Scarlet Pimpernel

You're referring to the 06Z EPS that was shown earlier? I agree. I made these comments earlier, but (1) it stops at 144-h, and I don't think that's the entire storm and (2) to me, it appeared that the max snow area actually widened or expanded. Either way, yeah, one could argue that the axis shifted a bit south but right now it's mostly noise.

I know, we've all been there, done that, have the T-shirt. Which is why I mentioned the GFS was showing that kind of scenario just the other day before it began suppressing everything, and everyone got freaked out at that. I still think currently, that's the least likely scenario...if anything I can see a snow to ice (or snow-ice-snow) outcome if this ends up going "too far" north in the end.

Agree, given the current setup look, suppression is more likely in terms of how this could fail. But I'd still like to be optimistic (won't necessarily say "confident") that even a bit of suppression where we end up on the northern edge of the best snow would still be a win for us. That would still be warning-level snows, literally cold powder. I think last night's Euro showed that scenario? Heck if we can even increase the amount of moisture being thrown into the cold air, expand the precip shield, that would be nice too.

I know this is perhaps meant as a semi-humorous downer post but...ironically, the GFS was kinda showing just that in the 12Z Saturday run, before it then proceeded to suppress things too much.

Kinda hard to say that it's a definitive shift south per se. I mean, yeah, the axis of max amount shifts a bit that way but a couple of things. First (and as you say) this is out to 144h, there's still surely at least some more beyond that time. Next, notice how the max area actually expands or widens (looking at the dark blue and higher area). Probably nothing, but still interesting perhaps. And really at this point it's more or less noise. Catching up on the last several pages here (and...ahem!...ignoring certain posts!), I agree with the overall idea that we're in a pretty good spot, taking into account the AI models, GFS, Euro, GEFS, EPS, and even the CMC. Others probably already said this, but while a more suppressed solution is clearly on the table here (seems like a "cutter" is much less likely right now), even if we're on the northern edge of the best stuff we still would get a really solid amount of cold smoke. Would we all like to end up in the max zone? Yeah of course (duh!)!! But a warning-level event through this region even on the "edge" isn't something I'd sneeze at.

@stormtracker, will echo others and say I always like and appreciate your MLK avatar picture in honor of Dr. King each year!

Has the classic damming signature as well, with what looks like a secondary low forming east of NC/VA (perhaps a bit east of the classic scenario but it's there).

Interesting. I'll also add that the ridging along the West Coast is also notably different. Though that surely results in the downstream effects too of course. In the Euro AI, that ridge points more directly up the coast (more north-south) whereas the GFS has it protruding more inland toward the Pac NW and southwest Canada. I believe that the AI version with the ridge tilted as it is, allows for the main downstream trough in the central/eastern US to broaden more rather than digging so much in the east, giving the southwest trough more of a chance to turn the corner better or at least not get squashed into oblivion.

Ahh, thank you. Yes, I recall hearing about under-dispersiveness in the AI ensembles (both Euro AIFS and the AI-GEFS). I wonder if going forward, that can be remedied in the future, either by somehow perturbing the initial conditions better or how the training is done for each member.

Now to be clear, @stormtracker did not specify exactly which "F" word he'll use! So be careful!! Of course, FOLKS know which one we would like!!

Yeah, good and fair point. I don't have subscriptions to all that information so was just going by what I could make out on the zoomed-in image above. All the same, what you mention does indicate some suppressed members but in the minority.

Oy, Gevalt, yes please! But seriously...ignoring the specific amounts, the ensembles (mean at least) clearly has the main swath of snow (and precip) through the area here. Going with just that, it's clear the deterministic GFS is currently outside the main envelope here with giving GA/SC/NC the heaviest snow and/or ice. (ETA: Gotta put out the usual disclaimer that I'm not saying the GFS will be wrong, just that with the current indications it's looking like an outlier solution or at least too much suppression.)

Totally agree...at this point (until they improve or there's more mesoscale AI type models) they won't capture small features like banding, convective elements, and the like. But for overall synoptic setup and general low and precip locations as you say, it's rather bang-on in a lot of cases.

I know from looking at various types of events (not just for snow) that the AIFS (Euro) has done a stunningly good job out to 5 or even 7 days for situations that are rather tricky. And it tended to lock in, not go all over the place. Granted, those cases were just specific individual ones that maybe were more favorable for it, but you get the idea. I'm pretty impressed with how the AI models have done.

Question for anyone more knowledgeable about the internals of AI models, both the Euro and GFS versions. Do they tend to "hold onto" or continue to reflect previous runs in general, for a couple of cycles? That is, if they show a great hit, do they tend to still sort of show that in the next run and perhaps gradually diminish over time? I ask that in terms of the standard dynamical models which rely upon initial conditions based upon a short forecast from the previous run, so some of the "information" gets propagated so to speak. This doesn't happen all the time, but there are notable events (ahem, some storm in Dec. 2010!) that held on to "good" runs for us before finally later giving up on that idea. Vice-versa has also happened I'm sure (but we tend to recall the bad busts!). I don't know if AI models do the same or if they just take an initial field, and based on the same long training sample they were derived with, come up with whatever forecast regardless of what the immediate preceding run(s) showed. Not sure if I asked this correctly and hope it makes sense, but I am curious.

Grey scale?

Too many people had too much tequila, and...well, you know!

Well, the last 3-4 pages were an "interesting" read!! I swear some people in this place. Thanks to those who kept it grounded and real, no reason to abandon everything due to different deterministic solutions a week or more out. To lighten the mood and give some hope, today is apparently "World Snow Day"!!! Gotta be worth something!!

Well for my part I didn't have a dog in the fight personally. But I will say I have a bit of animosity for the Broncos, as a native Clevelander. I witnessed "The Drive", and "The Fumble" in the AFC championship games in consecutive years (1987, 1988), Cleveland vs. Denver. Ugh!!!

And yet...they still managed to force overtime!

Can't wait for @stormtracker's drunken 00Z PBP...regardless of what the outcome is, that will be more entertaining and informative than the past couple of pages of crap posting and negativity!

Weren't you talking about how all ensembles were showing their greatest agreement with a pretty decent amount, several hours ago?

Looks to me like that big, cold high is notably farther to the northwest compared to 12Z, rather than moving in over-top. So the wave and low are a lot further north.