Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    18,635
    Total Members
    14,841
    Most Online
    SENCMike
    Newest Member
    SENCMike
    Joined

February 2026 Medium/ Long Range Discussion: Buckle Up!


Weather Will
 Share

Recommended Posts

You don’t see the setup this clear on an ensemble this far out often. 
IMG_0963.thumb.jpeg.f66c5a3bb31a8a6c83fa65bba3d7d863.jpeg

The crazy thing is the blocking is all that makes this work. Similar to Feb 2010, the pacific longwave pattern would normally scream huge SER but the displaced TPV and 50/50 there won’t allow it. The fight between the attempt to ridge in front of the approaching wave and the blocked in cold is what will create the threat.  We’ve got snowstorms from this exact setup many times. 

  • Like 13
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

You don’t see the setup this clear on an ensemble this far out often. 
IMG_0963.thumb.jpeg.f66c5a3bb31a8a6c83fa65bba3d7d863.jpeg

The crazy thing is the blocking is all that makes this work. Similar to Feb 2010, the pacific longwave pattern would normally scream huge SER but the displaced TPV and 50/50 there won’t allow it. The fight between the attempt to ridge in front of the approaching wave and the blocked in cold is what will create the threat.  We’ve got snowstorms from this exact setup many times. 

And this general look is now within 10 days, lowering the chances of yet another rug. Can still lose it, but the idea of a wave undercutting the decaying block has been on the ensembles for at least a few days now. 

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mitchnick but at this range I’m not married to any idea. I think this is a legit threat but we need to get closer to 100 hours before I’ll even try to get specific about it. And even then know further adjustments will happen. We’re still in the “this is interesting I’ll keep an eye on it” range. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Terpeast said:

And this general look is now within 10 days, lowering the chances of yet another rug. Can still lose it, but the idea of a wave undercutting the decaying block has been on the ensembles for at least a few days now. 

Yea I think the idea is legit. But where the snow zone ends up, whether this ends up one stronger wave or multiple weaker boundary waves…major details that determine whose backyards get snow won’t be known for a while. But I agree confidence is increasing in the general flavor of the period. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

@mitchnick but at this range I’m not married to any idea. I think this is a legit threat but we need to get closer to 100 hours before I’ll even try to get specific about it. And even then know further adjustments will happen. We’re still in the “this is interesting I’ll keep an eye on it” range. 

Got it. With the Pacific seemingly opening up, the models are going to have their hands full with vorts shooting all over the Conus, so I  have low confidence in any model, moreso than usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mitchnick said:

Got it. With the Pacific seemingly opening up, the models are going to have their hands full with vorts shooting all over the Conus, so I  have low confidence in any model, moreso than usual.

The biggest issue I think the guidance has to resolve is how consolidated the pacific energy ends up. Guidance is split between multiple weaker wave solutions and two wave (lead weak wave followed by a more amplified follow up) solution. There are ways we could “win” in either permutation but until it’s known which we are dealing with the details can’t be known. 

  • Like 2
  • 100% 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

The biggest issue I think the guidance has to resolve is how consolidated the pacific energy ends up. Guidance is split between multiple weaker wave solutions and two wave (lead weak wave followed by a more amplified follow up) solution. There are ways we could “win” in either permutation but until it’s known which we are dealing with the details can’t be known. 

Wolud you agree that the split between guidance is either a low risk, low reward solution (multiple weak waves) vs. a high risk, high reward solution (amplified follow up)? Or is that an improper, inaccurate way to word it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

AIFS EPS still very interested.  Save yourselves time and don’t look at op runs past 100 hours.  Not saying this is going to happen. There is uncertainty even among the various ensembles.  But worrying about the op runs at this range will just add confusion and noise. 

So you're saying it's gonna happen.  Cool.  You can start the thread,

  • Haha 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bncho said:

Wolud you agree that the split between guidance is either a low risk, low reward solution (multiple weak waves) vs. a high risk, high reward solution (amplified follow up)? Or is that an improper, inaccurate way to word it?

I think that’s accurate. There are more ways to get some snow from a multiple wave solution but less chance of a huge storm. A more amplified wave introduces a MECS+ potential but a total fail if that one wave misses. 
 

I’ll take my chances with an amped up monster storm. Another 3-4” of snow won’t change my opinion of this winter at all.  But a 10”+ storm definitely would.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Sure…

I know you’re kidding but it couldn’t fail worse than that last thread did lol 

 

4 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

NOTHING can fail worse than that thread,  Probably the worst thread since I've been on these here boards.

:(

  • Like 1
  • Haha 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

You don’t see the setup this clear on an ensemble this far out often. 
IMG_0963.thumb.jpeg.f66c5a3bb31a8a6c83fa65bba3d7d863.jpeg

The crazy thing is the blocking is all that makes this work. Similar to Feb 2010, the pacific longwave pattern would normally scream huge SER but the displaced TPV and 50/50 there won’t allow it. The fight between the attempt to ridge in front of the approaching wave and the blocked in cold is what will create the threat.  We’ve got snowstorms from this exact setup many times. 

This setup reminds me a good bit of our last storm (not the NC blizzard). While I've been very vocal about how that specific storm was extremely frustrating I'd take the setup time and time again as we had everything going for it on the large scale! 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GreyHat said:

I'm talking about the around 17. AIEuro, AIGFS and Euro, the 850mb are warm for that period too, the 700mb is cold but the warm air aloft will hurt.

Screenshot_20260204_152944_DuckDuckGo.jpg

Screenshot_20260204_153044_DuckDuckGo.jpg

Screenshot_20260204_153140_DuckDuckGo.jpg

i was jus saying in general, upper air wont be to supportive. Surface wont torch to much

  • Like 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...