Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    18,368
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Patruthseaker
    Newest Member
    Patruthseaker
    Joined

12/2 Cold Rain and High Elevation Snow


WxUSAF
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, NorthArlington101 said:

Was debating a sick day travel up your way but hoping there will be a much better shot not too far away. Now I just gotta figure out my bike commute into the office tomorrow… sounds miserable 

Good call. I think we'll see snow up here but it's looking less and less for each model cycle.

Catoctins above 1500 probably get 2" or 3" 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, psuhoffman said:

I think the only hope for a snowier outcome (and even then it’s mostly for the NW fringes of the forum, is for it to come in hot and heavy and the dynamic cooling and mixing of the column keeps it isothermal near 32 long enough to get the classic thump surprise. We’ve seen it happen. But it’s not something we can nail down ahead of time usually. 

latest hrrr comes in pretty hot and heavy out here. 

image.thumb.png.63b11a908e741b094bbb6139d141d58f.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, 87storms said:

Just got a workout in and it’s definitely anti-torch outside, unlike in March when we’d easily blast into the upper 40s/low 50s. I’m becoming more bullish. My bar is an inch on all elevated surfaces.

Only got to 41 here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Imgoinhungry said:


The amount of digital snow we lose each year is absurd. Why does it never happen in reverse… i dont get it? Models have a 2-3 degree cold bias for mid Atlantic?

maybe it's because its the GFS more than a week out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Imgoinhungry said:


The amount of digital snow we lose each year is absurd. Why does it never happen in reverse… i dont get it? Models have a 2-3 degree cold bias for mid Atlantic?


.

This is perception bias.  It does happen in reverse.  The vast majority of our actual snowstorms were not on the guidance 174 hours out.  And very often not showing that much snow...even at 72 hours.  They trended into something in the last 48-72 hours... just like most of our "fantasy digital threats" trend away form something...because the truth is the odds of the guidance being exactly right from range is low.  Very rarely do we get a snowstorm where the guidance nailed it from really far out.  The first Feb 2010 storm...January 2016 were rare exceptions not the norm.  

And the reason it feels like we get way too many "false threats" is also perception bias.  We register every potential threat as if "the models say it's going to snow"  WHich models? Did they all?  And when...did they have a threat at day 8 then lost it by day 6...which day is the one that matters...if we count every day through the whole winter where a couple models spit out a permutation with snow...as a legit threat and expect that snow to happen...that is on us...that is a failure of our perception not guidance.  

All that said our guidance is not perfect...its flawed...and we need to continue to work to improve our ability to forecast both with models and through other means.  But you're compounding this by falling victim to typical perception biases.  

  • Like 3
  • 100% 1
  • clap 1
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

×
×
  • Create New...