Typhoon Tip

Perfectly phrased ^

Nice reference there … Something big is out there. For now, that is all. It could ORD … it could be BOS … it could in between. But these members are some sort of exotically powerful and large -most likely would require a multi faceted risk profile/spectrum event. Model mag would tone it down to just a major ordeal. Gotta assume that, and also allow for this to emerge in general. But the signals itself is about as robust as is possible

Obscenely loud signal between the the 20th and Xmas. Some if these individual GEF members are quite extraordinary.

It actually trended pretty significantly westbbetween 84 and 96 hours… Seems to stall there and it really pummels northeastern mass coastal New Hampshire and coastal Maine pretty good, comma head

It actually flips a lot of us over to a period of moderate snow in the latter half of the storm as the CCB lingers in the area coming in there

Yeah it’s sarcasm

About the same as previous. It’s not interested in deviating from a track just S if LI. Looks like a 4-6” of wet snow in the deep interior as a low risk correction.

There’s reasons to believe it’s more right. I’ve outlined those … it seems people sans anything other than the worst possible model cinema. Lol

Despite all the smaller incremental trends … one run wipes it all out. It’s an odd circumstance to have big cold vortex parked over the lower Maritime, with -NAO block over Baffin Island and have the Great Lakes control everything. Interesting. Guess no one trusts the GFS huh

I know who it is but I’m not gonna fix what this phone does on the couch

Wave length is longer than best fit there … but, you know I just got done talking about a faster flow lending to x-coordinate extension. Who knows. I tell you tho, the numerical Tele connector/PNA really likes that time from 20th+. It’s got a pretty clear Archibald recovery signal there with an actual mode change as opposed to just rising

Fair enough but try to make it funny then lol

What would you be holding him to? That structure is unlikely...so there's no purpose are method for testing whether it would rain or not - so it's good that you won't hold him to it.

Yeah six/dozen or half of another ... It's a fence enough look

Dilemma ... It's both true. The bold, and that fact that it has 300 years of climate backed inference to suggest a cyclone should not move headlong into a -NAO blocking with being shunted E.

See I kinda lean the other way, ...I'd call it a cutter pattern with the possibility of stretching the field ..which can lead to fun shit that way. But the -EPO look with limited counterbalancing -NAO ( this time around...) and a "La Nina -based +PNA" wants to dump chunk troughing into 100W which...as we know, would put ST L to Michigan in the telecon cross hairs. The difference that "might" be useful to winter enthusiasts back east is that the flow probably resumes a faster base-line state... That has a tendency to fiddle with wave lengths in interesting ways as much as it can be hostile - either direction. There's a loud signal in the 20-24th period... Let's see how it starts emerge in the deterministics.... Heh, it's not that long away. 7 days it's the 20th..

I would characterize the 12 Z GGEM solution as a uniquely ‘exotic bomb’ gotta love the GGEM imagination model. Lol. That’s a rare yard-stick storm from DC to Maine So there’s definitely a bright signal between the 20th and 24th, but it’s so far off that it’s very difficult to determine how it will express itself. For example… a mode change into a positive PNA doesn’t necessarily translate to the same kind of N/A as it would during an El Nino. I mentioned that because … we happen to be in a very well coupled La Niña base state so in deference to that, we have to consider the variance. I could see this all evolving more midwest and being a cutter unfortunately. Plenty of time… I mean like the present storm shouldn’t be going this close to Logan Airport anyway by climate inference and it’s probably going to do that so well hell

Unusual large scale synoptic evolution in having such a large vortex anomaly centered over Michigan (~) while a -NAO flex takes place over the western limb ... is not doing the models any favors. This is down to small scale differences, but the differences between the GEFs and EPS (GEPs) are on either side of the proverbial fence. The 00z/06z GEF blend would almost undoubtedly flip the interior to a period of moderate steady snow once applying marginality with the fact that the 850 mb stays < 0C .. This isn't true for the EPS and GEPs... SO, ...it's a 2 to 1 contest at 90 hours of approximate lead. Standard convention holds that we lean toward the consensus...which would lend to the Euro-like notion cold rain after a quick intro of snow/mix. However, the climatology of NAO ...particularly those expressing over the western limb such as this, is that these things correct S. So there's plenty of reasons not to 86 the GEFs/GFS solutions...which by the way, are quite tightly knotted as of 06z version, with very limited/no spread at 90 hours taking a moderate cyclone response between CC and the BM. ...that "tight clustering" aspect makes it weird - In either case, this still looks as though the better snow shot is along the axis outlined in the beginning of this thread to me. Maybe erode that back NW a little in a Euro solution... But **IF** the 06z -like idea of the GFS wins this... the relative error with 850s less that 0C and height falls and +PP situated N, probably sees an interior snow-rain-snow scenario with greater accumulation concerns. I tell you though ... a simple SE movement by the Euro of very little synoptic spacing would go a long way toward making more sense with the NAO. But the 'unusual' big vortex over the Lakes ...may just make this be a comically rare scenario.

And the nam was actually northwest of the previous run. NAM’s likely to be left if other guidance beyond 48 hrs

There is a signal emerging for the 20th thru the 24th. I’m sure by now somebody’s mentioned it…? If nothing else I agree. Want to talk about it further once we got around to the storm thread - so that maybe we can have a place to focus the near term. Lol maybe we should start a new December thread like part II

That’s not a bad interpretation … no. I noticed the 18 z GFS backed of intensity a little - the low ends up more E. It’s probably related. It’s negatively tilted Its likely slowing as it attempts to move past. Those would tend produce by virtue of maximizing mechanics over duration … But we don’t want it to get so weak that it doesn’t matter. It all to comes down to what ejects out of the trough as it’s moving through the Midwest and starts smearing out under the block. I don’t believe the models are really going to have a very good handle on that until maybe tomorrow night. Seems like more could be delivered given the size and depth of that beast, though… which could conserve more of that momentum by winding it up in a stronger lead short wave injection for example.

Obviously we are all aware ... this has been out there for 10 days at this point. This is also a bit of a continuation over the thread now scrolled that began coverage as a risk assessment this week. It's stuck around and here we go. The question, what? There are 2 aspects that are in conflict, and I suspect that has manifested in these large scale synoptic fluctuations that have occurred, sometimes upon single run cycles, over the past week. Not just as it pertains to this storm, but the entirety of the circulation. 1 .. a well-coupled La Nina base state with the Pacific and how it influences the behavior of the PNA --> PNAP this autumn is notable. 2 .. Asynchronous to that basal flow tendency, we are seeing an obscene amount of blocking over all quadrants of the polar hemisphere. The tandem of those two disparate forcing pretty much puts us exactly where we've been with this system, uncertainty that ranges from a major to minor impacts, or what can be imagined in between. Yet, 'some' kind of any event has persisted through those modulations. In the end, this ... combined with a this ... tends to produce. That and the persistence for an event at all, lends confidence in an event - above normal. There's a huge amount of uncertain as to what form the storm will really take. My feeling is that a moderate commitment to Miller B will be forced E of a European guidance track. I am paying particular attention to that regression in the NAO you see after 4 days from now ( curved line annotated on that graph is kind of ugly...).. That's important. There is a precedence this recent two week of blocking for 'pulsing' in both the EPO and NAO domains. The behavior you see there has some trended merit, and there in is the tricky part. There is in fact Baffin Isle/regional -NAO pulsation, as this storm will be riding toward our latitudes. That does not teleconnect to storms going W of Logan. Can it happen? Yup. Is it likely? Less so... I'm thinking this is not a major event, but is the first one that offers a synoptic snow threat ... Preliminary for that would be briefly N-W of PHL... perhaps longer as it moves N, N-W up the I-95 corridor ... NW of HFD-ASH has the best shot for snow. Should this need to be adjusted E over this week, don't be surprised.

It’s a great question… my first impulse would be to say yes because of the nature of the hemisphere being in a blocky regime. We are in a climatologically favored location for slow downs, stalls, and exotic types of retrograde behavior in general, during times of blocking. however there is a conflict with the basal state of the hemisphere and the La Niña - particularly this ladder factor is of importance because the hemisphere appears to actually be coupled to the La Niña basal state. that conflict in principle is probably related to why we saw the models with unusual stuff going on over the last week. Model performance is rarely held accountable beyond day six without a degree of incredulity (ha), anyway. But there have been some really rather extraordinary large mass fields movements across modeling cycles over the past week that have been hard to predict and rather unexpected even considering that. Anyway… it’s not abundantly clear that the slowing tendency of the blocking hemisphere will be able to operate without some influence from the other aspect. I’m inclined to think that we are losing a big closed vortex going underneath our latitude because of that … but the circulation medium still has a lot of mechanics that have to resolve its way through and it’s not going to go through the block. Therein fits taking the compromise - which is often the course of lesser regret in these conflicting scenarios Right/for now I’m leaning on a moderate impact scenario by our climatological standards moving somewhat slower than we’ve seen in recent year storm budget, with profiles probably a little colder than what we’re seeing now. That “moderate” may be open to some subjective interpretation understood

Will check your messages

It’s not model noise. Too many parametrics are leaning the other way and that’s all it’s doing is just responding to those as we get closer if those were not the case and they weren’t leaning so to speak… then it probably would be model noise