psuhoffman

I saw that all or nothing dichotomy because either the wave has the necessary amplitude to begin to amplify a surface system and cut off to our west and it would then foster a bombing secondary along the coast that would tuck in tight with the upper low...or it would fail to reach the necessary amplitude and get suppressed by the flow. In between doesn't really work. Its a a critical mass thing to spark the chain reaction we needed...there is a very narrow zone for the in between options...its more likely it amplifies or gets squashed because its too weak.

Oh no you don't...you started all this by dropping these nuggets for no reason in both storm threads earlier today. You didn't post in banter. And now you want to pull this passive aggressive BS "not the right place" crap because you're rightfully taking a beating for the nonsense garbage you posted.

I expect it to keep trending south... I thought it would either amplify enough to bomb along the coast...or get squashed...I never liked the in between option. It's becoming clear which way its going imo.

I am skeptical of the day 7 threat...but lets see what happens as it gets under 150 to the range where EVERYTHIGN has shifted south since December without fail. Storms that were cutters at 180 hours ended up suppressed south of Atlanta. We need to get the transfer to happen further south then guidance is suggesting right now...but its well within margin of error given the seasonal trend. Now getting the wave to amplify and not shear out...that might end up the bigger problem if we apply the seasonal tendencies.

There is no sign the pattern just breaks down and we go into a shutout look...but we've had a pretty freaking good pattern all winter and almost nothing to show for it so I don't know what to think or how to even be excited by anything anymore.

It will if the GFS adjusts the track the same way its been adjusting everything else from that range all winter long. We probably want to see the storm cutting to hudson bay right now frankly. Just sayin

So many little things went the wrong way...but what sticks out there as by far the biggest issue is again what happened in the Atlantic. The lack of any space between the waves as Thursday's storm reaches the east coast because the previous one lingers there. There is no room to amplify.

Thank you for contributing...and in case you haven't noticed his ridiculous NWP conspiracy rants drive me absolutely crazy. It's not the stupidity of it...its the extreme disrespect to basically accuse so many people of that kind of thing without any evidence to back it up. The audacity to think its acceptable to just make up some BS like that and impugn the integrity of others without a shred of any evidence to support the accusation.

I have always wondered how current models would have handled some of our past storms that busted pretty close to game time. Like 1996 when we still expected most of the snow to stay south until about 24 hours out...or 2000 of course.

it was "ok". It got some WAA snows over our area. I guess the totals are measly but honestly I don't bother to look at that at those ranges. But again...the wave is falling apart as it tries to press east under the blocking...from 992 in KS to a 1009 shearing out mess near Detroit. It tried to secondary and was close to something nicer though. I was mostly kidding about "the one" stuff. I posted a couple times earlier on that threat...the setup had potential but it also shows some of the same limitations we have been suffering from all year. Look as the storm is crossing the plains...notice AGAIN the lack of a significant snow shield on the north side of the storm like we would expect from a decently amplified mid winter mid latitude system. This thermal profile is disgusting! There is no strong gradient...no thermal boundary to focus baroclinicity and amplify the surface system. And the system again looks more like what we expect from a late March/April storm and it starts to shear out as it heads east absent a nice boundary for it to focus along and amplify. What we would need for this to work is to get the upper system to crash in and phase with a secondary along the coast kind of like the euro op did but a little further south. That is not off the table...there are hints at that progression in the guidance...but again its a situation where we are left needing the complicated intricate 10,000 steps all have to go right solution to make this work because the simple way to get snow...ride a system along the thermal boundary and get some nice WAA up over a cold air mass is removed from the equation. Remember Bob used to say we do simple well...we don't do complicated. Well everything has to be complicated when you remove true cold from the equation.

I love your optimism I really do.

That is THE ONE lol. BTW I do remember the old 3rd wave rule HM was talking about. I had totally forgot about that from back before the GFS even existed in the old AVN/MRF days. I had considered the Thursday storm the "3rd wave" though...but I was counting that washed out POS that barely got some showers to Atlanta the other day. You could make a really strong argument that ushered in the new regime and that this storm tomorrow is wave 1.

Do you know why they aren't updating the GEFS?

Thursday was our best setup of the winter since the Dec 15 storm. More then just "not enough cold" goes into each specific event. There are lots of factors all playing a part. We could debate over which is the fatal flaw. My comments on the lack of cold are more emblematic of the entire winter fail so far. We have had multiple threads and overall what the common theme muting our chances each time is the lack of cold. And some have pointed out how dry it is...true, but I am convince, and I am not alone I know HM agrees, that the lack of a nice thermal gradient due the lack of cold is part of the reason storms aren't amplifying this year. But yes there are some very discreet unlucky timing issues that contributed to the fail Thursday. If you just glance at the look without looking at the details its a really nice setup. But there are a few warts that prevent it from being a DC snowstorm. That December storm btw was a REALLY good setup. I know the blocking was north of ideal but there was a block north of AK and a 50/50 and a north greenland block and the result was excellent suppressed flow ahead of a really amplified wave coming across. That DC had a total fail was really really amazing imo. I am not saying that was necessarily a lock for a MECS or HECS...but to get no snow from that was really impressive in a horrifying kind of way.

Let it go.

When the eps looks great often that one member that sucks is right. But why can’t it ever be this one that’s right...??? it hits DC with all 3 waves. Like 2-4, 2-4, 20”

Exactly...I can’t even come up with a decent justification for that nonsense.

@WxUSAF plus if you go and don’t get it you still have a shot if you stop them there. That was one of the worst calls ever.

I thought it was pretty gutless at the time too. Cutting through the crap you either have a shot at a TD one play from the 9. Or you have to get a stop then drive the whole field with no timeouts in under 2 mins and get a TD anyways. That doesn’t seem like a hard choice to me. I was shocked they kicked.

This post sponsored by big overreactions incorporated...our motto is why be measured when you could fly off the handle. What’s the worse that could happen.

The phasing of that TPV with both waves to our northeast sets up the next wave.

Yea and it’s right to be skeptical. But the signal is there and sooner or later it will snow again. Hopefully sooner.

Honestly TN might be too south in this flow. Of course we are too far out to know exactly where the suppression sets up. Gfs is less so then the euro. But in Thursday’s setup for instance, the runs that crushed us had the primary get up into KY/WV or even Ohio. We’ve had big snowstorms from a NW track primary in blocking before. Obviously details we won’t know from range effect each variable and the ideal track.