Typhoon Tip

Look at it on the bright side … it’ll snow right where the new climate regime we’ve clicked into says it should… How’s that for trolling. Lol. ho man

I’m sure they did but “days ago” this was tracking through CNE heh

This is ice if it’s that miserable aloft. Higher PP north while wet bulbing is an easy tuck call

Dew points pressing in the low 20s … not bad. Ts 40-44.

nothing to see here ... until a week 2 perhaps unless shit changes - we'll see if it does, otherwise. nope -

00z NAM looked snow -like beneath 800mb/ N of the pike. about .5” liq eq

Its shit like that which drives me nuts when I see WPC’s stupid resolution here

Yeah agreed... I think that period 22 -25th is still on the table... It'd be ( I think? ) the 22nd event these models toyed with 4 days back, but lost it. But that chart above is/are a part of the moving pieces back then, still being negotiated in these runs now... I don't think - duh - at D7+ it is too much to ask for this to modulate back into significance. I just you know honestly I wouldn't really be hitting at it, but these blocking nodes, Greenland ( and trending W by the way ...) and -(WPO;EPO), are evolving, ..which means no one from Colorado to NF is safe at this point. interesting

I'm saying that as a 'least' result - I mean, at this point, I'd hedge the Euro run and put money on that ... ( but tomorrow is a different day at the casino) But you know, even for the Euro, ..when the flow is compressed and fast like this, the snow vs mix vs rain corridors may also narrow. Small or even nuanced perturbations in where the ballast of the system tracks can make for impact variances along challengingly small forecast distances. And those small variances are below the model(s) capacity.

No one's asking me ... But I'm still okay with front snow spits going over to ZR/PL/R mix in the interior, with snow mainly southern VT/NH ...maybe down to Rt 2 along N Mass interior. I don't think the front IB is that huge though, because this thing is mechanically not huge. But ...sometimes things can maximize too ... There's that, plus ... that local climate group tendency in the verified numbers to result above guidance - ..so Anyway, I'm calling that a relative win; probably already is, considering 3 days ago ...not many were taking this seriously, either for entertainment or impact aside. My thing then was that it should be considered, and..it would like be colder - I still feel that way just based a-prior experience. It's after Dec 15 ... with a new polar boundary S of us. I realize GW is going to eventually f-us good and proper right out of winter, but it is too early to start assuming those kind of fronts end up back N of our latitude in flat screamin' flows +PP over BTV.

I think this should be monitored on the 22nd and 23rd for that thing to make a re-appearance, old school style, in guidance... We can see below, close! That N-stream is just not quite digging enough, but ...notice that time stamp there says 174 hours... And given the speed of the overall system translations in the flow, the total N-stream aspect of this is probably somewhere NW of the Aleutian archipelago ... and with the flow during this run-up era buckling toward more N-S constructs over the Alaskan sector... it's not a far-gone conclusion as to whether that'll start digging more in future run cycles. ya know ... we typically lose, or lose significance, systems in the ext...it'd seem almost fitting if one 'emerges' instead. Although ...the 22n/23rd was in there 3 or 4 days ago, just sayn'

I've actually noticed the middling wave interations/stream timings have been more off, and that phasing is rarer, EXCEPT for big events, which those have a slightly greater frequency - and why we've been seeing things like yesterday, and that NS/NF cat 3 -scaled blizzard... historic in scale. We've been breaking records, case anyone hasn't noticed, as like a "weather culture" at this point. Folks are expecting it - digress. It's like lowering the numbers of mid-grade phases, and increasing by a little, at the big kahoona end. I betcha.... I'd be willing to hunch that the energy budget of the atmosphere is balanced that way... 2 mids = 1 big in a sloppy sense? So we reduce the mids by a couple ... but get 87 kts out in Goodland Kansa in clear air in dust. ha

I tossed you 'like' on this because yar ... I've been rather truculent about these observation ... over and over again, for years - specifically the bold abv. But it's all good - I've noticed with the general public, mantras seemingly have to be repeated 100 times to move the needle of awareness 1% - occupational hazard 'falling on deaf ears' The phenomenon that I have been trying to bring to the attention to the dopamine drip D9 bomb zombies ... ( relax I'm kidding!) is that these damn things keep getting corrected less, as they move from that range to D6 ... D4 ... sometimes not existing at all by the time they are D2 or...some paltry version of the original vision. I've metaphorically referred to this as the moon rising over the horizon phenomenon, where it looks ginormous at first, but then shrinks as it rises... Anyway, I suspect the velocity, specifically as it is physically related to the gradient saturation and is handled by the models, is the problem there. In basic wave mechanics - to wit ... all of the atmosphere is a stage for basic wave mechanics merely operating at a giant scale, with various influences of constructive or destructive interfering inputs, but the waves are guided, in principle, by the same. I realize I've likely lost most in this haha ... but for shits and giggles, it looks like this Anyway... it seems for some reason the models "lower" the value of V in that squared term ...out in time, where they are then having to run to run correct the toward higher. Supposition as to a cause, though. You can set this up algebraically, and solve for V's affect on these terms at all scales, out in time, and if the models are slowing things down erroneously, that is going to screw up the X and Y dimensions of the wave space, and intuitively, it does lend to seeing why these events get diminished - change V on the next run, effects these partials. It could be that the models try to relax the gradient, --> less velocity, and then as the the runs go by... add more gradient, adds more V ..blows up the original vision.

That looping stall/hesitation has been progged that way for about 10 days to 2 weeks actually - in other words, all along. I'm not sure I agree with those tweet authors, that it is effecting shit frankly. That loop was there before Rai was itching it's daddy's pants. It's really more remarkable that circus act appears actually destined to occur, proving ...holy shit, the models are capable of verifying discrete permutation like that. That said, the fact that "Rai" 's "recurve forecast" is delayed until the China Sea longitude ...strikes me as not coincidentally linked to the notion that Phase 7-2 (or the left side of the RMM) are in "destructive" interference with the La Nina footprint of the N. hemisphere - this latter aspect, according to CPC's weekly PDF publications disseminated weekly. In fact, as of the 13th just recently here, "...This MJO event is likely to destructively interfere with La Niña, and there remains uncertainty as to whether the MJO will maintain an organized structure as it moves near the Date Line, as evidenced by large ensemble spread in the RMM forecasts..." Those that want to use the MJO to modulate the hemisphere ( for better or worse and one's leveraging, notwithstanding LOL ), they really should absorb what that means. It means, the MJO could be entirely meaningless. That said, it also may be open to interpretation - as CPC said above... 'unclear,' which doesn't mean no influence. It means the wave integrity is in question - I gather that the 'other side' of that loop some of this may get more clear, but that is a guess. If the hemisphere was in constructive interference, Rai probably comes/pulled out earlier along present track trajectory, and then it's influx of latent heat into the westerlies would go on to help matters. But here's the thing... the EPS and GEFs mean ( as is no novel observation at this point ! ) are heavily agreed upon a significant NE Pacific blocking episode....One so massive, in fact, that the end of their runs...they terminate out to entropy while still some vestiges of that, echoing like a haunt. What is interesting there is ... that is not very La Nina either. It's as though we have two interim -time scaled teleconnectors, the MJO and the AB Phase of the N. Pacific, in an epic battle against the La Nina... Not sure if RNA/-PNA is really that connected to the La Nina, but either way...the whole f'n planet is in destructive interference with all these narrative understandings in conflict.

It's not impossible that the 22nd ( altho, perhaps adjusted to more like 22.5 or 23rd) could come back, too -

Still waiting on the seemingly dependable 20 to 30% reduction in overall system integrity that the models typically start correcting at this range. So far so good … but I wouldn’t put it passed this doing that going forward. Heh

I guess Dryslot already did. But maybe you could petition to get ‘SWFE’ removed from the title ?

‘Cept, … I wouldn’t consider a flat wave going underneath us with typical frontogen and backing elevated flow signatures/ low securely going south as a SWFE. But that’s just trying to apply some consistency to the usage of the term. I mean it’s happening along a narrow corridor admittedly but it’s still not a primary shooting up at Saint Lawrence and a huge isentropic wall that ends as a weak meso low scooting seaward. This is a frontal wave /New Jersey model hybrid… but weak in the latter sense.

There’s gotta be some sort of a cold reenforcing boundary around hr 60 (NAM) per the FOUS because the thermal profile rather abruptly goes white below 800mb as the wind switches NNE (Logan)

May as well just have one big super thread … call it, ‘2021-2022 minutia and personal bullshit occasionally interrupted by model imaging psychosis ‘

I wonder if that was a tropospheric fold out there

I wonder if they trop folded

Looking at some of the particular details in the PP/mass field behavior... It wouldn't shock me if this thing were to labor toward mixing, then a "tuck" jet swooshes SW and formulates a more proper rain/snow line that bows into RI

Fwiw - I don't see any difference wrt to the GEFs that offer much distraction. Both EPS/GEFs means even quasi manifest a polar cut flow ...centered ~ D10 . As is typically the case ... by 300 hours the mean starts to look increasingly annular around the hemisphere, bleeding out the nodes toward entropy ..etc. But, there are still vestiges of the D10 echoing through the disarray of those vast extended frames... so.. short version? cross guidance support about as far as can be seen in the future... That looks like an emerging threat for an arctic outbreak like old school - that's the scaffolding anyway..

Personally ... I side with the Euro for a few reasons, both meteorological and operational/experience included... That said, I'd call some ZR/PL down to the Pike or even NW CT as a relative win, because as I went on with it earlier...the Euro most likely has a better handle on the DP layout post the shallow boundary, and it's synoptic PP being subtle but crucially greater than the GFS north, is more likely real at this range and adds to that... Operationally, we are < than 96 hours and I don't believe the GFS scores typically better than the Euro in this range. but there are other nuanced reasons with the tooling, too