Typhoon Tip

Funny... something like 5 days ago the GFS had a 950 mb low on the BM, which from the point of time looking forward was in that same window ... ha

Yeah...that's definitely neg interference pattern in the resulting mean. The individual members may or may do that - but just at a conceptual level, the 1004 mb contour/circumvallate is basically the size of a country out there... If you shrunk that to the normal scale of a cyclone you'd probably have the equiv. ISE of a 970 mb low ha

I'm gonna be interested in the EPS mean ... This operational run has definitely taken a step toward "seeing" the potential in the flow beyond D6. I'd be willing to hunch that future cycles tend to sans one or two of those entities between D 7 and 10, in lieu of more focus on one. It's generating it's own neg interference. The 500 mb evolution centered on D7.5-8 is a gem for huge problems NYC --> NE, but its paltry surface reflection. I don't have a problem with rapidity and repetition, ... but not with such deep features. Those aren't exactly shallow troughs. But the prior/leading EPS means have been pretty consistent with a signal that corroborates the notion for "D9" amplitude in general. The 12z GEFs made a subtle trend toward more depth. The stasis in the elevated PNA ... and now we have a -NAO ? interesting party arrival... west based, arrival. Don't want it statically negative, but with the PNA leading and western ridge in place ( better than recently) this starts to suggest teleconnector convergence ( disparate indicators targeting the same region ) may be evolving.

You know what you need as the perfect revenge elixir ? A 1969 stalled out, cyclic snow band backing redux. Only have less S of Boston to really grind it in -

Clipper D6? ...gotta watch for the tweener systems when bouncing the PNA index

F! ...I had my dates screwy on that early statement .. push 7-9 to 8 to 10. Maybe 11 day... So, yeah, it only underscores the "too early" aspect for a thread, but I do believe the period in question is above the standard model uncertainty for that range. It may also push up in time... There's definitely a signal out there. As far as the 12z details..that's obviously just an artifact of base-line potential, magnified too - as is typically the case at long leads. It's gonna be a wait I'm afraid.

Better 12z GFS rollin' in wrt to scaffolding a significant event D7 - 9, comparing 00z. 00z was too bold with N/stream insertion into the NP, ... causing suppression/compression and velocity problems that ventured on in negative interference to not doing much in the time frame above. The larger super synopsis of the hemisphere leading ...offers more support and probably atones for the EPS ( and GEFs...) signal -above normal coherence for 192 hours off the 00z run. Anyway, 12z has substantive N/stream amplitude descending without out it being so overwhelmingly powerful.. Thus, conserves the S/stream eject through the west underneath ... "possibly" setting stage for more then less phasing. The flow overall in that period is relaxed over the velocity saturation as of recent weeks ( and f'n winters for that matter). Interesting aside, this sort of gradient slackening took place last January, too, thought gradient and speed came back in Feb. The numerical telecon spread is fiddling with the PNA in a not so savory way. It's still neutral ( esque), but seems members slipping neggie out there. Not sure it's real.. We just spent a day and half with server farm/comms problems down at NCEP, so maybe these are temporarily unstable. Both the graphical means of EPS and GEFs, offer wave amplitude ... less neg interference E of 100 W across the continental mid latitudes - Maybe a thread tomorrow...

Mm nah, even accounting for these nuances in measuring techniques ... they don't account for rare 6" back whence, compared to pretty regular one foot occurrences now. ..I mean, not to suppress your notion. I'm just speaking anecdotally ... Although, I have read that quantitative rain has increased globally anyway so there's that - too

I'd really focus on D 9-ish first... heh. One notable under the radar .. if perhaps climate jab about this system today. "Over performance" relative to input parameters, is getting to be a rather regular distinction in winter times over the past decade, particularly the last 5 years. It seems harder to get anything to happen, but I bet you dimes to donuts ... events that break through average higher QP than similar storms of closest objective, comparative intensity, prior to the turn of the century... Perhaps asterisk 1995-1996. This isn't the first time in the last 10 years a 995 mb low put down 16's ... We all know this is true; I remember the collective discussion back in 2015 how we were handing out 12 like Pez dispensing, when 1950 - 2000, the "mean storm depth" ( if there is a such a metric ) was smaller. Perhaps we should make one. Now watch ..the study comes back dead balls on the same. .. You must forgive some of us. We were alive in hell decade.

Except for today, ironically enough lol. but in general, sure ...

The 20:1ness of the snow quality might be problematic without refits, outside of the meso band/lolly axis. The 4-5'ers, those of us skirting that band, sublimation might take some toll on it. That said, it does not appear there is any kind of rapid turn-around in thickness after this thing. In fact, it'll be rather chilly through the weekend. As Will mentioned - there's some sort of whisky boundary threat for rain/snow showers ..probably ending as a WINDEX as that arctic truer blue expression comes through. Between the cold before that front, and the cold during next week... probably what fell is safe. Areas like me to ASH and FIT may be down to grass blades poking through. Squalls can help but not much... Fleeting possibility a clipper like S/W later this week may emerge from the mid range as refit potential but that's long odds.

This reply made me laugh a little... I mean it's like, 'yeah, just get a steady diet of snow storms' and call it day. lol

For winter enthusiasts and that "d-drip contingent" ... post mortem can be tricky on the psyche.. After an event, alleviation of "withdraw syndrome " comes from perpetuity of some kind; and when the model-telecons-ens mean mathodone clinic's open for business ...? ahhhh I'm kidding of course... but we've all been there. Sense of 'loss' after a big storm, it's like post-partum depression in some ways. Interesting... This event had lots of ramp up time resulting in a fever pitch. What next? If say ... we were staring down the barrel of a mode shift toward interminable warmth, that would almost make it worst to have had this event at all. ...It appears we go from this into an interesting pattern, one which may actually contain a target too ... We'll see - preliminary is D9/negotiable

I've seen 3-5" down with the orb of the sun dim visible, aggregates transiting in front of it, yet 1/2 mi vis on the ground ... Those are neat clippers when they roll down through a deep blue arctic air mass.

Been awhile since touching down in this thread... Not sure what the status is, so tfwiw - Firstly, re that cold: don't be surprised if it ends up less extreme. These cold waves that take the long trajectory through southern Canada, and then come here while the L/W and N-stream are relaxing, tend to be over modeled at this range. Nonetheless, -20 850s with successful cryo landscape now/then in place will bite. 2nd: Signal around D9 is real ... might be able to play with date, but something is going on out there just beyond the cold wave next week. I wouldn't thread for it at this time, but it's legit. It's been in the deep field ens, perhaps just the "cadence" if you will, more so than directly observable. I believe it was mentioned earlier in the week in the other thread, ' a fuzzy signal mid month..' Anyway, now the 00z EPS and GEFs mean are more materialized in their depiction. The EPS in particularly has rather robust signal, D8 ..10, and it is one that -imho - does synchronize with modes/modalities transmitting downstream, which at larger scales are also multi-model cluster agreed upon. Those being, a quasi -instilled +PNA cyclic flexing, the first of which we have relaxed(ing) height garland from old Mexico to Bermuda, while the flow plumbs toward TV latitudes. The EPS closes off a contour already and runs up to NS. I would be less inclined to mention much of this if the abv mentioned, larger scaled scaffolding were not recognizable. It is also encouraging for "hunch" confidence, because they essentially agree as said. In fact, just for muse for now, the extended range GEFs imply winter rock and rolls from the 20th to some unknown ends.

Cannot really be avoided - you know this ... but every system has a personality in distribution, and it won't be loved by all.

Very glad to see that many realized a good performance after enduring the week's modeling and banter peregrinations ... But lord ..seriously, did some of you not go to sleep last night... LOL. 9:20 am; 27 S- closely ~ 5" in Ayer.

32km looks like grid point/scale feedback. 3km being below that doesn’t suffer from happenstance thunderstorm complex feedback

Yeah... this is an interesting now-cast later evening and night.

There may be a TROWAL formulation getting going. That deeper westerly cyclone node probably occludes to that "fake" low, but in reality ...it may be dominant - in route to becoming so in the next runs. It would be a hoot if all this consternation all week was just convective feed-back hallucinations ... But anyway, as that eastern low decays in future guidance, that increases the elevated warm tongue wrapping back west - I suggest for folks the improved look is less about zonking ( lol, not sure what the means ), and more about shedding the eastern "choke-low"

...I mean... I don't wanna get my ears pinned back if it doesn't. just imagining it could nowcast more impacting. You know ... the convection isn't there - yet. I mean... it's like the models detect instability and 'trigger' from whatever fractals they need to fire it off. But, what if the triggers don't happen? Basically any time a storm gets enhanced(diminished) by "as yet" virtual generated processes, there's no guarantee there. Oh it's likely this thing will have a squadron of super cells out there ( oy ) but that doesn't mean they are also exhaustive on inflow, either. That's a 2ndary - Meanwhile, like Will and I were just surmising how the synoptics look like an NJ model bomb. They do. I can find a lot of cases at NCEP Library where flat open waves with big wind cores missiled off southern Jersey and Brockton Mass got 14" for it.

Oh absolutely ... I mean, I think this could now-cast favorably overnight. I think it's a candidate for a short range improvement scenario.

I agree in principle that either end of that spread might not make a huge difference. Thing is... like I was just mentioning to Scott, the v trajectory climo has y'all in CT -NW RI- eastern MA is a sweet spot. Obviously climo is what it is and not all storms have to obey the mean. Still, there's some impressive frontogenic looks to this along said axis. It'll be fun to watch for convection behavior later in the evening .. overnight. Pleezy weezie with sugar on top, can we bust one positive like the good ole days?

It may yet ... in a way - I mean... even if we don't get some nucleated 980 low 50 Mi fram ACK, I don't think J.Q. Public is going to know the difference or know to care if they are sitting in rush-hour under a frontogenic thump. I keep looking at the PVA track and it's pretty much ideal for heavy snow climo ... 2 deg polar side of the torpedo path - Ryan's right ..this thing is just uniquely odd

Yeah it's really like the RAP just doesn't grid those convective issues at all, so it ends up with 990 mb low and actual Nor'easter look. I dunno how to resolve that difference from those models that do incorporate plausible effects ( limiting as they may be...) wrt to convection out there. Part of me wants to say the flat open wave nature to the total S/W space, with flat-like lead S/W ridging out ahead, would tend to support convective clusters robbing potential vorticity from center. now cast it I suppose... I mean, we'll probably know at about 1 am this next morning if the models were too sensy to the convective parameterization by observing sat and gunk.