Typhoon Tip

heh, m'yeah, sorry - I do. Lol. Fond memories with those. I have seen more positive busts with those than any other type. And in some weird personal 'holistic' symbology ... for some reason cool things were always going on in my life around the time one happened. So it's like a lighthouse in the sea of disparity, when one gets modeled... I might be able to get laid. hahahaha.., kidding, but the reason the positive busts happen more frequently with those is likely do to them being smaller in latitude and thus not having a hugely physically detectable presence at long-ish leads in guidance. Simply put, they're sneaky. Both the events in the double pop in 1996 Will and I were reminiscing yesterday were both NJ model lows. So was the exit bomb the nailed SE zones way back in '86 or '87 ... it seems there were NJ lows in both those autumns though so ... One could argue the mega snow bomb of Dec 23 1997 was a NJ hybrid.

Something like this ..yeah. As a gross estimate or point of conjecture ... it'd be like; 20% cut into low tier event climate. Then, 10% cut into low to mid range ... Followed by (+)(-)5% around some mid point/middling events. +5% adds to middling+ with +20+% on majors. It's a grab and give spectrum, from low to high in that sense. And, I would almost be willing to conjecture that their is an increase in freak over production events, enough so to add new category - perhaps call it 'hyper events' ... So low, mid, upper, hyper ...and so on Fwiw, the PWAT increase stuff does come from formalized climate science and modeling therein. That's not just our surmise and educated guessing - it's mathed out. As it "may" apply to our local corner of the world and record keeping .. mm, sometimes when it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...it's a duck. The notion of a velocity saturation as secondary modulator? ( which i have personally noted has become more like a base-line prevalence over recent decade(s), regardless of ENSO this or polar telecons ) That is an offset to that > PWAT model, as a early posit. But I like it

It's an interesting discussion because by atmospheric physics, principles of ..., there should be more snow ( and rain) regardless small, middling, or major events. It comes down to a warming ambience holding greater theta-e ( WV), such that synoptic forcing in a richer medium becomes more proficient. I think there are other factors... Speed of the flow ( imho ) is bigger in this than people realize. And it fits that ... because the faster flow field is becomes a mechanical delimiter ? And the first to go in that scenario would be the weaker S/W's in the field. So that "might" account for why their is increases except for those lowered tiered events.

Right right … when it’s obvious totals could exceed 75 in both - what’s the explanation for that discrepancy

There’s been a striking correlation between favorable model depictions vs pulling the rug immediately upon the most available eyes drawn to observe them. weird

still, there are examples where two pops took place ... In 1996 there were two storms 18 hours apart ... between last flakes of the first, 4- 9", and then Jim Cantore almost getting struck by lightning in ORH thundersnow lol it was barely a day between the two. It was early Dec that year, and both were flattish waves spaced closely but managed to get it done.

My experience with systems spaced closely in fast flows like this is one or the other tends to become dominant. Both by wave spacing arguments, but also feed-backs in the environment. If the lead gets a little more potent it'll sweep the dynamics away so that might belay developing the 2nd, ( next Mon ). But if the 2nd evolves stronger, it'll tend to damp the first out more so.

but even in the Euro.. the Dec 4 wave is hugely powerful. nada. hmm I don't know to question the Euro paltry result of that, or, pat it on the back for seeing the compression in the field as an inherent limitation - which it is... But, how much or how little.

Just thinking back ..isn't this the same system the Euro had 3 days ago on a D9/10 run, that drove pressure to historic depths? - perhaps this is coincidentally in the same timing window. Not sure. I had mused that the following run was an 'overcompensation' when it came in flat and devoid of anything, but this flat fast flow ... remember the metaphor re the 'unmanned firehose' we flop -

Unfortunately science does .. .heh. It was a white xmas whether we're spurned or not - 12:01 AM probably had 5" inches still or something... lol. Oy

I almost wouldn't be 'as' concerned at the present notion of the EPS and GEFs means being so flat with some of these ( otherwise ) interesting oper. runs. Namley... D8-ish. Lower resolution model types, such that individual ensemble members are ... are trying to operated in a progressive open wave pattern. The flow is fast, ...it doesn't lend to helping forecast accuracy of these individual ensemble members, that don't employ the 'souped up' physics of the operational runs. It "might" offer a bun explanation for why the there is an interesting coherent agreed upon signal from the Euro and GFS for D8, for a flat fast mover, yet vague in the clusters. If the flow were slower and more meridian in structure, that might lend to the means picking it up better at this range.

I used to muse in writing years ago. There's a coarser sort of orbital perspective on this whole thing. '...It took this planet some three and one-half billion years to create and stow all these volatile, reactive fossil-fuel chemistries; humanity comes along with their innovating force and threatens to liberate all that storage back into the system in what amounts to just the last two centuries: How can that happen without consequence? ' Obviously there is some hyperbole gracing this delivery, intended to gaslight the intuitive, obvious answer to the question: We likely can't. We have not liberated ALL fossil-fuel volatile chemistry back to the reactive environment, not in just the last 200 years. However, the rate in mass conversion we are succeeding, in the delta, vastly exceeds any comparison to any Millennia prior to the Industrial Revolution. You know ... Archeological science approximates 400,000 years since the first Homo Sapiens would add proxy over fire, to their tool-chest. It can be argued, that was the moment in time that would inevitably lead to one day's shimmering brilliant achievement of humanity: Hiroshima. A dire story that took 400,000 years ( give or take ..) to play out its thematic arc. Yet, as 'hot' as Hiroshima was ... it doesn't even register on the same scale as the amount of energy being/been stored int the atmosphere by Anthropogenic Global Warming. A story-line that is still being written. Chapter one, Africa, 400,000 years ago. After an elevated dry-cumulonimbus generated a lightning bolt that set the savanna afire, instead of running along side with all the other animals, and probably, like most of the tribe did that faithful day, ..."Groont" lagged behind. He or she instead picked up a stick as it burned at one end. It was probably a she, then a male saw her do this, grabbed it from her. And after a moment or two of gazing into the plasma as it danced along the other end, his attention then drew toward the miasma rising at a distance. Purpose replaced fear, and thus humanity claimed "victory" over the 'strange orange light.' It would be ironic if that victory would ultimately lead to the greatest loss of all. It seems as though there must be some sort of as yet proven 'Law of uncertain quotas' in complex systems that perturb reality. Just knowing about the propagation of fractal systems, seems there has to be. Almost like an 'emergence product function.' It would go like, 'for every 1 direct result of cause --> effect produced, there are 3 emergence: a secondary ... a subsequent tertiary ( meaning emergent because of the 2nd order ),' and on and so one. Such that if there are 2 direct ... the subsequent polynomial becomes complex really quickly as we add more direct consequence - that don't have to be laterally related, just existing as a result of the primary event. This fiction or something like this may be why these "different" graphs keep materializing. If there were ten direct results of AGW, there is perhaps a logarithmic increase in plausible unknown, silent-to-the-observer systemic responses. Meanwhile humanity's genius after the fire ... like a Gulliver's Travels through the Millennia. We were perhaps by a quirk in evolution, inextricably enticed by the allure of innovation; but meddling results in being overcome by Lilliputians.

NAM came in at 18z with nada at Logan FOUS

If we can get the NAO recovery to stall, that’d transitively help confluence/llv cold. PNA is dipping neggie next weekend by a modest amount before what looks in the vague distance to be a positive reload. … about 4 days or so. Does offer cutter track activation in that window … If cold/ west limb neg NAO dams we SWFE/ overrun

He's making a statement based upon persistence and seasonal trend; completely valid approach and there's nothing really there that impugns his ability as a Meteorologist. Let's not jump on the pig pilin' parade float? Instead, judge the content on it's own merit ? That said, he may in fact not be good at his craft - I don't know the man. Don't follow his work. But that tweet in and of its self it perfectly valid. Fact of the matter is, it's been a game of postponing - he right.

I thought the EPS was better for the run up D 5--> 10 range last night. GEFs wasn't terrible either. The numerical EOFs didn't look terrible, with briefer -PNA returning neutral positive toward the 2nd week of Dec. They are missing some of the classic featuring in the mean layouts of the polar-stereographic views, but, there is a deep nadir/SPV over James Bay not really allowing much warmth N of IND-PHL ...some perhaps very brief in shunting warm sectors...But that look could end up with ice events. One thing I am concerned about is the look as though we are setting into a huge gradient over our hemisphere ...again - jesus I'm sick of that sonic speed look. Transporting S/W from California to the southern tip of Greenland at orbital velocities gets old. Anyway, folks mentioned volatility so...

I've personally noticed the GGEM's improvements, tho - competing with its self, it's better in that space then prior to a couple years ago when I noticed it abruptly started looking more "Euro like" one D4 to 6s. fwiw -

Yeah, I knew there was a subtler distinction between the two ( lazy ) but that's good rule of thumb re the stationary aspect. Interesting. But that bust was funny... man, "clear" - haha. That may be on par or even exceed the extraordinary Dec 23 1997, for me ... the first greatest bust of all personal witness'! And thankfully .. it was a "positive" bust. Night before official for Worcester MA up through Concord NH axis went something similar to, "Tonight: Increasingly clouds. Low in the upper 20s. Saturday, lights snow early, accumulating 1-3, mixing with rain, ending in the afternoon. High in the mid 30s" What happened? 18 to 24" with some towns getting 8 of that in a single hour, temperatures hammered down to mid 20s ... not mid 30s. The 2nd greatest bust of all personal witness notoriety was that infamous 48 hour in advance Blizzard Warning fiasco of Jan 1987 --> flurries NW of Boston through sun dimly visible. And the coup de grace was the 9F 32 mph wind gust walk to school that morning of "national guard on notice"... kidding but, that would be a negative bust, if anyone needs that defined -

oh, coming back to me. It's also based on the defunct NGM ... Man, I can't believe the NGM's been turned off that long. I don't know if this immediately applicable to the NAM .. I suspect it is?

yeah yeah that's it! cool

Oh it's most like a phantom event's reach-around puge tug while pulling out, no doubt. But it would be nice to see the Euro be oblivious to an event that is "10 KM" in grid spacing. heh

There's a NORLUN checklist ... shit, I used to have that on an old OS.. But that NAM QPF just looks like a NORLUN meso band

It's interesting how these IVT snow scenarios are like buck-shot in models. That may be last untamed frontier in forecast modeling performance, and that's where the IVT targets. The last 36 hours of models made this painfully clear that it wouldn't be a classic cyclone impact, but at the time ... IVT entered the discussion by spraying solutions everywhere. I remember this back all the way to the 1990s. I think there was a Norlun ( or IVT ...if there's a difference there), that gave PWM like 18 to 24" overnight on a headline graphic that had white states... oops. But models back in the day used to start sniffing the possibility out, and then every run would reposition the axis of QPF south of previous... If it came into the 60 hour range on you, it was an ordeal that verified south after pivoting that way in future guidance. It doesn't seem that sort of 'error prediction' happened here. It's been NYC, Berks... NE Mass...

... I've seen this happen in the past, a lot. Some model puts up an idea on some run along the way, and it is either ignored, laughed at, or just hm'ed. Then, yup ..said depiction goes away, and the notion to dismiss is validated. See? Except ... two or three cycles later, some other model does the same thing. What this tells us is that the idea was physically possible, more so than should have been dismissed out of hand. In this case, GGEM that we just got done impugning from that run *( well, I wonder if I am thinking of the same run cycle ), and here this NAM solution isn't hugely different than that in concept-result. Whether it is Berks, NYC or Logan aside... RGEM kinda gets a pat on the back "IF" these runs are in concert onto something. That remains to be seen...

Certainly feels like it out there.. wow.