Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,110
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Elarey7
    Newest Member
    Elarey7
    Joined

January 28-30th Possible Nor'easter


Rjay
 Share

Recommended Posts

Was the excitement on this thread yesterday because of ratings, or was it because there was a legitimate chance of something special happening?
 
There was a legitimate chance. But should have just said that. A potential storm that would need to be watched. They immediately started saying huge winter storm . Once people hear huge it's over

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, tek1972 said:

There was a legitimate chance. But should have just said that. A potential storm that would need to be watched. They immediately started saying huge winter storm . Once people hear huge it's over

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
 

You also can't have people preparing for this literally Friday. IMO we shouldn't project our disappointment on the fact that they started telling people about the storm's potential.

Very tough situation with the models split like that, unless their meteorologists were prepared to toss the Euro completely and commit to the GFS no way you can't bypass giving the millions of people that live here ample notice given the potential for a very, very potent storm.

I work in an area related to this, if they waited much longer and this pans out, it would be absolutely nightmarish on Friday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jt17 said:

That nam run wasn't included in its guidance. It came after 3:20. That being said the other mesoscale model with any legitimacy the rgem didn't fall apart like the nam at all. In fact the rgem was a little better than it's previous run. 

There discussion talked about the 18z nam and they were essentially discounting that outcome.  

Not saying they used that for there graphics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wthrmn654 said:

00z versus 18z gefs the spread actually increased,  total opposite of what you would expect to see getting closer to event.  Just nuts 

 

gefs_2022-01-26-00Z_108_45.839_272.37_28

 

gefs_2022-01-26-18Z_108_45.839_272.37_28

Maybe im misreading this but it looks like even the western end of the ensembles are still pretty far east? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, wthrmn654 said:

There discussion talked about the 18z nam and they were essentially discounting that outcome.  

Not saying they used that for there graphics. 

My bad. That's good to know. It did look ridiculous after all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HVSnowLover said:

Maybe im misreading this but it looks like even the western end of the ensembles are still pretty far east? 

Sadly,  the western most tracks placements, hasn't budged from 00z, just a smudge east of bench mark,  I believe that the eastern side of guidance spread has increased unfortunately, and that is a little concerning...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like we're pretty much cooked except maybe parts of LI. Bummer that guidance universally trended away from us. We're getting to the point where we would need major models errors just as we approach the short term when those errors become unlikely. Late phase and offshore low was the clear risk with a super fragile trof setup. 

Obviously with such a sensitive setup, this could always come roaring back. I was hoping we would at least stay within striking distance today so small shifts west would get it done. But now unfortunately we need pretty big shifts. The season of tracking frustration continues...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, eduggs said:

It looks like we're pretty much cooked except maybe parts of LI. Bummer that guidance universally trended away from us. We're getting to the point where we would need major models errors just as we approach the short term when those errors become unlikely. Late phase and offshore low was the clear risk with a super fragile trof setup. 

Obviously with such a sensitive setup, this could always come roaring back. I was hoping we would at least stay within striking distance today so small shifts west would get it done. But now unfortunately we need pretty big shifts. The season of tracking frustration continues...

Big shifts at the surface are -in reality- very small shifts at H5. All is not lost. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stay with the focus on H5. Does the upper stream energy stay robust when it merges with the the lower stream as it arrives at the bottom of the troth? Small deviations will be consequential, and we won't have reliable indications until at least 12Z tomorrow.

(I'm at the Holiday Inn evaluating all this)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a major part of these snowstorms to people like us, is the unknown as to what you are going to get. I love the snow, but there is also a major component regarding the unknown amount and how it plays out. I think if weather technology ever got so great where you could enter your zip code within 5 days of an event and it told you how much snow you would get to the tenth of an inch, most of the fun and excitement would be gone. It's not just about the snow, it's probably mostly about the ride. :)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, eduggs said:

It's a very minor shift west. And the improvement is partially offset by a slightly shallower mean trof and worse upstream height field orientation.

Bleeding stopped, need the west trend to commence 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...