Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,502
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Weathernoob335
    Newest Member
    Weathernoob335
    Joined

January Storm Term Threat Discussions (Day 3 - Day 7)


WxUSAF
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, CAPE said:

Yeah the mean still  looks good.  Not quite the monster it was a couple runs ago, but I don't think anyone expected that to continue. A tad more suppressed.

People make these declarations after looking at one prog.  If we dig into the gefs it was a good run Imo.  The majority cluster of gefs members have a track inside Hatteras and outside Norfolk then ENE. That’s perfect for our whole area from Wes on the southeast edge to southern PA on the north.  The mean is skewed by a handful of extreme east/weak members.   The reason for the qpf contraction was the loss of about 5 crazy inside amped members that would have been rain anyways.  It’s never good to use snow maps to judge an ensemble run but for the love of god if they’re going to make any determination at least use them correctly. 
4A519474-852B-413F-BE35-6CBF86BA6C28.gif.9328e1b6efb0df67c9ef45310047f8f4.gif

the loss of the snow from my area north is from the loss of those inside members that clobbered PA and still got a lot of snow along the MD PA border counties.  So me and mappy north lost some (not concerned I’ll get to that later) but the core target zone that runs right through DC there was no change.  It remained generally 4-7” along that axis. The southern edge trimmed north too.  That’s the goalposts narrowing which is what should happen.  
 

The 24 hour 3”/6” probabilities didn’t change in the target zone.

50BC5949-F895-46F7-B05C-C67A52B0E33D.gif.92f279a523e690da640963ee8f2a33b6.gif

192C979E-3936-474F-8D31-4B8CE284A5D2.gif.73aa1624180974ef835c52be21cbb00e.gif

Now for our northern crew @losetoa6 @HighStakes @mappy Keep this in mind. Some members have a wonky surface depiction. They often miss the NW extend of heavy precip. That’s the actual cause of the last minute N trend most of the time. More then the track changing what typically happens is the precip shield expands.  A track between Hatteras and Norfolk of an amplifying storm won’t miss us no matter what a model says at 120 hours. We also don’t get missed when DC is the snowfall bullseye on an amplifying storm.  That’s not something that ever happens!  Sometimes DC can get a snowstorm and we miss if the bullseye is central VA and DC is on the northern fringe of heavy banding. Some of those 1980 storms  @Maestrobjwa likes to have nightmares about did that.  Gave Richmond like 20” and DC 10” on the northern edge of the heavy banding and we got fringed.  The late January 2010 storm fringed us but that was a southern VA Jack.   But a track inside Hatteras with a DC snowfall max bullseye on guidance doesn’t fringe us. What typically really happens is once guidance picks up on the enhanced lift on the northern edge where the moisture feed banks up against the blocking confluence flow and adds in the orographic advantages and higher ratios NW of the cities ends up doing just as well if not better.  So we don’t want to see a bullseye down in southern VA. But so long as we enter the home stretch with a bullseye just to our south we’re fine. 
 

Imo the 18z gefs was a great run for all of us. What I would worry about is simply that it’s wrong. That’s an obvious risk. But the run itself was what we want to see at this range. Now just got to get the euro on board. 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, osfan24 said:

I just got pretty optimistic between PSU saying this was the period he was targeting for a big one and then seeing the GFS with a few runs of a monster storm and the CMC also joining the party.

I’m sorry I do think the setup has big upside if we get lucky and everything comes together but a hecs was never really what I was thinking was the most likely outcome. I don’t think an hecs is EVER a likely outcome from range. That takes a lot of factors to all go perfectly. I was more thinking just getting a warning level event in DC which has been hard enough lately!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, psuhoffman said:

I’m sorry I do think the setup has big upside if we get lucky and everything comes together but a hecs was never really what I was thinking was the most likely outcome. I don’t think an hecs is EVER a likely outcome from range. That takes a lot of factors to all go perfectly. I was more thinking getting a warning level event in DC. 

I’ll be all set for mid feb if we can dc to get like 4-8, and like 2-4 here in philly out of this one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wentzadelphia said:

It looks like the 50/50 influence is trending weaker, but that tpv lobe has obviously pressed SE. idk how much it plays a role though since the main ULL is closed off and cut off a bit anyway. 

That’s the kinda thing where it’s fine it’s fine it’s fine then NOOOOO what have you done!!!! So long as it stays far enough northwest not to compress the flow in front of the upper low we’re ok.   But it’s getting too close for comfort. If it stays behind the axis where we need the upper low to amplify we’re ok. But if it comes any further south and ends up ahead of the upper low it would become a killer!   Guidance has been a mess with that. That feature was originally supposed to come across on top of the wave Monday. It ended up looping around and possibly in the way Thursday.  Guidance could end to changing again it’s had no ability to accurately figure that thing out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, psuhoffman said:

That’s the kinda thing where it’s fine it’s fine it’s fine then NOOOOO what have you done!!!! So long as it stays far enough northwest not to compress the flow in front of the upper low we’re ok.   But it’s getting too close for comfort. If it stays behind the axis where we need the upper low to amplify we’re ok. But if it comes any further south and ends up ahead of the upper low it would become a killer!   Guidance has been a mess with that. That feature was originally supposed to come across on top of the wave Monday. It ended up looping around and possibly in the way Thursday.  Guidance could end to changing again it’s had no ability to accurately figure that thing out. 

Yep, I think it has hit every province in Canada over the last few days of model runs lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, BristowWx said:

I’d rather 3 inches of cold powder than 6 inches of wet slop that starts as rain.  So I am rooting for the colder solution.  In case anyone was wondering. 

Why 6” of wet snow would look a lot nicer (stick to everything) and last longer (thicker) 3” of powder sucks. Blows around and sublimates the first sunny day. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Why 6” of wet snow would look a lot nicer (stick to everything) and last longer (thicker) 3” of powder sucks. Blows around and sublimates the first sunny day. 

IDK.  I just like the look of cold smoke that blows off the rooftops.  My preference is irrelevant I know.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

eps still hanging around in that zone close enough to keep hope alive but not quite good enough to celebrate. There was some good on the 18z (more amplified wave) and some bad (more confluence to the NE and the wave was further south). The more amplified wave is numero uno though in factors we need.  All the details don’t matter if that isn’t amplified. So I guess I’ll take 18z as a slight net positive even if results took a slight step back. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

Dunno...you’re in a temp bind. If this amps up it likely tucks too tight for you. If it doesn’t it’s unlikely to crash the temps. You need a lucky band as the upper low passes and I can’t predict that this far out. 

Sounds like same old problems lol. Thanks for the thoughts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Dunno...you’re in a temp bind. If this amps up it likely tucks too tight for you. If it doesn’t it’s unlikely to crash the temps. You need a lucky band as the upper low passes and I can’t predict that this far out. 

Feels the same way around Fredericksburg (but probably a little but here than in RIC) not sure what exactly to hire/root for. I understand the temp issues we face, just feels like as you’ve said, it’s going to have to align just right. Frustrating and fascinating at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MD Snow said:

Surprised no one mentioned the 12z GEPS. Just looking at total precip on TT and it’s pretty bad. A step back from 0z imo. Any thoughts? 

It was a really weird solution...seemed like it focused totally on the upper low and never linked up with the STJ moisture at all...and its way different then all other guidance so I kind of tossed it as a weird run.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an anecdotal observation...I’ve not done an unbiased study or anything to confirm, but over the last few years I’ve found the geps to be unhelpful with medium range synoptic details. Often it will trend one way then jump back the next. Often when it differs from the op (in situations where the cmc op is in line with other guidance) the geps caves to the op. It just did that with the last 2 storms actually. Showed something vastly different then the operational and caved to the operational.  So when the geps shows something “weird” not in line with the op OR other guidance I’ve learned to just toss it. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...