“Cory’s in NYC! Let’s HECS!” Feb. 22-24 Disco

[40/70 Benchmark]

3 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

I think a big issue is what happens east and northeast of Maine. That is what some models focus on with the flow not buckling enough. 

That was my original point. Just saw DT's video on the way in, maybe it's my fault bc I took it out of context or something. 

[dendrite]

Idk..I think without a trailing s/w to boot this north there’s enough of a rotting block remaining to limit the northward extent of this before it’s mostly LBSW. It’s just curling up at too far south of a latitude otherwise.

[EastonSN+]

Hopefully the inverted trough is far enough east for WNE to be affected.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, dendrite said:

Idk..I think without a trailing s/w to boot this north there’s enough of a rotting block remaining to limit the northward extent of this before it’s mostly LBSW. It’s just curling up at too far south of a latitude otherwise.

You maybe right...like I said, I just listened to his video on the way into the office. My original position was the confluence N of ME and the marginal quality/positioning of the ridge out west.

[Kitz Craver]

The confluence over N. Maine and the Manitoba energy are turds in the punch bowl 

[40/70 Benchmark]

@Ginx snewxThis is from Sunday blog:

The largest storm potential exists in association with a potential coastal development on Monday, February 23, however, the early indication is that this system is likely to pass predominately out to sea and pose a larger threat to the Canadien Maritimes.

 

 

[Go Kart Mozart]

8 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

I think a big issue is what happens east and northeast of Maine. That is what some models focus on with the flow not buckling enough. 

Yowza, and GFS depicts that feature as weakening and retreating, that's why it ends up with the best result. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

@Ginx snewxThis is from Sunday blog:

The largest storm potential exists in association with a potential coastal development on Monday, February 23, however, the early indication is that this system is likely to pass predominately out to sea and pose a larger threat to the Canadien Maritimes.

 

 

@Ginx snewxThis is from Tuesday...you tell me what my position was/is:

What is also evident on Friday night is disturbance #3 entering the fray may by moving into the north plains.  The crucial difference here is that shortly after the system descends south of the Canadien border, ridging begins to build over the western COUNS intramountain region.

 

This allows ample room for amplification under the aforementioned PV-block dyad due to the fact that southeast heights decrease as a result of the building western CONUS ridge.

 

 

Note the decreased amplitude and further east position of the ridge in guidance from Sunday.

 

While this does in fact represent a more favorable ridge placement and intensity for major east coast storms, the fact that it remains marginal in conjunction with increased confluence to the north still implies that a major storm is dubious. There remains plenty of time to maintain vigilance with respect to this major storm potential to end the week

[Ginx snewx]

11 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I've always been on the OTS train with this. You want links?

Let me know how much you end up with.

So defensive Jesus. You did say probably yesterday. Such a dick.

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, Ginx snewx said:

So defensive Jesus. You did say probably yesterday. Such a dick.

Okay, I'm a dick, you are a dick with reading comp deficiencies.

[SnoSki14]

12 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I've always been on the OTS train with this. You want links?

Let me know how much you end up with.

I agree with you. There's just too much interfering with a positive outcome. 

Maybe a grazer for coastal regions at best. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

I think anyone who puts that amount of time into being as clear and transparent as possible would be annoyed by that...just my take.

[Ginx snewx]

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Okay, I'm a dick, you are a dick with reading comp deficiencies.

So so sorry you wake up cranky 

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, Ginx snewx said:

So so sorry you wake up cranky 

Nah, stressed doing a million things at once. I hope we get croacked and if I have my way, I'll be 1000% wrong.

[Ginx snewx]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Nah, stressed doing a million things at once. I hope we get croacked and if I have my way, I'll be 1000% wrong.

It's all good my answer to Brian was very very innocent. I clarified your position. Won't make that mistake again. 

[Typhoon Tip]

Seems like the models are hedging.  It's like two ticks NW, then 1 tick SE... and summing all those up you have a painfully slowly, albeit it not enough, trend NW - so far. 

Just a behavioral ob re the total modeling with this over the last day, the significance of which notwithstanding.  The sum total is that we are about as on the fence as we can be at this point.   If this tips 50 mi NW in the mean of all, we have a solid high end WWA E of CEF-ASH, with warning S-E of PVD.  Probably BW on the Cape just from the shear ferocity of what almost has to gust to 70 jesus.  If it goes 50 mi SE, cirrus and wind with WWA on the Cape. 

It's like go up or down from there.   But we're at 108 hours.  Typically, we're narrowing goal posts by now.  We'll have a few straggling posters that think we'll get a big move <100 hrs, but that actually doesn't occur as often in 2026.  However, I agree with whom ever said 'rug pull' awhile ago; this appears to have a higher than typical potential for a short term correction, however that's in either direction. 

I think there's chance for shorter term bounce NW, just because we have a bit of an unusually noisy situation out west. It is anomalously complex.  I noticed at 36-42 hours, the GFS has a spurious almost nondescript beta scaled S/W/jet streak coming in over S Cali...this sucker is a bottle rocket. FF FTW?   It whips over the 4 Corners, across the deep south, it catches up to and slices over the b-c potential over EC.  The GFS appears to use that for a quicker cyclone response ... the wholesale trough amplifying then takes over. Cut to a 970 mb low that the Euro, because it doesn't apparently see this feature, doesn't end up with

- in fact, the Euro doesn't appear to even see this jet streak (right) in the first place.  

Now, I don't know why that is...or if the GFS is full of shit, or if it is the other way, and the Euro's data smoothing thing might be killing it?  But it is quite easy to miss that all but undefinable difference between those two cinemas.  Ending up in a profound difference out in time.  

SO, if that triggering jet feature is - after all- under assessed by 10% while at the same time, all guidance get a dose of it via physically realized soundings and so forth... we get a total correction NW with a monster.  If it comes in more invisible, we collapse E.  

It would also be helpful to this whole ordeal if the models would jack the western heights more. There is a relative maxim in the PNA that has materialized over the last week in the indices, but it's just lacking that much.  ugh.

 

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, Ginx snewx said:

It's all good my answer to Brian was very very innocent. I clarified your position. Won't make that mistake again. 

My bad, Steve. Limits of not being able to detect tone combined with a fast-paced AM.

[CoastalWx]

22 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Ukie has a nice shitstreak backing in 

Yeah to me that’s what I’m focused on. We need that out. All of our coastal fails were because of shit like that. Scares me.

[Ginx snewx]

Just read the entire Juno thread.  Hope you all realize all models were buckshot until hr 84. If we get a monster NAM RGEM once inside 84 buckle up. 

[dendrite]

Ukie has the biggest shitstreak…it’s the most south. GFS clear it east and gets that more potent trailing s/w to dive enough south to fuji kick the system north a bit too. So my take is keep improving SE Canada and try to give it all more of a boot north. But the odds aren’t very good of anything substantial up here.

[Kitz Craver]

Anytime you are relying on Fuji to kick it north… good luck 

[dendrite]

2 minutes ago, Kitz Craver said:

Anytime you are relying on Fuji to kick it north… good luck 

Happens in a lot of systems

I mean it’s just different shortwave interactions…some tend to fuji/rotate around each other, sometimes it’s a kicker, sometimes it’s a phase which initially usually starts as fujiwara. 

[Kitz Craver]

1 minute ago, dendrite said:

Happens in a lot of systems

Right, it would be nice though to see a more consolidated SW that doesn’t have to rely on that 

[WeatherGeek2025]

[dendrite]

2 minutes ago, Kitz Craver said:

Right, it would be nice though to see a more consolidated SW that doesn’t have to rely on that 

Edited my post more. I’ve said it before…I think of the systems and their “energy” as bodies in spacetime…the more potent or massive they are the more they bend the spacetime. Small bodies have less pull on massive bodies but can still affect their trajectory if they’re close enough.

[TauntonBlizzard2013]

Here’s the problem in my eyes, and this is completely serious.

The aggregate is not good. When you take every piece of guidance, ensemble, etc? They average out to a miss.

You also can’t really afford a compromise. A compromise of the euro and gfs solutions is a miss. You’re essentially hedging that every model is entirely wrong with the major players for the system. Because even models and ensembles with a hit are mostly confined to Se New England.

Given all the information, I’d put the odds of a region wide hit at like 5% and a plowable SE graze at like 15%

[40/70 Benchmark]

6 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Happens in a lot of systems

I mean it’s just different shortwave interactions…some tend to fuji/rotate around each other, sometimes it’s a kicker, sometimes it’s a phase which initially usually starts as fujiwara. 

This is why KU s are rare.

[dendrite]

4 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

This is why KU s are rare.

Sure, but by definition a KU is an extreme event. Put all storms on a bell curve and we “define” KUs as those storms well above that +2SD threshold. Everything has to come together to reach those upper limits.

[Kitz Craver]

6 minutes ago, TauntonBlizzard2013 said:

Here’s the problem in my eyes, and this is completely serious.

The aggregate is not good. When you take every piece of guidance, ensemble, etc? They average out to a miss.

You also can’t really afford a compromise. A compromise of the euro and gfs solutions is a miss. You’re essentially hedging that every model is entirely wrong with the major players for the system. Because even models and ensembles with a hit are mostly confined to Se New England.

Given all the information, I’d put the odds of a region wide hit at like 5% and a plowable SE graze at like 15%

This makes a lot of sense 

[Typhoon Tip]

22 minutes ago, TauntonBlizzard2013 said:

Here’s the problem in my eyes, and this is completely serious.

The aggregate is not good. When you take every piece of guidance, ensemble, etc? They average out to a miss.

You also can’t really afford a compromise. A compromise of the euro and gfs solutions is a miss. You’re essentially hedging that every model is entirely wrong with the major players for the system. Because even models and ensembles with a hit are mostly confined to Se New England.

Given all the information, I’d put the odds of a region wide hit at like 5% and a plowable SE graze at like 15%

The only issue I have with this analysis is that it negates ( or just doesn't consider) trend. Trend doesn't stop at the scalar moment of the modeling image. It implies 'reality' is moving toward a different destination than the still frame. 

Very important consideration in deterministic philosophy in this bidness.  

In this case, there's been a persistent ..albeit slow, trend NW recently.  And there is also a little bit of reservation one could apply to your analysis in that these tools are not confidence-weighted evenly.  There is situational awareness and bias that are unique to some guidance.   So your blend approach isn't terrible ... it's actually rather good. But, we have to be careful because the application of that cannot drop trend, nor being aware of the constituent member's individual contribution.