March 2- 4 Snowstorm Potential

[Sn0waddict]

I wasn't arguing that the bulk of the storm isn't Monday, but what happens to all the QPF that falls Sunday and Sunday night? Whether light or not, it's still part of the same storm. Come Sunday we'll see who's buying and who's crying.

Could certainly dry up as virga. Besides the point, if the GFS does verify and we all can get 12+, the Sunday stuff wont really mean anything to anybody.

[Rjay]

Enough with the whole "you can't disagree with a met or talk to them like any other gman being" bs. This a forum, look up the definition of the word if you have a problem with the free exchange of ideas.

Really?? No you can't talk to mets like that. This is why our subforum is looked down upon. They are nice enough to even come here to share their thoughts which I for one appreciate greatly. I think yanks does a good job especially with pbp, but he himself admits he doesn't take criticism well so sometimes he overreacts.

[JetsPens87]

I wasn't arguing that the bulk of the storm isn't Monday, but what happens to all the QPF that falls Sunday and Sunday night? Whether light or not, it's still part of the same storm. Come Sunday we'll see who's buying and who's crying.

 

I said verbatim on the GFS. My opinion is that .01 and .01 and .01 frame after frame for Sunday afternoon is just pointless. Could be very light snow, could be virga. But to me that doesn't add it up to make it seem like a 30 hour event. I think the thump of this storm winds up coming in a 12 to 18 hour window as numerous other mets here have suggested. Could there be an inch or two either way on either side of that window .... sure.

[Allsnow]

He said essence, and he's right. Laughing at a red tag is a sure fire way to get suspended. You're lucky I'm not still a mod.

I reported it, hopefully the mods address it

[mob1]

He said essence, and he's right. Laughing at a red tag is a sure fire way to get suspended. You're lucky I'm not still a mod.

are you doing a time lapse of the kiddie table?

[hazwoper]

And I meant no disrespect. I just don't see how you can call that run on the low end a 12 hour event, especially when WAA snows almost always arrive faster than modeled.

0.01" of qpf in a 3 hr period is not accumulating snow. Also, it is smoothed out. Not everywhere would be seeing precip with a 0.01" qpf over 3 hrs

[Rjay]

Uggggh, please just stop bickering and stick to analysis and hoping the good run continues. At least use the banter thread. We've chased away enough mets and good contributors.

[Sey-Mour Snow]

what if ratios are higher than we think with 1"+ qpf?. This storm has some decent potential to be a pretty big snow maker.  My only concern now is it trends south, and/or we don't get great snow growth, I do think there is potential of 15:1 or more types of ratios.. by the way where is Earthlight, I enjoy reading his posts.. 

[JetsPens87]

And I meant no disrespect. I just don't see how you can call that run on the low end a 12 hour event, especially when WAA snows almost always arrive faster than modeled.

 

http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/Image.php?fhr=081ℑ=data%2Fgfs%2F00%2Fgfs_namer_081_precip_p12.gif&model=gfs&area=namer&param=precip_p12&group=Model+Guidance&preselected_formatted_cycle_date=20140228+00+UTC&imageSize=M&ps=area

 

That's thru 81.

 

http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/Image.php?fhr=093ℑ=data%2Fgfs%2F00%2Fgfs_namer_093_precip_p12.gif&model=gfs&area=namer&param=precip_p12&group=Model+Guidance&preselected_formatted_cycle_date=20140228+00+UTC&imageSize=M&ps=area

 

That's the 12 hours from 81 to 93.

 

Which is why I said in essence on the GFS it seems the bulk of the show is 12 to 18 hours. I don't see how this is wrong.

[Storm chaser]

not sure what the bickering is about when most of the Metro see's a 12-16+ snowfall.. 

 

I wonder when we get to the weekend what some of the Hi res Short range models will show QPF wise as most showing over an inch QPF like 4 days before. 

[mob1]

Yes.

Good times man, I think you had an epic one of Feb. 06.

[WintersGrasp]

I think something worth mentioning is that a couple days or so ago....this was modeled as a 2-3 day event. It is now modeled as a 12-18 hour event. When the models showed the event lasting a few days, it spit out about 8-12" of snow. Now, in this shorter, albeit less unusual, event.....it still spits out 8-12"+ of snow. Yes, scattered flurries would add to the atmosphere and make it a unique, long event.....but even still if that occurred, the BULK of the "real" snow would probably fall in a 12 hour or so period

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jm1220]

Enough with the whole "you can't disagree with a met or talk to them like any other human being" bs. This a forum, look up the definition of the word if you have a problem with the free exchange of ideas.

If you mock analysis that a met, who went through 4 years of undergrad at the very least to earn their red tag, provides you should absolutely be suspended if not banned. Disagreeing is fine but the LOLs are what's BS. This is their profession and they aren't weenie hobbyists like we are. They deserve respect as such.

[PB GFI]

Enough with the whole "you can't disagree with a met or talk to them like any other human being" bs. This a forum, look up the definition of the word if you have a problem with the free exchange of ideas.

Great debate is always warranted , We all should always exchange ideas , but go check out any other thread , its just  done more eloquently and with more civility . You don`t want to become an accuweather forum where 15 year old kids are the predominant sources .

Yanks Fan is very good , the criticism is to just be more polite with his opinion . That goes for me and everyone else , I promise you it will make for a professional atmosphere ( no pun in tended ) . Here`s to 12 to 15 on Monday . Cheers .

[JetsPens87]

I think something worth mentioning is that a couple days or so ago....this was modeled as a 2-3 day event. It is now modeled as a 12-18 hour event. When the models showed the event lasting a few days, it spit out about 8-12" of snow. Now, in this shorter, albeit less unusual, event.....it still spits out 8-12"+ of snow. Yes, scattered flurries would add to the atmosphere and make it a unique, long event.....but even still if that occurred, the BULK of the "real" snow would probably fall in a 12 hour or so period

Sent from my iPhone

 

The nice thing with this is that it will be more likely to accumulate faster than long drawn out light snow over a few days.

[Juliancolton]

The final outcome here is uncertain, but I see nothing to suggest that anybody will remember the storm as a "long-duration event". Precursor snow showers are forgettable, and the models tend to overdo backend precip much of the time. That's objectively speaking, of course. If keeping tabs on all precip, regardless of accums, helps you enjoy the storm, by all means go for it! Sometimes you have to seek out some peculiarities to make the storm memorable, even when you don't jackpot.

[jm1220]

The nice thing with this is that it will be more likely to accumulate faster than long drawn out light snow over a few days.

These long drawn out setups models have at this point are often just those models not keying in on a shortwave to emphasize. So I would think too that it's mostly this last wave driving the precip, not this scattered stuff then heavy snow.

[kevbo81]

looks like very cold temps during the height of the storm per the GFS. With this kind of temp profile, we're prob looking easily at an 8 plus inch snowfall verbatim. 

[WintersGrasp]

These long drawn out setups models have at this point are often just those models not keying in on a shortwave to emphasize. So I would think too that it's mostly this last wave driving the precip, not this scattered stuff then heavy snow.

I've noticed this actually happens more often than not. Start as long duration events and end up much shorter. However, what makes it or breaks it always ends up being what kind of dynamics come into play. Look at the dumping Long Island got with the 4-6"/hour rates dropping 30"+ so quickly just a couple years back. Those are the kind of events that are memorable. Not a couple days of scattered snow flurries with a couple heavier snow showers dropping an inch. I think altogether, we tend to remember a storm by what is ok the ground as it comes to end

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PB GFI]

These long drawn out setups models have at this point are often just those models not keying in on a shortwave to emphasize. So I would think too that it's mostly this last wave driving the precip, not this scattered stuff then heavy snow.

I agree I  think the models are starting to focus on the second SW , which may do 2 things , It allows the 1st feature to sag the arctic front S through the area , and if the 2nd SW gets stronger it will ride the  BAROCLINIC  zone , and is starting to look stronger . In that case it may be able to  pull even colder air into the mid layers and the surface .

[tdp146]

what if ratios are higher than we think with 1"+ qpf?. This storm has some decent potential to be a pretty big snow maker. My only concern now is it trends south, and/or we don't get great snow growth, I do think there is potential of 15:1 or more types of ratios.. by the way where is Earthlight, I enjoy reading his posts..

I'm sure this has been explained ad nauseum, but would you mind giving a brief recap on what temp profiles and and what heights etc create the best snow growth?

[earthlight]

what if ratios are higher than we think with 1"+ qpf?. This storm has some decent potential to be a pretty big snow maker.  My only concern now is it trends south, and/or we don't get great snow growth, I do think there is potential of 15:1 or more types of ratios.. by the way where is Earthlight, I enjoy reading his posts.. 

 

I love this storm. I'll be in Guatemala starting Saturday AM though so I haven't really taken the time to dive into the model guidance and analysis aspect of it. I think it's almost a lock to deliver 8-14" north of the thermal gradient with the potential for more if the shortwave is a little bit more organized. This looks like a classic plume of moisture overrunning a temperature gradient which is in an ideal position for us. The surface low doesn't have to be strong in this situation --in fact it takes an ideal track for most people in this forum on all guidance. 

 

North of the mid level centers (700,850,925mb) is where a swath of heaviest snows will set up..this is almost always the case in these setups. The thermal gradient as modeled brings the highest likelihood of this from Eastern PA into Central/Northern NJ and NYC. The PV is in an ideal position and the low/mid level cold is locked in. I suppose we still have the potential to see model shifts as this draws near, but I think they would be more towards 50-75 miles and nothing too crazy. 

 

The only thing I would keep an eye out for is the CMC solution from 12z which remains a possibility, in which an initial shortwave rides ahead and sinks the baroclinic zone south. So the main show will be farther southeast. But that remains an outlier solution at this time. All in all..this looks like an increasingly likely moderate to major winter storm for most people in this sub forum. 

 

By the time I come back from Guatemala next weekend I have a feeling we'll be closing in on an all time snowiest winter here. 

[jm1220]

I'm sure this has been explained ad nauseum, but would you mind giving a brief recap on what temp profiles and and what heights etc create the best snow growth?

You want -12 to -15C at around 600 to 700 mb, which is the snow growth zone. Surface temps really are pretty irrelevant.

[IsentropicLift]

http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/Image.php?fhr=081ℑ=data%2Fgfs%2F00%2Fgfs_namer_081_precip_p12.gif&model=gfs&area=namer&param=precip_p12&group=Model+Guidance&preselected_formatted_cycle_date=20140228+00+UTC&imageSize=M&ps=area

That's thru 81.

http://mag.ncep.noaa.gov/Image.php?fhr=093ℑ=data%2Fgfs%2F00%2Fgfs_namer_093_precip_p12.gif&model=gfs&area=namer&param=precip_p12&group=Model+Guidance&preselected_formatted_cycle_date=20140228+00+UTC&imageSize=M&ps=area

That's the 12 hours from 81 to 93.

Which is why I said in essence on the GFS it seems the bulk of the show is 12 to 18 hours. I don't see how this is wrong.

it was obvious you took what I said the wrong way. Going to yield to you on this one since you have a met degree and I don't. We'll see how the models evolve. I was really, really hoping for a long, long duration event, no matter the likelihood.

[jm1220]

I love this storm. I'll be in Guatemala starting Saturday AM though so I haven't really taken the time to dive into the model guidance and analysis aspect of it. I think it's almost a lock to deliver 8-14" north of the thermal gradient with the potential for more if the shortwave is a little bit more organized. This looks like a classic plume of moisture overrunning a temperature gradient which is in an ideal position for us. The surface low doesn't have to be strong in this situation --in fact it takes an ideal track for most people in this forum on all guidance.

North of the mid level centers (700,850,925mb) is where a swath of heaviest snows will set up..this is almost always the case in these setups. The thermal gradient as modeled brings the highest likelihood of this from Eastern PA into Central/Northern NJ and NYC. The PV is in an ideal position and the low/mid level cold is locked in. I suppose we still have the potential to see model shifts as this draws near, but I think they would be more towards 50-75 miles and nothing too crazy.

The only thing I would keep an eye out for is the CMC solution from 12z which remains a possibility, in which an initial shortwave rides ahead and sinks the baroclinic zone south. So the main show will be farther southeast. But that remains an outlier solution at this time. All in all..this looks like an increasingly likely moderate to major winter storm for most people in this sub forum.

By the time I come back from Guatemala next weekend I have a feeling we'll be closing in on an all time snowiest winter here.

Wow, enjoy bud, and hopefully it all works out up here on the home front!!

[Juliancolton]

You want -12 to -15C at around 600 to 700 mb, which is the snow growth zone. Surface temps really are pretty irrelevant.

I thought it doesn't really matter where the DGZ is in terms of geopotential height, as long as the layer of optimal temps intersects the best vertical ascent?

[Sn0waddict]

GGEM is pretty much awful for everybody here, especially compared to the GFS. It's 2-4 for everyone here, except slightly more in SNJ.

[jm1220]

I thought it doesn't really matter where the DGZ is in terms of geopotential height, as long as the layer of optimal temps intersects the best vertical ascent?

Ehh, that's something I'll have to yield to the red tags, but that's always been my understanding.

[JetsPens87]

it was obvious you took what I said the wrong way. Going to yield to you on this one since you have a met degree and I don't. We'll see how the models evolve. I was really, really hoping for a long, long duration event, no matter the likelihood.

 

It's fine man, as I told you I was not upset and always welcome good discussion and debate. I just wish you had approached it in a different manner than you chose to do.

[Rjay]

I thought it doesn't really matter where the DGZ is in terms of geopotential height, as long as the layer of optimal temps intersects the best vertical ascent?[/quote

You need good lift around the 700 mb layer and temps -12 to 18- C for optimal snow growth

At least it has been my understanding...Red taggers, take it away