high risk

Agreed. The NAM Nest had the band falling apart as it moved east, which was a clue that the scenario shown by some of the other CAMs wouldn’t play out.

That’s not even remotely true. Several models yesterday had a band of light snow moving through the area this morning. It’s a real thing, but it’s just too light. Even if it ended up not working out, LWX doesn’t make up advisories out of nothing.

Several CAMs are showing a band of snow with the ULL pass midday Thursday. There is even bit of instability in the forecast soundings, so some heavier bursts of snow certainly seem possible. And stockage would be very efficient with the very cold temps.

We should all acknowledge as a group that, even if the NAMs are spectacularly wrong on this event, we’re going to miss them like deceased grandparents when they’re retired next year.

Yes! When the 3 km shows details differently than the 12 km, the 3 km is better way, way more than it isn’t.

Absolutely. The problem is that the mesoscale models really weren’t designed for beyond the day 2 period. That doesn’t mean that they’re useless; you just have to use extreme caution.

The wind threat is behind the cold front. Still several hours away for the I-95 corridor

Oh good. You’re back with your incessant 3rd grade understanding of NWP.

I think it's legit. The forecast soundings show potential for good mixing behind the front, and there will be some strong speeds just above the surface.

Several CAMs take most of us into the low 60s Sunday, with the NAM Nest being a notable holdout. Soundings support possible thunder ahead of the cold front.

As expected. The changes between the 06Z and 12Z GEFS were small, and both the 13 and 19Z NBM use the same cycle (00Z) of the EMCWF ensemble.

It ran on time, but they are having huge issues with getting the data to their customers, so no site is able to generate any graphics.

Of course the model ran. The problems are with the dissemination of the output.

But you're showing the parent (12 km), and I praised the nest (3 km). The parent NAM is not a very good model, but the nest is, especially at shorter ranges. I don't trust the synoptics much beyond 36 hours.

In seriousness, though, the HRRR was developed to be a model to assist with forecasting of deep convection. Is it totally useless in winter? Of course not, and we know that it led the way on lower QPF last Saturday, but at least be suspicious when it bucks most other guidance. Go back and look at simulated reflectivity from yesterday’s 12Z NAM Nest. Pretty damn good. This is one of the first models I look at for short-term winter forecasts. Too bad that its days are numbered.