psuhoffman

I think it was going to be huge. But it depends on this feature over Montreal that’s diving in. If that was about to phase with the amplifying upper level low coming right for us it was going to be a monster outcome. If however that was going to act to shear it shunt the h5 low southeast it might be a less significant event on that run. And I think it was the former but I needed to see one more panel to be sure. @WxUSAF curious what do you think?

Guys...wait until the upper level energy catches up to see what happens. ETA: the initial wave runs out ahead of its upper support and washes out but the upper level low looks just fine. Need to see what happens as that approaches the trough on the east coast before we decide. A surface storm could blow up quick along the coast somewhere as the upper levels catch up.

But for how much? Might need to check on the bus...

Another period that showed up in the cpc pattern analogs recently

True but that was a northerly outlier among the eps.

It happens in blocking. The extreme blocking part is what’s rare...a surface low that’s not amplifying getting forced south of east like that isn’t unusual in this setup. The storm around the 28/29 has more chance to amplify and gain latitude (some) on the coast.

If you expand out to a national level it’s not really compared to what a healthy west to east wave under a block can look like wrt geographic coverage. This run was perfect for us in every way but even there the temps were iffy at times for south of DC.

Funny you’re the one making the most noise

That was the point of my post a couple hours ago in the long range thread. Yes there will be hits somewhere from this setup. But the snowfall area won’t be as expansive as it should with a normal temp profile for late January in this pattern.

Facts can’t penetrate truthyness

if so thats ok. At this range...if you have a mix of just to your north, just to your south, and a few hits across guidance...that's pretty good. Were not in "details locked in" range yet.

You do know you are free to contribute however you want? Instead of complaining about how everyone else it discussing the medium/long range why don’t you analyze what you think will happen without using the models and show us how it’s done.

It hasn’t really liked that event much until recently. It was hinted at by the pattern and the EPS started really seeing it 48 hours ago but gefs us just starting to get the idea.

March 2015 and March 18 just off the top of my head.

Man get this relevant substantive scientific crap out of here.

Fair enough...but in my post I did say “this is DCs problem”. I was really focused on why the DC area has been REALLY struggling. It wasn’t as much for our locations.

Tell him to just sniff for the snow smell and head in that direction.

This falls under “2 things can be true”. I’m pretty sure some in the mid Atlantic (and not just the mountains) are going to get snow next week. I am also pretty sure that the warmer then they should be thermals will mean some get rain that would have had snow in a more historically typical thermal profile given the same exact setup.

I fully agree but would we feel that way if we lived in the DC UHI near sea level? Or if I was on the eastern shore like CAPE? I was being more general and region wide with that comment.

I don’t. I average 40. And yes we share a lot of common storms. But I usually do better. What did you get in late March 18? I got 15”. What did you get in December? I got 10”. And while it’s not common for me to get a big storm that you get blanked it’s common for me to get 1-3” marginal events (like the one before the big storm in Dec) where you get rain. And those add up. The math is what it is. I dunno what to tell you.

@winterwxlover14 even that cmc run last night that had a fully phased 974 bomb off the coast the snow in VA was very marginal and only due to the extreme dynamics. I mean what does it take anymore????!!!

For you and me the temp issue I pointed out above isn’t as potentially fatal a flaw. But if I lived on the coastal plain and I kept seeing rain with a low off the coast in late January with a non pac puke airmass...I mean that’s kinda depressing!

I debated where to put this because it affects the day 7 threat but it’s more about the pattern in general and the other thread will be flooded with 12z analysis so it’s going here. Wanted to illustrate the issue with temps using the 6z gfs because imo it’s a perfect example of DCs problem. this is yesterday... look where the flow is from...straight out of the Arctic. No it’s not a direct cross polar straight from Siberia shot but this is not a pac puke airmass. It’s a polar airmass. It’s just not that cold! 3 days from now...still a flow from the Arctic And look at that pattern!!!! That’s textbook PERFECT west based NAO Rex block, epo ridge bridge. This should dump a truly cold airmass into the northeast. 150 hours... and this is a critical point in the setup...but still not a pac puke issue. Yea pac air comes around the base of the western trough and pumps into the ridge from the south but that’s unavoidable (news flash you can’t completely block the pacific it’s kinda HUGE and upwind) and our source regions to our north are still being fed with air from the Yukon. The pac jet is buckled and there is no straight firehose pac puke blasting in. But...look at the thermals Look at 90 hours, after 5 days of direct flow from the Arctic through the Yukon... THATS IT????? Where’s the beef??? That’s a pathetically weak shallow and non expansive cold pool given the setup and the problem comes after when we need that cold to resist the southerly flow ahead of an approaching wave from the west. Now look at day 6 that cold was too weak to resist that northern steam wave from wrecking the thermals. And yes the flow ahead of the wave is from the south but the dominant flow to our north is still from the Arctic and yet no cold. Just a bubble of near normal air over northern New England. Nothing to resist the surge north of warmth ahead of the next wave. So now we see the effects on the specific surface systems. Wave 1... That’s not an over amped or particularly north wave yes just not cold enough. If there was a true deep cold airmass the snow line would be where the blue line is. We don’t really want a weaker souther wave that would just be bad for everyone. Much weaker and frankly there is no heavy snow anywhere. It just isn’t cold enough. Wave 2 again the track and amplitude are fine. Any weaker and it’s not a significant storm anywhere. It’s just not cold enough...even with the storm to the southeast of us and “cold” pressing its rain to the NW for many. I used the 6z gfs and I haven’t looked at any 12z guidance yet but honestly this post is about the general pattern and fact the thermal profile continues to be warmer then it should be regardless of what the source of the airmass is! That doesn’t mean we won’t get snow from this...but the lack of a truly deep cold airmass is going to make it harder. Less margin for error on every wave. The 6z gfs was a perfect example because both those waves would have been snow in DC simply with a colder airmass. There wasn’t a longwave pattern problem it was a “it’s late January where is the cold” problem. As for the “where is the cold” issue I don’t know what to say. Before someone points out the minor flaws no this isn’t the coldest most direct Siberian express Arctic shot ever. I didn’t say that. But it’s not pac puke. It’s a flow from the Yukon in late January. If that’s no good and we need a direct straight flow from Siberia direct over the North Pole well...ok how often do we ever get that? This setup shouldn’t be too warm to snow.

This is the one issue. Everything is trending towards the favored euro progression but the one problem is the temps are also trending warmer. The 6z eps is a good example. It doesn’t go out far enough to see the end result...but at 144 it’s definitely further south with the low track with less ridging in front. But it’s also still slightly warmer on top and ahead of the wave. What once looked like a colder setup is quickly becoming marginal again. Doesn’t mean it won’t work. It’s a really good pattern. But it means less margin for error.

28/29 threat I like that distribution pattern very much. Reminds me of something