FXWX

Yep... Good call... I've been very frustrated by the marginal air masses over the past 2 or 3 weeks. If we could have had just nice seasonably cold air masses with these storms not only would we already have a nice snow pack but the forecasting would have been relatively stress free. Today's another case of mostly elevation and latitude driven results. We are going to have some towns cancel school with part of the town deep in snow while on the other side of town only some slush and wet roads... Crazy stressful to deal with...

All snow at 1,140 ft in Burlington, CT

Hey Kevin... For this system, I've used a list by county and in most cases have broken the counties up into north / south zones, as well as higher v. lower elevations. Given the tremendous variations expected across short distances due to elevation changes, even within some individual districts like yours; my superintendent groups actually prefer the list range compared to a contoured map in setups like this. My take is a bit more bullish (by an inch or 2) in the central valley zone compared to some other numbers I've seen... For your area, I let the 10-14 inch zone cross the I-84 corridor by a smidge and let 14+ number get a bit closer to the MA/CT border area of Tolland Cty. The most volatile areas I think are the sharp gradients across western Hartford Cty, far northern New Haven Cty and the southern Litchfield Cty into northern Fairfield Cty area. I also think southern Tolland Cty into far northern New London Cty is going to be interesting?

This thing is going to have to be fully underway in terms of sfc low development before these models figure it out... I think they are going to struggle to latch on to a well-defined boundary to focus on; they are constantly chasing some weak signals...

Hate to say it, but one of the issues we collectively have is that there are TOO MANY models to look at! ICON / RAP / 3k NAM / HREF / Reggie 1 & 2... models which we (maybe just me) have little or no faith in. Personally, I don't know the last time I even used the UKMET as a player in my decisions. It's great to debate what they are all showing, but the vast majority of the forecast is going to come from a mix of GFS / Euro / ens info and occasionally some NAM stuff... There may be some folks out there that really get into the RAP and/or HRRR for short range stuff, I use HRRR frequently but almost never beyond 12 hours. I guess sometimes the RAP and HRRR point toward some trends to keep an eye on, but they can be so unstable, its hard to trust them for making major shifts in your forecast thoughts... That being said, it is great for forum chatter...

I've done this a lot of years... this is one of the most challenging / error prone calls I've ever made, not only for the inside 495 area but the western / eastern edges of the CT River Valley area from central CT northward.

4 inches is my worry point for heavy / wet / sticky snow...

That doesn't mean you are wrong? Maybe we are wrong but when something appears off, you have to be wary of the modeled solution... Gut tells me just plot 500 and 700 tracks and ask yourself what normally would happen... That's my starting point.

Yes... As he noted, eps appears to suggest op is a bit too far east. I'm with Tip concerning significant unknowns about how things can rapidly develop in ways you don't see coming well in advance with setups as dynamic as this at mid-levels. Maybe it plays out as modeled but I think we might have some significant nowcast issues down the road.

Yes... I know all the caveats about temps and rates, etc... And I know the deal with the snow graphics, but run after run continues to highlight more snow than suggested by some.

That's what it appears to me... Nothing is coming easy with this event...

Still looks like Litchfield cty into northern Fairfield cty and far western HFD into the Wolcott area still do well.

Yep... 20 f or lower. Svr 10 f or lower

By wiping down & tanking up my tractor this afternoon, I came back in to check trends? The old don't touch the money curse come is starting to haunt me! Worried about Murphy's Law syndrome.

You know that's coming... Lol

Can't be... About 10 posters in the past 30 minutes have stated it's all over based on long range HRRR trends...

Yes and Yes

I think the issuance of specific snow amount maps at this time is unwarranted and does more harm than good. The numbers on the these maps are going to change over the next 2 days, and when they do, all folks are going to remember is how much snow was predicted for their backyard and now it has changed. It leads folks mocking forecasters; they don't care about the reason, all they know is the number change? I am ok with forecasters issuing FIRST CALL outlooks with appropriate caveats. At this stage of the game, I think it is completely acceptable to use general probability terms on maps. Here some of the terms I'm using... Ex. Moderate to High probability of heavy snow of at least 10 inches; Moderate to high probability of seeing less than 10 inches; Moderate probability of seeing excessive snow totals more than 15 inches;. Of course the numbers I'm using are subjective. I fully understand the desire for numbers and the now expected call for media folks to post them. But we posting numbers long before we have reasonable confidence in those numbers verifying. A storm like this is a prime example of why many times you need to play it close to the vest. Again, first call maps like 40/70's with his detailed discussion and caveats are fine, but I guarantee there maps being posted now that will undergo major revisions over the next 2 days. Just some ramblings of an old forecaster; lol

In some ways not shocking at all given the volatile setup... The tiniest of changes with respect to development of the coast low, where the upper level flow tries to capture and bomb it out, as well as any where the best gradient focuses will allow for huge run to run shifts at this range. I won't be surprised if we see more significant shifts until tomorrow's 12z runs. I more wary of a westward trend than an escape east...

I have whole house generator so not worried about power issues...

Just bring snacks!!!

I agree, lol... When I saw Wiz's map I told him to shift his max area to include high terrain areas of far western HFD cty, consider the extreme northern portion of NH cty (Wolcott area were 1000+ ft elevations are in play. The northern parts of Wolcott often plays out like Litchfield cty).

I'm not shocked there are still these messy, convoluted runs... In highly volatile setups with sw energy still moving into and across the western states and trying to resolve capture and retrograde details 3 days down the road, I think we still have another full 24 hours before things truly become consistent. We all would love complete model consensus right now, but it is not going to happen yet.