tunafish

Bottomed out at 23° here around 7, upta 25° now.

Also wrong for Jay Peak, VT. They are at 238" for the season.

Now let’s unpack the jargon. Line-by-line translation “I think we need to consider the 6-7-8 a pattern arrival event” ➡️ Around January 6–8, a new large-scale weather pattern is expected to fully arrive. Think of this as: the atmosphere reorganizes itself rather than just day-to-day weather noise. “That's going to be an H.A. implication (I suspect…)” ➡️ “H.A.” = Height Anomaly (upper-air pressure departures from normal). He’s saying this pattern change will strongly affect upper-level pressure patterns, not just surface weather. “all ens systems agree in the rather abrupt guard change in the N. Pacific” ➡️ All ensemble models agree that there’s a sudden flip in the North Pacific pattern. “Guard change” = the atmosphere switches roles quickly (like defense → offense). This agreement is important — it means the signal is probably real. “The entire circulation medium out there essentially product reverses” ➡️ The whole North Pacific flow flips (ridges become troughs, troughs become ridges). “like on a temporal dime… Really fast… intra-weekly time scale.” ➡️ This happens very fast, within a few days, not weeks. Meteorologists don’t like this — fast changes break models. Why this matters for forecasts “that's likely to cause increased model performance problems” ➡️ Models struggle when the atmosphere changes this quickly. So details beyond a few days become unreliable. “sending such a violent signal downstream” ➡️ A big Pacific change ripples eastward across North America. Weather patterns behave like waves — a hard shove upstream creates chaos downstream. “the western N/A ridge will be in a period… correction vector… toward more amplitude” ➡️ As models adjust, they will likely correct toward a stronger western North America ridge. “More amplitude” = higher ridges deeper troughs bigger temperature swings more extreme outcomes “more than is currently in the cinemas” ➡️ Current model maps are too tame. Reality is likely bigger and sharper. “wave # number/distribution argument” ➡️ This is deep meteorology, but in plain English: The way large planetary waves are rearranging forces compensation elsewhere. If heights crash in one region, they must build in another. “supplant the regions N of HA with… height anomaly reversal” ➡️ When upper-level pressure drops hard in the North Pacific, physics demands that pressure builds somewhere else — in this case: ➡️ Western North America “there will physically necessitate height growth into western North America” ➡️ A strong western ridge is basically unavoidable. This is the key sentence. Why New England should care “More than 50%… closer to 80%… takes place in < 5 days” ➡️ This is an extremely rapid atmospheric reorganization. Which means: Models haven’t “caught up” yet Downstream details are suspect “I would be reeeally leery about any depictions down stream over eastern N/A” ➡️ Do not trust model specifics for the eastern U.S. yet. Snow vs rain, cold vs warm — all still very fluid. “more amplitude is actually favored” ➡️ When things settle, expect bigger extremes, not moderation. For New England, that usually means one of these, depending on timing: Sharper cold shots Stronger storms Higher snow potential or sharper cutters Bigger pattern swings overall “That all times around the 7th for some sort of emergence E of the nations midriff longitudes.” ➡️ Around January 7, the effects of this pattern change should start clearly showing up east of the Mississippi. That’s when things “pop.” The Big Picture (in normal human language) He’s essentially warning other mets: “Hey — the Pacific is about to flip hard and fast. That almost guarantees a stronger western ridge than models currently show. Because this happens so quickly, models will struggle and probably underplay how extreme things get downstream. Expect bigger swings over the eastern U.S. around Jan 7 — and don’t lock into specifics yet.” If you want, next we can: Apply this specifically to New England snow/cold odds Decode what this implies for storm track vs cold supply Or compare this to past winters with similar Pacific flips Before you respond in earnest, I'm half joking. Always read and appreciate your insight.

I've been contemplating making an AI bot account to automatically post the tldr; versions of your posts. I wanted to test if it would have the desired result and the initial attempt resulted in a text body even longer than yours. AI still has a ways to go it seems. The short version (TL;DR) He’s saying: A major, fast, and violent pattern change in the North Pacific around Jan 6–8 is likely. That change will probably force a stronger-than-expected ridge in western North America, which in turn means models are likely underestimating how amplified (extreme) the downstream pattern will be over the eastern U.S. around Jan 7. Bottom line: don’t trust the details yet — bigger swings are favored. Now let’s unpack the jargon. Line-by-line translation “I think we need to consider the 6-7-8 a pattern arrival event” ➡️ Around January 6–8, a new large-scale weather pattern is expected to fully arrive. Think of this as: the atmosphere reorganizes itself rather than just day-to-day weather noise. “That's going to be an H.A. implication (I suspect…)” ➡️ “H.A.” = Height Anomaly (upper-air pressure departures from normal). He’s saying this pattern change will strongly affect upper-level pressure patterns, not just surface weather. “all ens systems agree in the rather abrupt guard change in the N. Pacific” ➡️ All ensemble models agree that there’s a sudden flip in the North Pacific pattern. “Guard change” = the atmosphere switches roles quickly (like defense → offense). This agreement is important — it means the signal is probably real. “The entire circulation medium out there essentially product reverses” ➡️ The whole North Pacific flow flips (ridges become troughs, troughs become ridges). “like on a temporal dime… Really fast… intra-weekly time scale.” ➡️ This happens very fast, within a few days, not weeks. Meteorologists don’t like this — fast changes break models. Why this matters for forecasts “that's likely to cause increased model performance problems” ➡️ Models struggle when the atmosphere changes this quickly. So details beyond a few days become unreliable. “sending such a violent signal downstream” ➡️ A big Pacific change ripples eastward across North America. Weather patterns behave like waves — a hard shove upstream creates chaos downstream. “the western N/A ridge will be in a period… correction vector… toward more amplitude” ➡️ As models adjust, they will likely correct toward a stronger western North America ridge. “More amplitude” = higher ridges deeper troughs bigger temperature swings more extreme outcomes “more than is currently in the cinemas” ➡️ Current model maps are too tame. Reality is likely bigger and sharper. “wave # number/distribution argument” ➡️ This is deep meteorology, but in plain English: The way large planetary waves are rearranging forces compensation elsewhere. If heights crash in one region, they must build in another. “supplant the regions N of HA with… height anomaly reversal” ➡️ When upper-level pressure drops hard in the North Pacific, physics demands that pressure builds somewhere else — in this case: ➡️ Western North America “there will physically necessitate height growth into western North America” ➡️ A strong western ridge is basically unavoidable. This is the key sentence. Why New England should care “More than 50%… closer to 80%… takes place in < 5 days” ➡️ This is an extremely rapid atmospheric reorganization. Which means: Models haven’t “caught up” yet Downstream details are suspect “I would be reeeally leery about any depictions down stream over eastern N/A” ➡️ Do not trust model specifics for the eastern U.S. yet. Snow vs rain, cold vs warm — all still very fluid. “more amplitude is actually favored” ➡️ When things settle, expect bigger extremes, not moderation. For New England, that usually means one of these, depending on timing: Sharper cold shots Stronger storms Higher snow potential or sharper cutters Bigger pattern swings overall “That all times around the 7th for some sort of emergence E of the nations midriff longitudes.” ➡️ Around January 7, the effects of this pattern change should start clearly showing up east of the Mississippi. That’s when things “pop.” The Big Picture (in normal human language) He’s essentially warning other mets: “Hey — the Pacific is about to flip hard and fast. That almost guarantees a stronger western ridge than models currently show. Because this happens so quickly, models will struggle and probably underplay how extreme things get downstream. Expect bigger swings over the eastern U.S. around Jan 7 — and don’t lock into specifics yet.” If you want, next we can: Apply this specifically to New England snow/cold odds Decode what this implies for storm track vs cold supply Or compare this to past winters with similar Pacific flips

Short while. Maybe a half hour? And even then it was light - only 0.02". I know the peninsula proper and adjacent areas right (and I mean right, like your place) on the water rained for 2 hours, give or take. I'm centered 3mi from the water on all sides and that was enough to make a difference. Driving around during that time, the difference between 35/36° was the line and it was an immediate line.

4.9" / 0.74" for PWM at 12z. Probably a few more tenths to go. 1.2" on 0.34" first part 3.7" on 0.38 second half.

1.2" of 3:1 slop here.

00z obs 0.3" / 0.07" SN- 35° Feels close to flipping. Rain in downtown PWM, pounding SN 2mi up the road in Falmouth.

NAM and Euro have been consistent tainting my area, haven't seen that factored into GYX or any other forecast yet.

Bullseye of > 1.50" right over me is hilarious.

IVT already showing up on radar over midcoast Maine??

I don't need to jack, just cover the ground back up and get ponds and lakes re-solidified. Drilling through 5" of ice to fish last weekend, at least down this way, and wouldn't dare set foot on it today.

Map only showed through 1PM Tuesday. Back-to-Back holiday parties.

Thank you, I've been trying to tell my wife this for years.

My PWM plot is night and day from Mansfield in most regards, but I totally get the OCD part. I will go back and forth in my head about the depth during every wind-driven event. Hell, I'll even do it when measuring new snow. Talking myself in and out of literally tenths of an inch. At least you have other people to converse with. I come back in the house talking to myself and my family just looks at me funny.

Numbnuts neighbor didn't secure his trampoline. Thing was hurling toward my house. Threw a big sandbag on top so it didn't launch again.

School busses gon' get blown off the damn road this afternoon.

Thought the same last night when it was 29°.

If you listen closely you can hear children crying as defeated middle-aged men throw wrapped gifts and a flame-engulfed tree out the window. I also heard what sounded like a hooved animal getting choked out, and some muttering about the Mansfield snow depth, maybe? Wasn't expecting that based on the title. Kinda wild, actually.

That breaks my DBA brain. View only (read, not write) permissions universally means it can't be edited, ha.

I'm half joking. Most likely @bristolri_wx didn't set me up with editor permissions.

@bristolri_wx Looks like it's in "View Only" mode. Which boomer didn't close the sheet?

PWM 05z obs - 28/26 -SN 2.3" new 4.4" total

Had 0.7" (0.10" SWE) at 18z for PWM. Maybe we crossed 1" by now but rates and growth have been putrid since it started at 12z.