The Allsnow Blizzard of 2026

[[email protected]]

13 minutes ago, BxEngine said:

Which euro you wanna go with?

 

Number 2, for $300, Alex!

[nycsnow]

Who hacked the sref ?

[nycsnow]

[kat5hurricane]

5 minutes ago, nycsnow said:

Who hacked the sref ?

Just a shot in the dark here but the love child of Anthony and Weathergeek?

[Blizzardo]

Man... This is the ultimate GFS vs Euro showdown of all time! Never seen anything like this. Who caves first!! LOL

[nycsnow]

Just now, Blizzardo said:

Man... This is the ultimate GFS vs Euro showdown of all time! Never seen anything like this. Who caves first!! LOL

Euro already gave a big nod

[bluewave]

This is a great example of why we use the ensemble means at this range. The EPS AIFS has been very steady for days now with only gradual shifts from run to run. It hasn’t shown any big jumps from run to run like OPs. The OP runs should begin to converge over the next 24 hrs. 
 

 

[rclab]

2 minutes ago, kat5hurricane said:

Just a shot in the dark here but the love child of Anthony and Weathergeek?

Metaphorically speaking, of course…….. as always ……

[nycsnow]

This might be craziest sref run in a decade

[Tatamy]

2 minutes ago, nycsnow said:

This might be craziest sref run in a decade

Looks just like the 06z GEFS

[Nibor]

1 hour ago, Stormlover74 said:

Euro nothing like the gfs

At the surface yes they’re different but they’re really similar at 500 mb.

[Tatamy]

06z EPS AIFS

 

[EastonSN+]

3 hours ago, MJO812 said:

Wow 977 low

There is that norlun band PA to DC. 

[EastonSN+]

2 hours ago, nycsnow said:

Gfs should be better for most of us up here actually 

Getting that low to Cape May's latitude is what we need.

[BxEngine]

11 minutes ago, nycsnow said:

This might be craziest sref run in a decade

The srefs do that 20 times a season. 

[sussexcountyobs]

8 minutes ago, Nibor said:

At the surface yes they’re different but they’re really similar at 500 mb.

They are very similar. It's just timing. 2-3 hr. difference .

[EastonSN+]

49 minutes ago, qg_omega said:

Very unlikely Euro will be this wrong vs the GFS

I mean it already caved from nothing to a light to moderate event. At this point GFS wins unless it misses and all lose.

[Freezing Drizzle]

40 minutes ago, Freezing Drizzle said:

NWS for central NJ (Mt. Holly) through the Five Boroughs (Upton) is going with a middle ground, 1-2 or 1-3 inches, forecast.  

AW is also going with a broad 1-3 inches away from the immediate NJ coast. Their write up has plenty of (reasonable) caveats for an upside, however.

[EastonSN+]

1 hour ago, Weather Will said:

WB 6Z EURO; holding firm.

From the MA forum.

 

[qg_omega]

34 minutes ago, bluewave said:

This is a great example of why we use the ensemble means at this range. The EPS AIFS has been very steady for days now with only gradual shifts from run to run. It hasn’t shown any big jumps from run to run like OPs. The OP runs should begin to converge over the next 24 hrs. 
 

 

Nice

[donsutherland1]

Last night had some favorable developments. Although a significant or major snowstorm remains a low probability/high-impact scenario, there was a notable increase in EPS members supporting such a solution.

6" or above: 2/19 12z: 8%; 2/20 0z: 24%
10" or above: 2/19 12z: 0%; 2/20 0z: 12%

Model disagreement, especially at the surface, persists. The GFS remains the most aggressive model. The NAM shows no accumulating snow in New York City. Things should start to narrow today.

A good starting point might be a 3"-6"-type snowfall for New York City and its nearby suburbs with more than 6" likely in an area running from central/southern New Jersey northeastward across central and eastern Long Island. These numbers are subject to change as the situation remains dynamic.

[RU848789]

Keep this in mind when looking at Mt. Holly's forecast and snowfall map. Both are only through 7 am Sunday (they only project out 72 hours) and in thier AFD they said, "Given the uncertainty, our latest forecast stuck closely to the NBM," which should mean the 01Z NBM (the AFD came out at 3 am and would've been based on the 01Z NBM) through 7 am Monday, which is the first graphic, which is fairly close to their forecast map.And if they were forecasting for the whole storm, it would've been the 01Z NBM in the 3rd graphic, which is a respectable starting point, IMO, given the still pretty high uncertainty facing them.

I'd expect watches to go up at 4 pm, unless we see some unexpected significant model backtracking on snowfall. And there's plenty of room for them to bump totals up should it come to that, looking at their 10% high probability case showing 12-24" - but they also might have the biggest spread from high to low I've ever seen with their 10% low probability case being for <1" for all. Strap in folks.

 

 

[Jt17]

Nice

lol he wrote that and then 5 min later somebody posted 6z AI EPS and it was 75 miles north west and doubled the qpf for the whole area. Love to see it.


.

[weatherpruf]

30 minutes ago, Freezing Drizzle said:

AW is also going with a broad 1-3 inches away from the immediate NJ coast. Their write up has plenty of (reasonable) caveats for an upside, however.

just heard joe lundberg on 1010 saying the same thing; rt 1 in woodbridge closed both ways since this morning, what a mess. glad i'm retired. still got stuck in it at 630 on my way to walk; by 8 they were closing the northbound side as well. accident investigation. people can't drive in the rain, it seems. hope no one was killed.

[Tatamy]

This is Mt. Holly’s high end forecast (10% chance of verification).

 

[Jersey_Snowhole]

I would tame expectations the dual low needs to be watched could it be the gfs is about to cave come 12z? 

[NEG NAO]

2 minutes ago, weatherpruf said:

just heard joe lundberg on 1010 saying the same thing; rt 1 in woodbridge closed both ways since this morning, what a mess. glad i'm retired. still got stuck in it at 630 on my way to walk; by 8 they were closing the northbound side as well. accident investigation. people can't drive in the rain, it seems. hope no one was killed.

Someone was late for work and had to go 75 MPH in the rain instead of the much lower posted speed limit - now you know one of the reasons your car insurance is so high here - anyways to keep this weather related if the GFS which has been very consistent with high snowfall amounts here the last few days is wrong - it should be retired ASAP on the other hand if the EURO comes to the party to late in the game it will just prove its not the best model anymore . Here we are fighting the battle between the warmsters - who have a proven bias towards no snow and warm weather and the snow weenies who get excited over any model showing high snowfall amounts.....and somewhere in the middle is the rest of us who keep an open mind...

[RU848789]

13 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

Last night had some favorable developments. Although a significant or major snowstorm remains a low probability/high-impact scenario, there was a notable increase in EPS members supporting such a solution.

6" or above: 2/19 12z: 8%; 2/20 0z: 24%
10" or above: 2/19 12z: 0%; 2/20 0z: 12%

Model disagreement, especially at the surface, persists. The GFS remains the most aggressive model. The NAM shows no accumulating snow in New York City. Things should start to narrow today.

A good starting point might be a 3"-6"-type snowfall for New York City and its nearby suburbs with more than 6" likely in an area running from central/southern New Jersey northeastward across central and eastern Long Island. These numbers are subject to change as the situation remains dynamic.

I'd argue that the NAM at the end of its range shouldn't be used to inform snowfall forecasts.  Also most of the 6Z models showed decent increases in snowfall for this subforum and the immediate NYC metro, as per below.  Based on the models and the NWS forecast of 6.5" for CPK assuming they'd follow the NBM through 1 pm Monday as per my other post, I'd maybe say 4-8" is a better call for NYC Metro, although I an also see 3-6" being a good starting point with the high uncertainty and huge range we have over the models, as per the NWS 10% low and high cases being <1" for CPK to ~10" for CPK  Just my thoughts.  

• 6Z ICON shows 6-12" for NYC metro and 9" for CPK (big increase from 0Z)
• 6Z GFS shows 12-18" for NYC metro with 15" for CPK (decent increase from 0Z)
• 6Z AIGFS shows 10-14" for NYC metro and 12" for CPK (a big increase from 0Z)
• 6Z Euro-AIFS shows 4-6" for NYC metro with 5.5" for CPK (same as 0Z)
• 6Z Euro shows 3-5" for NYC metro and 3.1" for CPK (a bit of a decrease from 0Z)
• 7Z NBM shows 6-8" for NYC metro and 7.8" for CPK (slightly more than 01Z).
• The 0Z CMC/UK both only showed 2-3" for NYC, but I'd argue these are outdated

[donsutherland1]

For reference, here are the 7z NBM numbers, including the spread between the 25th and 75th percentiles:

Snowfall:

Spread:

A large area, including the New York City region has a 6" or above spread. In short, big changes are still possible.

[RU848789]

1 hour ago, Freezing Drizzle said:

NWS for central NJ (Mt. Holly) through the Five Boroughs (Upton) is going with a middle ground, 1-2 or 1-3 inches, forecast.  

That's incorrect.  NWS forecast for NB through NYC is 4-6" through 7 am Monday, which would be 5-7" through the end of the storm at 1 pm Monday, assuming use of the NBM (which they said they followed closely).  See my other post with the maps and such.