Possible Weekend Snowstorm, Jan 24 2015

[CoastalWx]

After that GFS discussion..why are people looking at it? Mind blowing 

 

It showed a similar trend to your beloved RGEM. It also is just model discussion.

[powderfreak]

Not saying that will happen here PF, but that's just an example.

 

Yeah I know what you mean.  Seems every storm this season, even up here, has been a nail biter until the very end...relying on some half a degree celcius cooling somewhere in the column.  Can't seem to just get a snowfall where its like -8C through the entire column haha.

[correnjim1]

1-4

[SnowMan]

After that GFS discussion..why are people looking at it? Mind blowing 

Well you don't actually look at any models, so I am not surprised you would say this...

[TalcottWx]

Second Guess.

[Zeus]

Well you don't actually look at any models, so I am not surprised you would say this...

 

He's busy applying -~+*ScIeNcE*+~-

[ORH_wxman]

I wouldn't look at the GFS and base a forecast off it, but adding more models to a certain trend can help.

 

The 18z NAM seems to be on its own with that weird warm punch way up high in the 750mb range. It probably got over-amped at 500mb and just ripped everything too far west. Not uncommon for NAM-esque solutions.

[SR Airglow]

1-4

For East BOS? I'll take the over on 2.5" which is the middle of your range. I like BOX's 3-5" but think the bust potential is more high than low.

[ORH_wxman]

For East BOS? I'll take the over on 2.5" which is the middle of your range. I like BOX's 3-5" but think the bust potential is more high than low.

 

 

Yeah BOS might get 3" alone on the parting CCB at the end.

[TalcottWx]

Yeah BOS might get 3" alone on the parting CCB at the end.

4-6" BOS

[correnjim1]

For East BOS? I'll take the over on 2.5" which is the middle of your range. I like BOX's 3-5" but think the bust potential is more high than low.

2.5 is a solid call...I don't see it going over 3

[CoastalWx]

3-5 Seems good. 

[jamesnichols89]

I agree Boston could get between 3-6"

[TalcottWx]

2.5 is a solid call...I don't see it going over 3

How much money/beer/liquor would you like to bet that BOS sees over 3"

[wxsniss]

This would be a tough enough forecast if models were consistent... 18z RGEM throwing in an additional wrench.

 

Based on past performance and the fact that NAM / GFS and now 18z RGEM all seem to be waffling, I'd stick with 12z Euro with a slightly tempered 3-5" forecast for Boston metro unless 0z guidance pushes otherwise.

 

Box map looks very good and I like that they don't chase these model fluctuations.

[JC-CT]

After that GFS discussion..why are people looking at it? Mind blowing 

 

That's a damn good point. Look at them all try to back-track into using it as an ensemble, after calling it literally useless.

 

But that's because it's not useless, it's just not as good as we want it to be.

[CoastalWx]

This would be a tough enough forecast if models were consistent... 18z RGEM throwing in an additional wrench.

 

Based on past performance and the fact that NAM / GFS and now 18z RGEM all seem to be waffling, I'd stick with 12z Euro with a slightly tempered 3-5" forecast for Boston metro unless 0z guidance pushes otherwise.

 

Box map looks very good and I like that they don't chase these model fluctuations.

 

I think 3 is a good starting number in the range. Feel good about that thanks to front and back of system.  

[Clinch Leatherwood]

GFS actually has a pretty good stinger CCB for SE MA.

These late runs are perking my interest. Maybe 2-4 here will see at 0z

[Zeus]

This would be a tough enough forecast if models were consistent... 18z RGEM throwing in an additional wrench.

 

Based on past performance and the fact that NAM / GFS and now 18z RGEM all seem to be waffling, I'd stick with 12z Euro with a slightly tempered 3-5" forecast for Boston metro unless 0z guidance pushes otherwise.

 

Box map looks very good and I like that they don't chase these model fluctuations.

 

I tip my cap to BOX; they seem to do well tempering each forecast tweak with a nod to the prior, for consistency. It's rare for them to make very big leaps, and in that practice, from my perception, it's been rare that they've needed to do so.

[Ginx snewx]

That's a damn good point. Look at them all try to back-track into using it as an ensemble, after calling it literally useless.

 

But that's because it's not useless, it's just not as good as we want it to be.

I think I will take perhaps one of the best most climo knowledgeable NE mets I know, advice on that. Eck knows bro

[ORH_wxman]

That's a damn good point. Look at them all try to back-track into using it as an ensemble, after calling it literally useless.

 

But that's because it's not useless, it's just not as good as we want it to be.

 

We could call it bottom of the barrel in this case.

 

The takeaway is that if you didn't have the model, I don't think your forecast would suffer.

[JC-CT]

I think I will take perhaps one of the best most climo knowledgeable NE mets I know, advice on that. Eck knows bro

 

Eck said it's garbage and to step away and not consider using it.

 

That was immediately followed by Will and Ryan both commenting on the CCB shown on the 18z GFS.

[JC-CT]

We could call it bottom of the barrel in this case.

 

The takeaway is that if you didn't have the model, I don't think your forecast would suffer.

 

But my point is, every forecaster is still going to use it.

[ORH_wxman]

Eck said it's garbage and to step away and not consider using it.

 

That was immediately followed by Will and Ryan both commenting on the CCB shown on the 18z GFS.

 

 

Probably because it was the only model coming out at the time?

[Damage In Tolland]

We could call it bottom of the barrel in this case.

 

The takeaway is that if you didn't have the model, I don't think your forecast would suffer.

Exactly. It has no use in anyone's forecast. There aren't any mets that are basing any aspect of their forecast on it. Or shouldn't be if they are

[Damage In Tolland]

But my point is, every forecaster is still going to use it.

No they aren't..Noone uses it.

[ORH_wxman]

But my point is, every forecaster is still going to use it.

 

Yeah but how much weight do you put on it?

 

You are playing a semantics game. Some of us might put only a very minor amount of weight into what it says. Others might use it a little more.

 

In any case, it doesn't matter. The storm doesn't have a lot of model divergence at this second aside from the 18z nam.

[JC-CT]

No they aren't..Noone uses it.

 

Who is this Noone person you keep talking about?

[Typhoon Tip]

18z NAM considerably more moist, eh?

[CoastalWx]

Exactly. It has no use in anyone's forecast. There aren't any mets that are basing any aspect of their forecast on it. Or shouldn't be if they are

 

Well it is true to a point. It is 6 hrs closer to an event and in theory should have a better idea than its 12z run. However, you still need to ask yourself if it makes sense. In this case, the RGEM surprised me a bit.