Typhoon Tip

I'm kind of hoping it degenerates but not entirely, and we get like a light to moderate burst, followed by the jet going by smearing out 30 straight ours of blue-gray tinted light through windows with mood snowing trickling down past.

Ha... looks like Brian and Will and I all keyed on the same aspect at the same time re the NAM Which was done for fun. at least I hope ...

^ an aspect that is like radiation trying to get through lead helmet on top of Mount Tolland, no doubt

HAHA... Just said that exact same thing in my head. It's like we're relaying destructive interference backward in the flow.

man - this is annoying. It seems I keep seeing model renditions of this POS that match my discussion points, while they're not actually picking one of them and f'ing sticking with it. I said this morning that this NAM extrapolation -type look would be possible. I gave it some 20 or 30% chance and then here we are, a model goes ahead and maps that out. But this has happened to all of us this week with this thing. It's all shot gun solutions still

okay I see it - yeah that solution may (if not likely) just the NAM being the NAM. But it's putting all the emphasis on the trailing S/W. In fact, extrapolating that 84 hour frame would argue that's enough mechanical power there to trigger some sort of NJ model low response out of that thing alone. But as far as the lead, it's all but completely damping it out of existence due to wave space/destructive interference

tropical tidbits is not a very good site for timely updating I've noticed -

gosh .. it almost seems it'd be better if the whole jet stream lifted N because with that high up there and that running over top would probably ignite a general region of isentropic lift snows - generate an event out of generic overrunning.

mm, not sure I'm seeing 'more amped' ...only out to hr 30 though

it may be the first by virtue of running first, but picking the first to gather the physical sounding

Two little things to remember - this dips S (total manifold) before lifting up. Climo on that is typically a wetter system. Not sure how that aspect plays into this, but that seems like there's room there to speculate. the other aspect is that S system tracks tend to inch N when climbing up a flow slope like this scenario appears to be.

True ^ I don't think we've sent a -EPO into a +PNA relay yet this year? The former loads, the latter brings it down. I'm seeing sub -20C's and even a blob of -30C 850s wobbling around up over the Canadian shield every other run over the past couple of weeks There's cold available should the circulation mode stop COC blocking winter This discussion also ( for me ..) hearkens to that other aspect where we don't seem to get seasonal temperature/ "cold" without a direct feeds thing. Meaning, our stasis air masses seem to modulate faster and or just rest state in mid 40s more so these days ... yeah yeah, CC -related most likely. But not looking to start a rage of 'plausible science' retorts that really masquerades as just to hide another form of denialism, either. lol No but more and more ... it seems we don't spend as much time in an average temperature ranges. Either 45 or 15 ..

OH ha... you mean "John" ? I thought you guys knew each other's names but FXWX poster's name is John man I was staring at that trying to figure out what the f you meant by that. Truth be told though ... sometimes it does feel one is speaking to an empty room.

what ?

Anyway, the original ideas for this event are still largely in tact - to me... This appears to be a middling event with ceiling somewhere in moderate amounts ( snow). There may be some subjectivity as to what others feel or want to mean moderate, but less than 10" and > than 4". Should this modulate less(more) in the more certain frames through tomorrow, we cross that bridge. The factors of attenuation were several going into this thing. Whichever is actually causing it to realize thus far, assimilation lapses/speed saturation in the flow/destructive interference aside, we are seeing some of that unfold before our very eyes. The last day and half of runs are taking us through that downward ride. Maybe things have stabilized with these recent UK and Euro type runs in a tentative alliance as of this morning and in fact ...heh. I don't really have a problem with that interpretation for now. I would still caution that we may get significance added back, or taken away further, during these next 3 model cycles today - particularly the 00z run this evening. I will say ...there is some 20 or 30% chance this minors out to the point where it becomes an issue determining what is really causing matters to take place. If the lead S/W runs thin ... yet the spacing shortens with a stronger 2nd, we may burst open an envelopment of lighter regional snows of 1-3" or spot 5" over a span of time anyway. There's also a reasonably good chance that we get something back from the first ... I told John the other day this was going to be a pain in the ass event to track and that much appears to be the best forecast for this f'n thing yet.

Heh. I’m crashin. This isn’t worth it and can’t be up late … good luck.

Actually some identity there at 72 hr We’ll see but guessin it won’t matter. Not enough

Wonder if this’ll be the gone in 2 runs chapter of this. Ha

This run appears to have even less of that backside wind max so far

That much continuity change wrt to the S/W identity, at this range and modeling tech, strikes me as something fishy in the assimilation over the eastern Pacific. Too many S/W in closer succession; the assimilation/interpolation aspects may be splitting the S/W space, given momentum to the lead, giving it away to both the lead and trailing deal on this run. 12z tomorrow this whole mess will be nosing onboard out west. If we're having this discussion tomorrow at this time I'll have less problem with it. That said, this event's governing mechanics were/are susceptible to attenuation for multiple reasons - we've out lined what those all were. Wave spacing is just one of them. Model problems with the speed of the flow and having to accelerate that when mid range nears (robbing from embedded S/W) is another. Now assimilation is also one of those but is different than these other aspects - if that is culprit here, the next run could very well reverse that.

It was vastly different that other guidance wrt to the entire NAO domain handling... Such a wholesale (hemi) continuity disruption is a bit dubious.

I'm noticing that follow-up useless S/W in the TV region is bullying in faster than the other guidance. It appears there's some sensitivity wrt that feature - the models that have a bigger gap between it and the lead Jan 7 S/W, have more intensity with the our storm. Short version, the Euro has more neg wave interference there from the looks of it.

Guys... can you take that to the banter thread ?

yeah... it looks like the -NAO is trying to exert a weee bit earlier than prior depictions. This being 8 days out - obviously goes without saying, a wholesale correction east with that OV trough becomes more penetrative. The whole thing could change into something else. The NAO is a masterful headache inducer. It's seldom correctly handled even at D8. For that matter, it could just up and evolve into an eastern limb expression... sending things to Manitoba. But present trends are the other way so - all possibilities about the flow east of Chi-town are still in the playoff hunt re Jan 10/11

Okay ..sufficed it is to say ( not including the Euro just yet) these 12z blends signal a major snow fall. I.e., something > than the "moderate ceiling" I assessed. However, I'm not ready to sign on just yet - although I really, really appreciate the gesture hahaha Seriously, this hasn't relayed into the physically realized sounding grid out west, and a high speed ... essentially longitude pattern that is at the far eastern end of the Rossby wave coherency ... those are circumstances not well handled by models. It makes events very prone to subtle variations - so prone that even in these more modern/well-advance assimilation technologies, there can be very important nuances introduced when that relay happens that take away(add) to this thing. There's that... but also, the stuff I said about attenuating magnitudes in the models when crossing D5s is still not tested just yet. I'd like to see this tomorrow morning to be more confident that we're getting through the de-amplification two-step. I'm just trying for some objective 'what-can-go-wrong' isms here. I don't think we have to reach very far to grab a hold of those.