign sources - or they used to. Maybe Brian or someone would know if that is still the case or if they've created some other coop program ...etc. But as far as the ICON's last 24 hours of runs, the old 12 on 18 off 00z on 06z off strikes me as the old days of data compliment shadowing. Why am spending so much time on this model ...

I dunno ... I think this qualifies pretty clearly as a 'saved by the bell' event. Look, every storm is going to shirk some zones. That's just the way it is. I remember back to some whopper storms of lore that shadowed CT. This time they fared better while the typical FIT Ma takes one for the team - so to speak. It's life. I'm really vastly more fascinated by the the crazy very late/short range wholesale model failure. It's actually encouraging in some respects, because that means there's still Dec 23 1997, or a Dec 9 2005 possible going the other way. - although I do think there's a bit of a weird model cinema reliance for mood control thing that's evolved over the years, which ironically ... that's tantamount to using an uncontrollable vector as a mood management control - hence the . That shouldn't be, but it is what it is.

I think you mean "willed it" haha

yeah I get it. just funnin'

LOL … after the last 24 hours of modeling peregrinations, you are only just now getting concerned ?

Part of this “bust “scenarios, also, I suspect attenuation caught up with us a little bit. I mean, it was pretty clear yesterday that the models were bullying the northern streaming and increasing the confluence suppression, and that was causing the south adjustment that seemed pretty clear. Southern Stream tending to weaken as we got closer slip below a threshold that allowed the northern stream - perhaps the model physics were overbearing and so on. But that appears to be an error now because it came back north - at least some degree. But in nowcast we’re not getting quite the dynamic intensity as earlier coverage dreamed up; such that not enough vertical mixing to scour out that shallow 34° white rain boundary layer going on down there. So it’s offsetting multifaceted errors in the handling of this damn thing.

umm Did we have a storm in December? I’m not sure I understand what this means lol but anyway… everyone should be able to start threads and let the merit of the content speak for itself. Someone should start a thread for the two minoring events at the end of the week. It’s entirely possible that somebody would get 3 inches from both those events with no melting between …spanning only 60 hours ? that becomes a 6 inch ordeal and is a significant enough.

Definitely a fringe job here. Aggregate types fluctuating. Sometimes uniform small ...back to mix of plump sizes with saw-dust sizes mixed together. Vis 1/3 mi, then 1 mi, then 1/2 mi ... back to 1 mi That behavior is typical of non-fully committed into the storm head but being grazed by it. Rad seems to confirm. A 10 min drive N of here is probably frustration flurries at best. 10 min drive S is up over 3" already. But ... all told this event is working out as 6-9" and counting down in CT/RI into interior SE Ma ( unfortunately west of the village of "Scottage" ) will be meaningful enough to justify this event coverage. Phew. what the f* right? Anyway, couple of clippers ...well, one clipper and one leading edge of an arctic outbreak ...whatever you call low later in the week.

S now. vis 1/3 mi uniform small to mid aggregates. 32

Fwiw - perfect aggregates here. Steady S- ... but, that is fine all things considered ... jesus. I was thinking sun dimly visible stuck at 34 F, with scud-strata off cold ocean skies would be this event's turnout here so a relative win perhaps. 32F

I'm not sure I agree there in general ... but if using this system? that would not be a very fair. The model came perhaps too far S? - the essence of having to do so was very necessary because the storm is S of what the consensus portrayed at this time yesterday. All the models are indictable on this. What we just saw in the run up to this is no model performing particularly well. The N camp was wrong until very late in the game - which is disturbing by present day standards of the technology ..etc. The S camp either was suppressed too much for days, or ... their late correction were too much - either way. Having said all that, even though storm influence-envelope appears to be verifying back ( maybe ) 1/3 or 1/2 the distance lost from that aggressive last minute correction S, yesterday ... the actual amount of snow may still be < 8" ? Radar and speed of movement doesn't look anything like those haughty totals from before, anyway. SO, there's some righteousness to that - What took place in the forecast arena before the storm arena, machine to man and back, was not good compared to what is verifying. I told everyone first thing in the morning yesterday that we'd probably have to now-cast this event - well... I think we all get credit for recognizing that there'd be something on the charts to monitor going back a long ways, but the details ? ...heh, this was poor.

Technically, it’s not a bust because we know it’s happening ahead of time? When I was young, a bust was always waking up in the morning the storm, and having it be not storming. yeah I guess relative to standards of todays modeling maybe. I dunno. I really think this requires some kind of analysis research to figure out what happened I mean this is a pretty serious indictment. I bet you the UKMET is right for the wrong reasons.

Have to go back to February 1987

There has been but ... let's see how this arriving -EPO distributes the temperature anomalies down stream over the continent - this is the deepest EPO mode this season ( as is projected ). It's gotten late and we're out of the solar min and into the solar transition season so it's racing a bit against the inevitable but there's time.