Typhoon Tip

No ... I did not "downplay" that event. I factually pointed out that it had none pervasive snow results - there were a lot of gaps. I'm sure that in J.Q.'s backyard where 30" resulted, it seems like downplaying as a attitude or some other petty interpretation that took it personally .. but there was nothing personal - it did gap regions.

Like I said ... I don't typically engage in the subjective tenor with this stuff, because of the semantic bullshitness of it. I said, it got it done with the least plausible amount necessary to do so - focus on that. Which it did, sorry! plus, the storm left a lot on the table.

I seldom get involved in this sort of subjective banter but ...in the spirit of commiseration I will add, this is different than 2012 was. That year had considerably fewer circumstantial chances - in a way... you give it prize/recognition to that seasons as a distinct sort of event in itself. This year seems to be achieving startlingly poor return numbers, despite ( or perhaps "in spite" of ) several qualitative contenders. This is where the damnable devil of the comparison resides: in the relativity between the two years. This year, to me, is far in a way the worse "luck" ( for lack of better word). It's kind of like 2012 was the slowest kid in the class. You wouldn't send that poor bloke into a Chess tourney and expect anything better. But this year? This year may take the prize in wasted potential... I remember 1994-1995 as the king piece of shit year, and still did as of this last November. Because again ... 2012 was so unique, it sort of on an appreciative island phenomenon. But this may beat 1994-1995 - we still have time. That year had a bomb that did not disappoint in February. This year had a "blizzard" that for lack of better word, felt like it cheated to earn distinction. It was interesting... doing so with least impact plausible to still get that done. LOL. That's commiseration

Not that anyone else is suggesting otherwise ... I'm gonna need a lot more than those two pieces of shit guidance. The last time either has performed a coup in this range ( 84+) east of Chicago, ... wow, I have to go - personally - back to January 2005 with the NAM. The ICON, as far as I can tell ...never has led. I'm still considering this events as a Looney Tune "Ralph Phillips" special until proven otherwise, and shall remain uninterested.

"Now" ? LOL Glad you've come around J/K

I'm leaning Scott's direction on the next two weeks ... once we get past the Looney "Ralph Phillips" blizzard in the foreground, the winter back's essentially broken. That said, I'm not sure the other side of the "daydream" will exactly feature a balmy escape, either. Firstly, the warm up next week ... might be oversold in the operational model versions. I've seen that in that in the past, where those types of eastern ridges start out as a 5 day long warm balm, suggested some 12 days in advance. Then by day 10, it's a 4 days... interrupted possibly by a BD. Then by day 5 its been whittled down 2.5 days with an accelerated trending cold front. The reason I suspect this type of modulation is in part because the numerical telecon spread in the GEFs isn't really presenting a strongly negative PNA. It's really more like, negative relative to present. It's actually more neutral. Meanwhile, the graphic presentation of the EPS/GEFs means, they don't look very impressive with that ridge in the east, either. They are rather flat and progressive. Secondly, didn't we just go through this back in mid January, ...when the Weeklies and the EPS ... even the GEFs for a little while, all signaled a warm pattern in February; actual temperatures records notwithstanding ... the pattern didn't seem to work out too well. I remember the PNA at CPC (GEF's based) at the time, did show the mean slump negative into the first week of February. But what actually took place was the PNA kept correcting back possitive. So I guess this is verification trend argument. There is a (perhaps) crucial difference now, though. According to the same CPC ( and statistical factual inference, either way..), the emerging Phase 3-4-5-6 side of the RMM is in constructive interference with the La Nina - this combination was not taking place back in mid January's prognostics. So that alters the map a little... If these two can couple and 'force' a more La Nina model hemisphere, then spring is maybe interpretive-split between this easterly biased La Nina vs just La Nina in general.. There's a bit of a signal difference there. Frankly, I find that CC is screwing ENSO up enough anyway, that any reliance is getting iffier, but that's another debate altogether. It's probably a smear between the two. Later on... the hemisphere probably seasonally slows down ( actual geostrophic base line velocities) deeper in March anyway...and when that happens, just like the last several years... I wonder if we don't go through some 'slosh back' blocking for a couple of weeks..

Yup... this is the first day of "solar spring" ... I'm looking forward to exit, personally. I've extolled in the past that once I've 'checked out' on winter? Yuck. It's really a psycho-babble switch for me. No interest in looking back; exceptions need be extraordinary. It is otherwise, very difficult to get me interested. There needs to be a some sort of unusually large, multi-interval standard deviation event to get pulled back in. 1888, perhaps 1956, ... 1993 ... 1997. Maybe 2005, though I recall being both amazed and disappointed, when in a moment, as I parked outside a mini-mart, a gust of gelid wind rose snow off a flat roof at 1:30 pm one afternoon in mid April and momentarily dropped the visibility out car window to frappe. Otherwise, the daily charts are an uninspired tedious drag for me - particularly in this geographical area of Earth, where circumstantially... cold is enabled to "cheat," but seldom cheats enough. I mean, ... that's what 38.4 in drizzle on April 10 in an air mass that smells like frozen salmon balls is, while it's 74 at Albany ... with the aroma of fresh cut lawns.

Little behind in this thread but just got back from gym and this 18z NAM solution extrapolates all pretty like. I'm a little concerned for the leading roll-out ridge being somewhat flat, with integrating higher velocities/geostrophic wind. I'd like that to start curling into more anticyclonic curvature, however ... that may in fact be about to happen if this model were allowed to head out to 96 hours. But it is the NAM so lest we forget, it's probably unfortunate for everyone that it goes out beyond 48 at all.. LOL... anyway - if anything, we don't want this carving back more west than this here...

today's 'nape affect' failure, tho - in my subjective opinion. heh. I mean, just an ooze of chilly breeze ruins it when it's this close to the bottom of the nape threshold. lol If we want the affect, at 40-45 F on Feb 9, you gotta have it dead calm. Then as you work your way toward 50, you an add a mile per hour... and on and so on. It's 43 here with Feb 9 sun, and it feels warm-ish, but the annoying light breeze immediately ruins the appeal. Saturday... if it is windy at those temperatures - nope.

Agreed... and I've seen the Euro and other models do this in the past...where they begin capitulating on a given run cycle, but not full in... it's like they 'hedge' in a way. If that mid/U/A comes in nudged even more amplified on the 18 ...0z, it'll probably break the dam and will go too far ( if anything...) the other way. Or not...but that type of antic is not uncommon.

It may have resulted flat at the surface but the 'fun' of that was directed for Will... we've been discussing the N/stream sensitivity to this whole thing, so the stepped improvement in that regard was what we were looking for - 'boom' was in deference to that. 'boom, there we go..'

boom

Actually ...I wrote more into that post - check it out ...

Not for where it counts ... only NYC where it is deserved .. hahah. J/K No but I wouldn't worry about that relative to that solution 1, the CMC has a warm BL bias at this range; 2, no chance with a high that strong pearled out antecedent to the cyclone approaching from the SW, would it be that warm in NYC...

Wow... gives this nerd goose bumps to see that modeled in the NAM ( perhaps vindication.. ) Like Will and I were just discussing, Ray and even George.. In his George's defense, he did say this: "I am convinced that the models are underestimating how much the northern energy will dig, and that the models will continue to trend more and more amplified. ..." - although he did outline "why," which might have helped his case - just sayn' Anyway, I was discussing earlier this morning that the arc over the ridge in the west as sensitive in this, and that's precisely why this NAM solution digs so much power over the Dakotas - ... I mean more so than previous, in total. You can see when toggling that the ridge is pushing more boldly into the Alaskan sector comparing 54 hour to previous, and that is dislodging more N/stream mechanics and sending it SSE. It is interesting the RGEM did this too...

Yeeeah but ... ( you know this ) the 06z was "better" than the 00z - I think there's a trend here that's gotten rather coherent. Here's the thing, we've seen these coastals this year trend, en masse, in then back out - trying sanity! I mean, usually when the ballast of an entire f'ing ens system starts moving a given way, that's a signal? This years been somehow denying that conventionality it would seem. Excluding the possibility that this is metaphysical more than physical ( LOL ), I like the idea that the N/stream is becoming more coherently factored - I mean for storm enthusiasts. I really think this situation is going to need that, but it has work to do. The UKMET is intriguing -

Oh absolutely ... heh, previous was tongue-in-cheek of course.. Yeah, the southern aspect is real an ain't goin' away. It's a matter of whether this n-stream can be significantly strong enough to 'torque' the total circulation manifold, such that whatever comes of down south, gets foisted ...captured...blah blah. agreed- that's not an M-b deal.

Ha ha .. the irony there? if that southern weirdness there in the Gulf proves to be faux convective fakery, that actually might result in a Miller B hahahaha. Hopefully that happens - with no actually logic conveyed that shows that was interpolated from clad meteorological reasoning and experience combined, that happens anyway. Let's do it!

Could be a last hurrah storm for this pattern ... regardless of what form and where. Or perhaps last of the season, given to the lateness. I mean there's likely to be a cyclogen processing SE to off the coast ... it's a matter of amplitude and position. In a definitive era where hockey-stick climate change is real and happening, and we've been verifying in hard data, exceptional warm oddities to mid latitudes across the mid continent February and March's with increased frequency over the last 10 years ... if one is objective they should at minimum begin to wonder if it may be harder to return to winter in 2022, that it was in 1956, past the ides of February with strengthening constructive interfering MJO wave over a La Nina footprint. Yikes! -PNA is gaining super synoptic support. ... In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if this storm came back to at least moderately impact NYC-PWM, and while we are enjoying the d-drip we are also ignoring the 70F on the charts for 4-6 days later - we've been through that drill in the spring, early or not. Regarding this event: Seems there is a 'race' ... Changes are positioning on the starting line over the Pacific, but like unruly competitors ...they may be jumping the gun in the models, causing false starts and forced loading to bully into the west? They could be rushing the -PNA, causing the ridge of the +PNA surge (presently occurring) in the foreground to dismantle too soon. Anyway, those really are starting to exert on the Pacific relay into western N/A ... in about 4 to 6 days. That is when the ridge over western N/A, the one that surged a bit now and is/was modeled to bump east, needs to maintain it's +PNA -like structure in order for the transitively force the east coast trough depth... Looking over all ens means I could... I suggest there is some sensitivity wrt to how much the N-stream can/will dive S through the Lakes, determined more than less on the N extent of the western N/A heights arcing into western Canada. If that gets sent south, we may be in business for better capture. I elaborated at this yesterday - I don't feel much has changed. I think this next 1.5 days starting now on this 12z cycle ... through early Friday, will clarify that interactivity up there and what is ultimately delivered. I give 50/50 for more or less, either way at this point.

It may be a "slow cook" arrival in the runs ( n'yuk n'yuk). Seriously, .. the Pacific may be more poised to enter a large scale mode change than is presently being sensed out by the daily model renditions. Time will tell if such a modulation will happen, or if it is a red herring.

Tomorrow looks somewhat 'napey' ....first of the year. I don't really see 'DSD'.. The flow is SW/WSW ... But, with the open sky over a narrow sfc ridge, and the sun now getting warmer... could be an intoxicating hour of faux mild-like feel out there. Thursday looks like intervals of clouds and too breezy ...

Huh... I think we're being a little harsh - George, sets himself up good and proper for excoriation ( heh ...wow -), but there's worth-while observation still out there re this. But, the fact of the matter is, the general flow scaffold is still there. This can still emerge. I don't personally know how to tell if that emergence will or won't take place... I would presently lean no - but that doesn't mean shit. One run looks better, I can see that happening just as well. Like I outlined earlier, the critical window - for me - will be about 3.5/4 days from now, as the ridge 140 W repositions to 110 W.. That adjustment may send a correction toward more amplitude into the eastern CONUS when that happens - and can emerge in time. Assuming the former does. But that much of it is higher confidence. What happens on the other side of the ridge movement has some upside variability to it. That's the objective perspective from where I'm sitting - seeing as anyone gives a shit what I think. Lol... That is the best I can offer George's ambition to getting us one step closer to ending the world in the 3rd Geological Snowball Earth

Mmm... the legitimacy of it may be a bit subjective to the observer here, but VDII is real. It's just not at the moment looking very promising - granted... But D5-7 still has ample time for better reveal.

Can't you like ... pm George, and white glove influence him to redraft something more representative of present signals/reality? god - It kind of ruins it if we want to be 'serious' and apply Met objectivity and substance, when it sounds like b-movie horror tropes

For muse only - the 12z ICON arrived quite significant+, for HFD-PWM and Phin country