Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    16,987
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Dankles
    Newest Member
    Dankles
    Joined

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


WxUSAF
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

Dude I was thinking the exact same thing, lolol

I did, or at least hoped. I'm chasing a big one. Pretty clear we are heading away from that. Precip slipping farther south, also looks like either less precip overall or the storm is just pulling away quicker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't had near as much time as many here to dissect the Thurs system but today seeing the UK  and Euro ops making   significant adjustments towards us for  a hit at h5 and the surface was encouraging .  Lining up with other guidance. Today was a win. On to 0z 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, HighStakes said:

Also trending to be a shorter duration storm. Looks like 12 hours. Snow shuts off before noon on Thursday. 

Id take a quick 6 hour hit myself with 3/4" to 1 " an hour rates :pepsi: But more is always welcome lol.This could be a near miss to the east for our neck  in the end but trends from the European pair are encouraging. I'll continue to :popcorn:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, osfan24 said:

I did, or at least hoped. I'm chasing a big one. Pretty clear we are heading away from that. Precip slipping farther south, also looks like either less precip overall or the storm is just pulling away quicker.

I understand the desire for big snow...but ya gotta try not to get sucked in by one run that shows a monster result...I try not to let my mind go to "big" until there's consistent evidence that such an outcome is firmly on the table. Otherwise you risk not enjoying what measurable snow you do get (like if you're looking 12" and we get 6"...we can still enjoy that!) I think a more reasonable bar is WSW level...that's been my bar this year--since that's been so hard to get the last few years, lol But I will admit...part of me is hoping February delivers a bigger one somehow...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

I understand the desire for big snow...but ya gotta try not to get sucked in by one run that shows a monster result...I try not to let my mind go to "big" until there's consistent evidence that such an outcome is firmly on the table. Otherwise you risk not enjoying what measurable snow you do get (like if you're looking 12" and we get 6"...we can still enjoy that!) I think a more reasonable bar is WSW level...that's been my bar this year--since that's been so hard to get the last few years, lol But I will admit...part of me is hoping February delivers a bigger one somehow...

Yeah, I am sure if it snows hard and we get 6-10 or something, I'll be happy with that, even if the duration is quite short. It would be my best storm since 2016. Maybe I'm just spoiled from that hot stretch we were on, but man, it seems like forever since we got crushed and I'm like a drug addict needing a fix.

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...