psuhoffman

The main thing we need is for it to track through southern VA not SC. But yes then we also need it to be more amplified and the colder solutions to be more correct and the moon to be aligned with Venus and Neptune while the solar energies are low,

See this is what happens when you try to be positive, you end up looking like a fool.

It's not that far out anymore...we are well inside the range now where guidance has been pretty good at beginning to hone in on the track. This is not to say adjustments wont happen and especially in a delicate situation like this...but we aren't 200 hours out where its likely to shift 500 miles anymore.

You’re out further than me so I’ll shut up. It looked better to me at like 90 hrs

Looks better than the Gfs/cmc to me so far. More like ukmet

Still waiting for the EPS but the combined probabilities for 1” at BWI from the GEPS and GEFS is 18%

What was that Doctors name again?

Why does everything have to be extremes? When someone say's they don't think it will work that does not mean it has no chance at all. There is always a chance. But its about probabilities. We don't forecast based on "maybe if we win the lottery of weather". Look at the preponderance of evidence. The only solutions that show snow each run are the most extreme solutions. The fringe outliers. It's been that way for days with this threat. It was one run of the ICON, then one euro run got kinda close...there was on CMC run a few days ago and more recently the GFS op. Within the ensembles there are like a few members showing snow. The vast majority of evidence says it won't snow. Maybe because the track isn't good (12z GFS/CMC) or maybe the track ends up perfect but its still too warm (UKMET and a few Euro runs). But if you add up all the possible fails (not perfect track, too warm, H5 isn't amplified enough) the probability it doesn't work is way higher than if it does. That's not saying it cant work out...its just making astute observations of the situation. Of course we want that, its the only way we have any chance at all... but we've seen way too many near perfect track rain solutions over the last few days on this to just ignore that with a "give me that track and it will work out" attitude. It could work out...or it could be too warm. Add in that we might not even get the perfect track and an amplified enough h5 cut off and the odds still greatly favor this not working out. That's all the "debs" are saying imo. Not that it has no chance, and not that it will never snow again. Ill run the probabilities for anyone interested once all the ensembles come in.

Agree, now want me me tell you how this ends for ya?

That’s how far we’ve sunk lol

@Ji I’m becoming increasingly optimistic we do get a legit “winter” period in March. We had a precursor weak SSW even followed now by a more significant one. These scaffolded ones tend to yield results more often. And it’s timing up with the MJO heading towards more favorable phases. I know some will deb it because it’s March but snow is snow and I’ll take it in June if that’s when we get it.

I'm sorry. To be clear I am not frustrated at you, and I am very sorry my frustration came out in a post directed at you. That was not fair. You're just doing your job. I thought when I offered to stop posting and let them vote it would put a stop to the whining. Either the majority wanted me to stop and I would, or the majority wanted me to continue to post and the others would see that and stop complaining. But obviously it doesn't matter.

@AtlanticWx the main thread is an analysis thread not a "digital snow fiesta" thread. We actually have a thread for that where we simply post models that show snow and celebrate. My goal is to be accurate and improve my analysis of the weather not to provide a safe space for those having emotional issues because its not snowing. My favorite forecaster was by far Bob Ryan, because he didnt blow smoke up our ass, the others teased us over and over but I knew not to get excited unless Bob was on board. I don't need fake BS optimism I want the truth. And the truth is I am not pessimistic enough. I bust high way more than low on both seasonal and individual storm forecasts. I was too optimistic this year...I said it was going to be bad but when I submitted my seasonal forecast I went below avg but probably not enough below! I was more positive about the mid december threat than I should have been. It failed...I was WRONG when I said it looked good! I still need to learn to be even more reserved and skeptical of snow because the goal is to be right not to spread false hope. We have a digital snow thread for that! We have plenty of people who make optimistic posts everytime any model shows snow. You can read JB. Put me on ignore if all you want is a daily affirmation. I offered to shut up and said I would respect the vote and it was 5-1 in favor of me continuing to post my honest analysis so instead of the handful of people who don't want that continuing to complain and whine everytime I post why dont you just ignore me since the majority wanted me to continue to post.

It looks very good at h5 but its running even warmer in the mid levels than the 6z GFS and that was barely able to get cold enough to snow with extreme dynamic cooling. That could have been a big problem, no way to know without seeing it play out. We need two things here...we need both the more amplified h5 solution and perfect track but we also need the colder solutions to be correct also. Remember we have seen plenty of "perfect track" rain solutions for this even over the last week or so its been teasing us off and on. I agree the NAM looked like it was about to have a perfect upper level pass... but not so sure the thermals were going to work from how torched things were at 84 hours.

Enjoy what? There is a thread for "digital snow". I thought the main thread was for actual analysis. Or do you want this to just be a circle jerk of "look at this model showing blue yay"? ETA: Mattie if that was a joke sorry (I missed the smile face) but some definitely aren't joking. @mappy the defense is in there because the attacks are in there. Frankly this is ridiculous. Its the same 5 or 6 people complaining and whining every-time anyone says anything about warm temps or skeptical of snow. That is an analysis thread not a digital snow thread and its not a safe space to emotionally support people who are full tilt over not getting snow. They need to suck it up and deal with it and not shit on people who are making objective analysis just because its not what they want. And as for me, I gave them a chance. I said I would leave and stop posting my analysis if that is really what people want, and it was 5-1 in favor of me continuing to give my honest opinion. Yet the same handful of people continue to whine and complain everyday!

I can’t update the GEPS part of the equation but substituting the 6z eps and gefs the probability of 1” at BWI increased from 8% to 15%.

That’s exactly how I remember that discussion in Jan 2021 going. The GFS has an over reliance on its 6 hour forecasts in the next initialization which means it can take 24 hours to flush out a garbage solution.

March is always a wildcard. One of our worst warm Nina’s that was snowless before, 1976, had a big snow in March.

Man that wave spacing. I’d actually feel better if it was March trying to pull that off. That’s a classic mid March bowling ball storm look. But who knows. With the temps the way they are maybe the pattern behaves that way early.

Maybe. The Gfs idea is hinted at on the other guidance but nothing else gets to the most extreme solution we need. However remember in late Jan 2021 the Gfs did this same thing at about this same range (like 100-120 hours) remember this fiasco, this are from breaking that threat down What sticks out is how similar this is. West to east upper feature in a marginal airmass. Plus I remember then someone familiar with NCEP pointed out the way the GFS incorporates data from previous runs it can take 3-4 runs to flush out a bad solution. Sure enough after 24 hours it caved. Not saying this is that again. I hope not. But that sticks out in my mind as a warning not to jump in on the Gfs until other guidance starts to support.

87. Never seen snow melt so fast. I was 9 living near Philly. We got 14” but the next day had to go to Harpers Ferry WV for a baptism. Left early and by the time we got to to Delaware on 95 the snow was almost gone. When we arrived in WV there was nothing but patches in shady areas. I said to my uncle I was surprised they didn’t get more snow because we had a lot. He said they had 16” but it all melted by the time we got there! The next day we went on a hike in t shirts. The temp comp is valid. But that was a Nino with blocking. Also looking at anomaly maps The base state that year wasn’t quite as putrid as we have now but there’s no way to quantify that. Anything’s possible. But I’m sure we will get complaints if we do get 12” and it melts in 3 hours the next day lol.

bwi combined ensemble probability through 0z Monday 1”: 7% 3”: 3% 6”: 1%

No one took issue with you for your dissent or your analysis. They took issue with your unnecessary attacks which you still keep deflecting away from. So read these words. Fuck off

Your intent is irrelevant he correctly described your actions. No one is attacking you for posting your analysis and opinions about the weather. They’re attacking you for taking shots at others while doing it. Why was attacking storm tracker necessary to what you were trying to say? You couldn’t just give your opinion of the setup? You already said what you were doing. You were frustrated no one shared your opinion so you started launching attacks. You said so in your own post. Now you’re trying to play the misunderstood victim. You’re understood perfectly. The bolded part is the attack and why was that necessary? How did that add anything to your point? No one is missing this. We see it. I think it’s unlikely. I don’t think it’s worth getting excited over yet. I’m keeping my eye on it. That’s it. Why do you care what I or anyone else thinks is worth getting excited? You can analyze it and post about it all you want. How do these attacks on everyone else help at all? Oh wait you already told us. No one way paying attention so you started trolling to get people talking. So then don’t complain when you get called out for it. You got what you wanted.

Unfortunately rjvanals was right about the surface. It’s 34-37 across the area during the height of the snow. The depth map looks a lot worse for a reason. Yes 6-10” falls but at 35-36 degrees not much will accumulate. The real reason this is such a long shot is given the thermal reality we need the most extreme solutions, and even they are underwhelming, to have any shot. It’s not hopeless sometimes the extreme does happen. But in my experience when we need the most anomalous outcome in any setup to be correct it rarely works out.