January 2026 Medium/Long Range Discussion

[NorthArlington101]

Just now, LeesburgWx said:

How many more improvements can be had before it’s enough? I've been hearing improvement for 48 hours now and still not there

We’re pretty capped on this storm IMO to someone maaybeee getting to 8” if the ULL pass is ideal. There are probably things that can be done to try and better lockdown an area-wide 2-4”, but I’m not sure we can improve much on the 12z offerings from the GFS/Euro

[nj2va]

2 minutes ago, TSSN+ said:

It’s an improvement but not enough 

Yeah, its better but wouldn’t do it if it went beyond 84 is my weenie guess.

[TSSN+]

3 minutes ago, nj2va said:

Yeah, its better but wouldn’t do it if it went beyond 84 is my weenie guess.

Nam at 84 is pretty much never right so still got many runs of the Nam before it even has a clue.. maybe 

[Ralph Wiggum]

Convective feedback error. Jumps the low 300 miles east of Hatteras over a thunderstorm cluster. Thats the NAM we've come to know over the years.

[psuhoffman]

2 hours ago, SnowenOutThere said:

Speaking of which do you have any resources on storms like this? I got stuff like the December events (jet steak WAA FGEN) figured out mentally when tracking but not really anything like this where it seems all vorticity driven and how that ends up producing snowfall. Would love it if you could explain those differences or recommend some reading 

At a birthday party and then watching eagles game so I can’t look up a ton of stuff but off the top of my head this reminds me of a storm in January 2001. That one worked out. IIRC it was about 3-4” around DC and northern VA and 4-8” across much of Maryland. And if my memory serves very similar. It was around Jan 20 2001 I think. 

[Weather Will]

If anyone cares 18Z ICON has nothing.

[ravensrule]

1 minute ago, Weather Will said:

If anyone cares 18Z ICON has nothing.

Thank you Chuck. 

[TSSN+]

2 minutes ago, Weather Will said:

If anyone cares 18Z ICON has nothing.

We do not, thank you 

[caviman2201]

36 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

At a birthday party and then watching eagles game so I can’t look up a ton of stuff but off the top of my head this reminds me of a storm in January 2001. That one worked out. IIRC it was about 3-4” around DC and northern VA and 4-8” across much of Maryland. And if my memory serves very similar. It was around Jan 20 2001 I think. 

your snowstorm memory is kind of wild... 

[mitchnick]

Rgem further west and a little deeper than Nam I believe. 

[mitchnick]

Rgem trough may be too broad, idk.

[SnowenOutThere]

13 minutes ago, Weather Will said:

If anyone cares 18Z ICON has nothing.

It has a very weird solution (not that ANY of the models show a "normal" storm). It pretty much has the vort lobe which all other models have takeover get killed off by one in southern Canada... which seems odd. However, I think that it did improve H5 wise and was generally further south so if it didn't have that progression it would've been Euro or GFS like.

[bncho]

Well guys the GFS, a slightly better model than the ICON, is running. Hopefully it shows 18-39” of snow. Jk, just want a hold or a change in a positive direction

[stormtracker]

1 minute ago, mitchnick said:

Rgem trough may be too broad, idk.

Seems better than the NAM, but I don't think it'll do what we need ultimately

[SnowenOutThere]

1 minute ago, mitchnick said:

Rgem trough may be too broad, idk.

It almost appears similar to the Icon with it washing out the vort which the GFS and Euro make our storm from. If that happens as depicted its game over, and with that only being 4 days away we should know sooner than later whos right. 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

6 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

Seems better than the NAM, but I don't think it'll do what we need ultimately

Could perhaps be interesting (maybe?) but it appears the NS and SS waves are too separated from each other and too positively tilted.  But again, the RGEM way out in range so whatever.

[TSSN+]

2 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

Ok, some small slight changes early on with the GFS is the s/w that we await to dive is coming down a little further west...just a little

Funny cause on Nam and icon that piece is barely up over the NE tip of MN while gfs touching sw MN 

[stormtracker]

Seeing heights/ridging whatever out front a bit higher vs 12z

[stormtracker]

1 minute ago, TSSN+ said:

Funny cause on Nam and icon that piece is barely up over the NE tip of MN while gfs touching sw MN 

Maybe I phrased that wrong.  I meant the initial piece on the west side.  That swirlie thing

[stormtracker]

4 minutes ago, TSSN+ said:

Funny cause on Nam and icon that piece is barely up over the NE tip of MN while gfs touching sw MN 

What we need to dig ain't digging enough so far.   Seems just short of 12z attm

[stormtracker]

Actually kinda looks better than 12z at H5 so far.   S.w digs to same latitude, but slightly further west

[bncho]

no snow for most on the gfs I think

[Imgoinhungry]

Actually kinda looks better than 12z at H5 so far.   S.w digs to same latitude, but slightly further west

Whatever we need to get 3-4 inches. Thanks for the play by play.


.

[mob1]

While closed at 500mb and a bit west, the trough is also a bit broader and the shortwave out in front robs the best dynamics. It's largely a whiff. 

[CAPE]

Just now, bncho said:

step back on 18z gfs

Gonna be a bit north, but lets see

[stormtracker]

Go figure.  Surface looks worse tho        12z Surface was better.  This run, H5 is better.   I dunno

[mitchnick]

1 minute ago, stormtracker said:

Actually kinda looks better than 12z at H5 so far.   S.w digs to same latitude, but slightly further west

It's either slower than 12z or gunna be not so good.

[bncho]

Just now, stormtracker said:

Go figure.  Surface looks worse tho        12z Surface was better.  This run, H5 is better.   I dunno

Maybe 18z too positively tilted?

[stormtracker]

Just now, mitchnick said:

It's either slower than 12z or gunna be not so good.

It's not good

[CAPE]

Gonna need the inverted trough thing with the low offshore NC