Typhoon Tip

Believe it or not ...it had this solution more so than less yesterday. It was deeper with the 500mb solution though, over ALB

uhhh what no. The only similarity either one of those two have to this is in the very real notion that winds and cloud patterns of all cyclones go round and round. You can't make a comparison to something when one side of that comparison doesn't yet exist for one. But for another, even if comparing the large scale ( hemispheric) antecedence, good luck getting a correctly reanalyzed series of charts from 1717 ( lol), or 1888 for that matter.

We're doing play by plays on runs that aren't ( individually) very likely to verify ... but, the Euro was slightly flatter with the western ridge after the impulse was ejected through. That is causing less total meridian (N/S ) structure to the whole field E of 100W ... such that this run gets slightly less constructive feedback. The 500 mb tracks slightly N of the 00z, ...the surface deepens at a slower rate, ... weaker response over all... All these are consequences. But again... these are are bouncing around for now.

I've often thought that would be a neat study...yeah. H. Archembault's papers/thesis work in the mid 1990s is the closest to that, but it doesn't go as deep, not parsing out the PNA's spacial and temporal magnitudes wrt to what storm events were observed - that kind of minute scale. Like a study that says, say, ' therefore 90% of 8" snowfalls took place between a +.7 and +.9 standard deviation +PNA' as an example? that would be interesting. Then, if you make that a three-way between the NAO and EPO ... the intersections would also be interesting. In general, though... most people with a-priori in the field know that at a baser level, changing index modes are correlative. I guess in a purer practical sense, does it really offer much more to have some series of algorithms that says 8" correlates in this x-y-z nexus of teleconnector convergence? Most of which is intuitive.

It's got wave interference (destructive). But I also feel - in knowing the GFS native biases... - that this model is not very well qualified to recognize the potentials embedded/native to patterns that are differentiating toward slowing down/curved structures. The success of a +PNAP ( getting more pronounced) implies W-E motions in the whole field are inherently slowing down in order for the emergence of more N-S meridian synoptics. Here's the thing... the GFS has a subtle, but non-zero/significant enough to be noticed tendency, to accelerate toward progressivity. Putting these two facets together, the former slowing down vs the latter speeding up, they are obviously competing aspects. It makes me suspect that the GFS is lesser likely to handle this particular D9 - D16 period of the month very well ( a broad brushed span of time in which these events are less conformed to faster flow in general - ) It's like the last system was in a fast flow pattern that is a better fit for the GFS. It may be why it stabilized into a stubborn continuity that lasted so many days prior to this event. Even though it ultimately ended up a bit too far S with cold and snow result ... different analysis.

Not to sound like a douche, but the impression of 500 mb height and vorticity loop ... where it ends on 144 doesn't require the actual sfc evolution by the trained Met/enthusiasts that know how the lower levels are forced by these mid level-type shenanigans. That's a chart topper look ... The 500 mb center, with its -2 or even -3 ST core, ends up in the Bite/abeam of NJ on the next frame ( most likely) and it's easy to envision a very, very deep surface consequence sitting right in the climate cross-hair for PHL-PWM. It can't really do anything else, if the 96-144 movie is correct Said deep low would probably capture and do a zig zag or backward yaw/hesitation or even loop somewhere off between the Jersey shore and ACK. So I guess of more pragmatic importance ... let's will those antecedent intervals correct - haha.

mmm ... Okay, tell ya what ... I'll give credit for the virtue of encouragement/positive re-enforcement along the collective psycho-tactic reformation ( LOL... haha) effort .. .but he still used the word Blizzard. I'm not sure there wasn't a kind of bargaining effort there that cons us into reading it

Bingo! I think the Euro in honesty deserves an honorable mention there. But this particular run/model may be the first to 'realize' the wave spacing arguments. Where and what precisely come of it ... yadda yadda yadda. I'll tell ya... this +PNA appears ( tentatively) to be relaying into a much better actual +PNAP ... unlike that Dec cosmic dildo paradigm variant ...

Hugely agree there ( bold)...As I was just expressing to OceanStWx ( Eric? I think it is -), I feel the primary sensitivity more relates to that handling. there is a change in the larger scaled wave exertion arriving from the d(PNA). when have the models ever been extraordinarily clever when it comes to handling a mode shift. ....this is yesterday(left) vs last night's(right) PNA ...it is showing both d(PNA) and +d(trend) This event really is an Archembault, ( after that research related to statistical correlations with indexes and higher scaling precipitation events over eastern N/A) recovery ordeal. That is a total 1 standard deviation rise over a short span of time, with a mass-field that is HUGE - sufficiently large in both respects, a major player is an entirely acceptable assumption. Adding in the west <-- fading black through central Canada, supplies a wave spacing negative geopotential anomaly argument right near WV give or take... so this all just timing perfectly, that a west eject trough would pass through that constructive interference region over eastern mid latitudes. That's what these telecons illustrate, without the actual advent showing up ( very well ...I'm not sure what the immediate recent runs look like - but given the din in here, the UKMET and may be ? ) ... just yet.

well ...it's a bit of an off-topic but I for one haven't lost any faith in the Euro yet. I'm still seeing subtleties and nuances that make it more valid than all other models. I still raise an eyebrow just as much as I ever have when it's crossing from D5 into D4s. I suspect some of it's performance being obscured by the din of over zealous nit-picking in this particular public opinion contributors. - an opinion, that is highly guided by the superficial specters of 'showing solutions' that aren't as entertaining. I mean there's a little gaslight there ( sounding ) but it's an honest opinion. This last system? I completely give it pass on the fact that that it was west-north of the GFS at D5 ... because a, it was correcting at the time. But more important, b ... it proved more right with where the better snows and cold ended up aligning. That's the nuance part. The storms over...no apologies conferred. I wonder why, gee. I don't think it has done enough terribly wrong to warrant what's been going on with that model lately. Just sayn - I don't.

It's really truly remarkable how brilliant this signal has become... even since starting this thread - it's only become more so... It really feels like we're forecasting the 2ndary wave function? -the non-linearity of it is that it is immensely implied, but is just not explicitly described. It's really like we have a high confidence forecast that the forecast will eventually have to be made - f'ing fascinating!

I mean just by observing the deltas between runs of the respective models, I've (personally) been seeing sensitivity related to the ridge response immediately aft of the trough ejection out of the west. When those surge more, there appears to be more momentum --> E, wrt the larger-scaled total (RW) wave space layout; the whole structure then finds the teleconnection coupled negative, that is in the process ( spacial-temporally) of passing through the ~ 90W longitude. That negative which is SE of the west fading middle Canadian 500 mb positive anomaly - timed well. And viola! the amplitude emerges there - if we go back and look at the oper. EC runs, those that did attempt the early polarward commitment ( about 4 runs ago) the ridge was depicting flatter along the backside of the ejection. It's really been pretty much 1::1. I suggest there is argument (valid) for needing accurate assessing wrt the larger scaled d(PNA), its relay into western N/A and the transitive forcing to play into over eastern N/A. This has been more evident in the ensemble means of all three, too. But, it is also evident in those op. Euro runs that came back E vs W with the amplitude. I'm really impressed by this clustering by the EPS... that is pure M/A bomb right there. There is a mode on the west side, and 2ndary depth mode that is deeper than the operational. Ha, just to point it out for fun...there 94x mb 150 mi E of Cape May.

I'm vehemently more impressed with the blend of the EPS/GEFS/GEPs, both in situ on the 0z cycle, but then wrt their individual trends, than I am any operational run. The spread in those is clear that there is too much difficulty seeing the trees through the forest during a pattern change - the specific advent in those guidance appears really yet to emerge.

Completely redrew itself the previous solution was quite unsupported all along … matter of time. obviously not done either.

...and like a different thread

Gosh, it really sneaks up on you. I mean, yeah...the calendar says March 4, but I was just scanning machine numbers for tomorrow and it struck me that climate is now mid 40s. It's sort of over and we're really getting lucky looking at this pattern we are - ironically considering... We're likely to have to deal with some winter threats over the coming week(s) but in the meantime... if we can clear out better than the models tomorrow, MOS has light winds while nearing 50 in the interior lower els. Under Mar 5 sun that'd be a real nape day. The ceilings break, but not until like 4pm and that's too later in equivalent October 8 sun ( altho I hate this comparison.. why do we feel the need to compare Mar 5 sun to October 8 sun? Just call it Mar 5 sun) but it's close, and with some d-slope trajectories on-going. egh...it'll probably self-destruct

Folks need(ed) to look at the whole run Meteorologically - and by that, I don't just mean all 10 days.. .but look outside the myopic low pressure and where it's doing whatever. The whole run is the hemisphere... I mean a lot of this is not intuitive. I get that. But the vortex in this run can't get N of Michigan in that look. There's no large scale circulation mode capable of moving it bodily into Canada. A region in which ( also ..) features a giant train wreck of constipated features. The main issue with this run that drives the difference between it and the 00z, is the handling of the western heights as it is being ejected E (behind..) That is flatter on this run. If/when those ridging structures return, this goes away from the Minn. squeeze back to just being an E expression. It's a not a terrible run if we know what to look for/recognize the surrounding constraints.

Actually ...what it's doing is attempting to 'Minnesota squeeze' an exceptionally powerful vortex.

Yeah... I think maybe some jumped the gun a bit on thinking we had a consensus formulating ? but either way, we're still in signal recognition and ensemble structuring. I mean, we can argue we should by now, for a Mar 11 ( say..) but not really. Because this appears to be dependent on correctly physically processing what's happening on the other side of fairly substantial PNA index change. The deltas have to be right, which they seldom are, first. It's like trying to see ( model ) through performance boundary.

Judging by rad and synoptic obs ..I'm calling this about done here. Sun's dim vis, too. 35 with flurries presently. glop bombs splatting under trees and the snow's mostly slid off the car on it's own. I may not even shovel, as I don't have anyone at this residence that is at risk because of it, and it's going to be high Mar 5 sun tomorrow to laze off the black top like a Tripod in War Of The Worlds... That should take care of the driveway... half kidding. But with this my seasonal total is now 31 inches.

I agree with this surmise ( bold ). In fact I was thinking about this very aspect this morning. How the d(correction) aspect, the Euro's total 7 day aggregate may have had to correct more, but ... once in short range? it seemed to perform pretty good/better than the GFS. Now...I'm not willing to give it 'complete' credit inside of 48 hours though, because it had rain to southern NH. I'm not raining here... at all. It just snow too wet accumulate, under a day glow Mar 4 overcast. It's actually cold enough to have been a much better player, if the GFS dynamics verified as far S as it had. It's basically busted N of the GFS the way it looks to me.

"bowling season" has it's own rewards ...even if the return rate on that is very low. April Fool's Day storm in 1997 was ... actually, I wanna get this off a nerd's chest. It's always bugged me a little that people think of April '97 as this bowling bomb. It wasn't the best of examples. As this 500 mb snapshot, 12z on the 31st of March shows ( courtesy NCEP library), the event was preceded by an integrated relay from the west. It sort of did take that on the next day ...but, it's hard to differentiate this below, from just any deep trough cutting off during the winter. I suppose the 'omega' construct overall sort of makes it both...but that the lead up to it was all an integrated wave propagation and less a bowling ball

In fact ...it's not beyond the realm of possibilities that the hemispheric appeal in that annotation above, and the empirical measured anomaly change in the SST ..., are indirectly connectable (physically) with what's going on in the whole planetary system. What's the SOI... ? Are the lower lat wind anomalies changing ? It may be that the whole hemisphere is just up and moving away from the La Nina scaffolding, and so the upwelling is abandoned - ... just venturing

I'm not sure about an "arctic" shot. Gelid, sure... Thing is, the 'blocking,' as the western limb -NAO fades ..it really smears west across the Canadian shield in ensemble means of all three, really. That actually blocks cold from higher latitudes. As far as the 'after the 20th' warm up... mixed sentiments in that range. I mean obviously that's getting into more seasonal dialogue. There are competing factors for me. One, the La Nina is dying ( in fact ...the weekly SST anomalies have explosively corrected toward neutral just about everywhere E of 3.4 longitudes...) ...but I am not sure it's momentum in the hemisphere is completely dead by then. I actually think its grip will be weakening... It's very complicated, but La Nina springs tend to be warmer than normal - not so sure about a rapid decay La Nina that is already ( see above) allowing a hemisphere that looks like that! So it may in fact be a moot inclusion of La Nina factorization in the discussion by then. Then, we have to consider the decadal signal for blocking in springs. It's been a recurring transition season aspect, regardless of ENSO actually... That may transition us into one helluva BD season...certainly we may deal with bowling balls if/when that innate tendency should recur.

man... That 0z "control" version of the Euro was fun... It actually splits this signal into two events. Both having sfc pressure down below 980mb... The first of the two, Mar11/12th... then, just 3 days later, it brings another up. Of the two, the first one goes up the Hudson.. snow for interior PA to SE NY, W MA and the Greens, but we all probably start as wet snow before going to rain east - so less than idea. But that 2nd one... wow, quite the eye-candy. It's got temperatures 15 to 25 everywhere NW of Taunton ... with a 974 mb low passing from just S of LI to the BM. Total 24-hour QPF is averaging 1.8" melted SE of PSM NH to HFD CT line, with over an inch NW, and 3" on the Cape where it's like 34F and probably sustaining close to hurricane wind gusts... We have mentioned that this period of time between the 10th and 15th may host multiple events... it's certainly plausible that carries us right up to the equinox ( spring challenges increasing/notwithstanding). The 2nd one above is 17th or so.. So unfortunately, there is almost no deterministic value at this range.