Typhoon Tip

mm maybe initially in a shallow sfc layer, but that ends up a cryo profile easily when cyclogenic atmosphere runs overhead the way i see it. the 850 mb event entry is -5c over ORH and the llv thickness is in the snow range, and it's not warmer at 700 mb in this case. it may be a difference of opinion ...over a model cinema that isn't worth the effort ( the rgem at 84 hours hahahaha ) anyway lol, but that low is going to pop s of long island in that circumstance, when the right exit region runs over the b-c axis that is better defined in that region. that will back the 850s and immediately there is no warm air at that point. you guys in the se ( again...talking my own rgem extrapolation ) may have to deal with a cf for a time... but it's less than 0c at 850 on either side of that

yeah, 06z euro is west and essentially on-board with the 06z gfs ... both of which may actually be tamed version of the 00z ggem, but i recall back in the older days the ggem had a slight meridian bias at d4. in theory the upgrade heredity would atone ... but just like with the euro's sw lag, or the gfs progressive bias... these still seem to vestigially nuance the runs every once in a while. and look, we're crossing the 96 hours threshold - go figure...

that RGEM solution from 00z and 06z ...doesn't necessarily extrapolate to a rain event east of the river for me. is there some longer version of this model that isn't the ggem itself or something ?

would anyone find it funny if this ended up takin' a boat ride up the Hudson ? ho man. there'd be some deliciously guilty schadenfreude watching that happen muah hahaha

oh there's a separate phenomenon with this engagement that's ( frankly..) a bit manic in the proper psycho-babble sense... it almost doesn't matter what the model is, reputation and quantitative skill ..etc etc, so long as it paints the illustration that triggers - that's why when enjoying a cup of morning coffee and cracking open the overnight's frivolities ... i seldom any more move my own needle on any inspiration or interest, motivated by the shared optimism that is apparent in here. because hands down... i go look at the synoptics and i'm like, 'what the f are they talking about' hahaa

this is the high sensitivity i was just discussing. one is hard pressed to see differences there that would typically inspire one version or the other yet we're seeing enormous implications from these very minute differences - it's all because of the compression circumstance. i just suggest people try to take these model runs on the chin, in both directions, until we get inside of 84 hours with the full compliments

late to the party this morning; this has likely already been discussed. the eps/geps/gefs mean all were a step in the direction of coherence on this thing. this is a positive for event enthusiasts for me, i have the same approach to this that i did two or so days ago... this needs to be < 96 if not 72 hours before the confidence slope. it's due to the fast nature of the flow in a very compressed field. this circumstance lowers the confidence more than typical, relative to lead times, for a couple of reasons. 1 the suppressive/negative interference flirts with being total ( enough to be a non-event). whether it is enough to completely miss ( yesterday's op gfs') or backs off enough to gets us into the action (op cmc) ... that requires higher resolution that a, is better provided by the operational runs, and b ...gets better in shorter terms. bringing this up because more typically ... a general risk assessment might rely more on the various ens means, but this circumstantially makes that challenging. this is an anomalously compressed total circulation mode predicament. the 06z gfs combine with the modest, albeit real, spread on the eps on the nw side of the track mean, which in itself, are clues that support the < 72 hour philosophy for me. 2 the impact corridor of any system is narrowed/stretched along the dx. there's other aspects like fast motion of the storm not being able to overcome the moisture sink further west of the center... nuances et al, limits the impact region so narrowly, this compounds reason 1 above even more, because we're asking the models to then be very precise about at a range they are even more challenged to be accurate. ..the two factors above are always in play when your dealing with these impacted flow regimes - it's a matter of how much.

heh the reason for the always miss frustration is just a numbers game - when threading needle patterns the margins are very narrow. which means the odds of any given location become unfavorable. not getting events is just the odds playing out for the pattern if you need to be frustrated, the real frustration should be in why this pattern keeps repeating every year regardless of variant leading indicators

I’m not super old … right smack in the middle of not a kid anymore. I don’t recall many winters that were pan-dimensionally snowy and cold prior to 95/96 maybe 78? the CSB storm, followed a couple weeks later by the blizzard back east. And I think what folks forget about late in ‘77 Dec featured a couple potent miller As. not sure if those produced in the m/a but Harv spun tails for me about covering those for the Boston area and how they were both supposed to be cold rain. that winter was multi regionally impacted. other than that and 95/96 … there seems to always be some redheaded step region that gets left out just for want -

qualitative ... he gave you his quant .. i think you mean qualitatively - the context of your back and forth was that 'big dawg ec winters are rarefying' - there's some subjectivity to that so it kind of has to be a qualitative aspect. whatever.. man, make this winter stop

god i f'n hope we don't observe a propagating ssw in f'um february. f that! if it does, no baseball weather until the end of june - and it won't mean snow in march, either. keep hopin' and maybe you'll get what the devil wishes you for

yeah i mentioned the same aspect to him last night. also repeated this morning, ' this probably needs to be < 72 or so hours' before the confidence spike

guys ... i was being snarky re the half over winter - dec 1 to mar 1 really doesn't mean anything to reality and nature. it's just a dumb demarcation because climate science needs to have equal quadrature

unless this is a pun ... i think you mean swallow us "whole" - but come to think about it .. hole is better lol

might be time to start admitting certain large scale irrecoverable limitations

thank god then ... winter's half over today by met calendar.

so the euro 're-compresses' the flow in that time period now ... of course anything more favorable looking between the 23rd and the end of the month was predicated on that relaxation - imho. without it, it's more nuanced and far less predictive. this is our problem ... non-hydrostatic heights exceeding 594 dm in latter January near by E of the Bahamas, pressing up against a mid Canadian shield PV that's below 500. nothing is going to squeeze thru there and conserve enough of it's own mechanics capable of doing jack shit

the present covid strain going around has been causing that, a particular 'shivering' response - some taxonomy that is indigenous to this strain perhaps... we've all probably cycled through less potent child variant strains by now, perhaps not even knowing. it's funny how big pharma still trying to squeeze more economics out of the extinguishing fear... anyway, then you hit your ribs with 23 f wind cold, disproportionate physical response ensues. if you were unaware that you have it at the time, your system and/or the shivering probably would come as a surprise.

i think this is even more idiosyncratic than the wholesale PNA consideration. i mean don't get me wrong - you know me, i'm a big proponent of telecon. but this is really about a down-pulse in the hemispheric cold expression at 500 mb. as Will also highlighted over in the event thread, there a coherent relaxation in the depth and circumvallate gradient around the spv/ long wave, and as it lifts out ...that trailing end has a chance to curl up on the flow. here's the 12z gfs version of that ... there still positive slope on the final ejectio out of the west, but this ridge position in the west ( your +PNA notwithstanding - ) is in a much better position to support eastern continental/mid latitude wave amplitude. If this trough should ever curl around even neutral? that easily becomes a bomb on the right with that ridiculous amount of sfc to 800 mb b-c gradient between..etc.

i think we should be watching this 23-25th time range, too

it's not actually a terrible fit for -epo's in the canonical pattern statistics - i think we're seeing a balance between that, and the unusually high degree of gradient/shear size and depth of this spv-long wave hybrid. that latter aspect is inducing higher velocities; those physically stretch the wave signature in dx coordinate..etc - which brings these waves up farther east of normal for -epo.

bingo.. it's why the 24th probably has a better profile for something, relative to 'extended outlook' performance in general. you can actually see it in the operational versions, all three ggem/euro/gfs, from 00z and 06z. the big buzz saw look,while not totally gone, relaxes. this allows that trailing mechanics to then run up the flow encountering less compression/negative interference. the particulars of those solutions are less important than recognizing these larger constraints ( for me ..) but there is even some vague support in the ens means that is frankly better at this range than this one ever was that is the purpose of this thread ( not saying this thread will not prove worth it - just the way the indicators presently align )

John's right ( FXWX ) tho - i'd only add to that, for some in here we're writing to empty skulls. when it comes to hypothesis using principles of meteorology, they're just not there. [ ...right exit region/upper diffluent channel approaches the region but doesn't intersect the theta-e ridge until ... ] = lacking audience when it come to theoretical canvas. one can spend time composing turn of phrases that offer "reasoning bottleneck," which describes and justifies a period of interest ..etc - it could be written with prose so refined that Shakespeare blushes in his grave ... crickets. not everyone can ... and it's not really to anyone's fault. it is entirely possible to have one's virtues in the right order in general, be interested in weather for either science or just liking dramatic events...etc, but just not have the tool-kit for processing how it all works in the background. what i don't like is those that have a kind of manic need to fulfill something that's provided by the utter vagaries of whether a model run has storm or not. those types are not typically very fair when it comes to evaluating one's efforts - if there's even something like 'evaluation' going on at all. it seems very superficially related to whether the last thread, and the occurrence of a boner model run and storm, happen to get them off. there's definitely too much of something like this when it comes to dealing with bus-stop social media lol

you know i mentioned this yesterday ...say it again, we're gonna need to get this < 72 hours. even if there is a consensus there at 108 hours ( say), and it's either all in, or all out at that time, it will still be the case where another ~ 36 hours is required. the models have to be precise to a degree they are not intrinsically capable of being in time ranges much beyond that, given to the highly compressed character of the flow. this latter aspect is shortening the confidence timing a bit this mad compression ordeal is making for the presence or non-presence on the charts sensitive to very discrete perturbations that are below the resolution of the model. that should give this thread some life for the next 2 days ... lol

yeah it is but I think in this case the high compression needs higher resolution to suss out the important perturbations; that which is native to the operational versions, comparing to their lesser informed ensemble members … it may give something back to confidence. It is overall a sensitive shaky set up. 18z op gfs shows how to overcome but again -