Watching closely .. February 1-3rd for moderate to major coastal event

[dryslot]

Its not.

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

Nope.

[Spanks45]

17 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

We’ll take our 5” and run lol. 

yup....second biggest storm of the season by Feb...it will be washed away after the massive cutter whether it was 12 inches or 5 anyway

[40/70 Benchmark]

2 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

So did I lol. 

My point is that I made it clear I was simply expressing an opinion...nothing more. No absolutes implied.

[WinterWolf]

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

My point is that I made it clear I was simply expressing an opinion...nothing more. No absolutes implied.

Oh I understand.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, WinterWolf said:

Oh I understand.

Everyone in the game, at this point...I agree.

[STILL N OF PIKE]

Given the “set up” when do we suppose models will have a moderately high level of confidence . Like Friday ? How relatively complicated is this one 

[PhineasC]

5 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

Given the “set up” when do we suppose models will have a moderately high level of confidence . Like Friday ? How relatively complicated is this one 

It's been bouncing around all over the place on the operational models. Still a huge spread from total whiff to coastal hugger. So maybe wait until Sunday.

[WinterWolf]

6 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

Given the “set up” when do we suppose models will have a moderately high level of confidence . Like Friday ? How relatively complicated is this one 

I think it’s pretty complicated.  Following the Euro play by play today, there are a lot of players coming on to the field. Lots of Energy diving into the trough/and phasing,  block, primary dying and then secondary forming. Pretty complicated imo.  

[Typhoon Tip]

I had posted this in the wrong thread:

V16 looks like it is engineering a way to not do anything - grudgingly .. it's admitting to that ? ... interesting..

I suppose it's possible that a this signal could remain less than fully realized.  Thank goodness this is the new version set to come on line in a week. 

Sometimes I cannot help but suspect everything with GFS DNA seems to try and avoid baroclinic exchange of any mass fields... allowing them to slide past one another never really tapping into the potential dynamics that exist in their absolute differentials - very interesting... But I really believe that if the progressive bias corrects, that exchange and deepening feed-back emerges.  Whatever it is in the physics...these GFS' I see this all the time with this guidance, going back many versions for that matter.  It figuratively if not literally ...goes out of its way to jam nails and staples into the crank case of baroclinic trough evolutions... and you end up with busted raviolis -

I have a question...does the GFS run a QPF dry bias ??  just curious -

In any case.   This too me, ..at this range and owing to leading indicators, appears to be the best fit for now - not anything the GFS is selling...or it's V16 either...

[78Blizzard]

Just now, Typhoon Tip said:

I had posted this in the wrong thread:

V16 looks like it is engineering a way to not do anything - grudging admitting to that ? ... interesting..

I suppose it's possible that a this signal could remain less than fully realized.  Thank goodness this is the new version set to come on line in a week. 

Sometimes I cannot help but suspect everything with GFS DNA seems to try and avoid baroclinic exchange of any mass fields... allowing them to slide past one another never really tapping into the potential dynamics that exist in their absolute differentials - very interesting... But I really believe that if the progressive bias corrects, that exchange and deepening feed-back emerges.  Whatever it is in the physics...these GFS' I see this all the time with this guidance, going back many versions for that matter.  It figuratively if not literally ...goes out of its way to jam nails and staples into the crank case of baroclinic trough evolutions... and you end up with busted raviolis -

I have a question...does the GFS run a QPF dry bias ??  just curious -

In any case.   This too me, ..at this range and owing to leading indicators, appears to be the best fit for now - not anything the GFS is selling...or it's V16 either...

I thought it was delayed until sometime in March?

[Damage In Tolland]

14 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

Given the “set up” when do we suppose models will have a moderately high level of confidence . Like Friday ? How relatively complicated is this one 

Well there’s a few that think the storms 6 days away starting on Tuesday . But most of us know it’s Sunday nite into Tuesday nite .. so that means Friday at 48 hours out we should know 

[Henry's Weather]

Energy comes ashore mid-day Friday, so I'd assume we'd know pretty well whats going on by 0z Saturday.

[WinterWolf]

5 hours ago, ORH_wxman said:

The short answer is weaker thermal gradients cause the geopotential heights to be further apart. Not a surprise in this setup though because we have the big omega-ish block up in Quebec/Ontario in front of the system. That said, the entire H5 low could trend stronger and more compact as we get closer...we're still 6 days out.

I don’t know Kev...Will seems to think the same thing Too, might want to pay attention pal.  Lol. 

[Damage In Tolland]

3 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

I don’t know Kev...Will seems to think the same thing Too, might want to pay attention pal.  Lol. 

Only the Euro is that slow. It’s wrong 

[WinterWolf]

1 minute ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Only the Euro is that slow. It’s wrong 

So Will, and the Euro are wrong, and you’re right?
Ok. 

[Damage In Tolland]

2 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

So Will, and the Euro are wrong, and you’re right?
Ok. 

I don’t know who is right, but we are not 6 days out. So you are wrong . If you wanted to say 5 days .. ok I can see that but it’s not starting Tuesday 

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

I think Will was referring to the coastal and not when precip may break out in CT. It’s pretty obvious if it comes, first flakes fly in sw zones sunday night/overnight. 

[Damage In Tolland]

5 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

I think Will was referring to the coastal and not when precip may break out in CT. It’s pretty obvious if it comes, first flakes fly in sw zones sunday night/overnight. 

Yup. 

[HoarfrostHubb]

37 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

It's been bouncing around all over the place on the operational models. Still a huge spread from total whiff to coastal hugger. So maybe wait until Sunday.

Sat / Sunday seems to fit with these... 

[WinterWolf]

9 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

I don’t know who is right, but we are not 6 days out. So you are wrong . If you wanted to say 5 days .. ok I can see that but it’s not starting Tuesday 

Will said 6 days..I agreed. So twist it whichever way you want.  The Point is 5 days or 6 is still a ways away, which was only my original point. 
 

This has changes coming the next couple/few days, count on it.  And the coastal is the key to this whole thing..unless all you want is some overrunning snow.  Which is ok too I guess in this anemic winter so far.  
 

 

[WinterWolf]

10 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

I think Will was referring to the coastal and not when precip may break out in CT. It’s pretty obvious if it comes, first flakes fly in sw zones sunday night/overnight. 

I was referring to the coastal as well...when I said changes are coming and its 6 days away. I never said anything about when precip breaks out at all. I was referring to the coastal.  

[dryslot]

In other news, The 18z EPS at hr 144  looked a couple tics west of the 12z EPS at hr 150.

[Hoth]

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

18z eps looks great.

[Hoth]

Just now, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

18z eps looks great.

My thoughts exactly.

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

Then it really deviates from there. 

[Ginx snewx]

Just now, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

Interesting 

[powderfreak]

Just now, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

That's some texbook stuff for the south and east coast of SNE.