psuhoffman

That looks like the 20 minute super cold front blizzard we got a few years ago It actually stripes us with 3-5" right through up the middle of our forum. I'm sure it will work out probably not...but we keep seeing chances in this pattern.

Oddly the anafront snow idea on xmas eve is on the GFS and CMC.

We still have not seen any arctic air yet looks like we get a brief shot around xmas...then after there is at least cold air around to tap. We have been paying for the god awful November still. It was so bad...one of the worst November's every...that it wasn't easy for the thermal profile of North America to recover.

If its trailing right behind a system that pulls the baroclinic zone well off the coast and its screaming in from the NW...no.

Ggem does it but no cold again Can we keep this pattern rolling into January when this would really pay off? The worst kind of gut punch would be to largely waste this now then have it break down and resume a typical nina look when our best snow climo starts.

somewhat similar problem to yesterday...only even less cold in front and the storm doesn't develop and close off a circulation until past our latitude. But its close and guidance is just coming around to this idea...curious to see what happens in future runs. Still time for thermals to adjust some but it won't be an easy win.

GFS really isn't far from something Monday...its got a kicker right on its tail...need that to either back off or dig more and amplify the trough.

The pac was good for the Dec storm...we really need EVERYTHING to be perfect to get a big snow in December...it was actually only EHH for the Feb snow blitz but the Atlantic blocking was perfect.

2014 and 2015 we had a lot of pac help... we have had some periods since then but nothing sustained for long stretches like that.

Their lift served vert is about 5600 I think...but its about 6000 if you start from the hike to terrain at the sub peak. I especially like the north bowl drop into the alpine off piste terrain on the back side though. Only about 3000 vert to that I think but its the best terrain. The front side is mostly really long cruisers that are good to bomb down at the end of the day. When were you skiing at Squaw? I've not been there...but most resorts out west have an open policy with natural terrain now. I know that was not so when I first started getting into skiing in the 90s...but has changed since. Not sure how "liberal" you want it to be though...they do typically have "access gates" to the "out of bounds" terrain with warnings and disclaimers. Jackson asks that you use a transponder if venturing into the avalanche terrain...but I don't think they will do anything if you dont...you just might not make it if something goes wrong. I have skiied extensively "out of bounds" at Utah, Jackson Hole, Revelstoke and Aspen/Snowmass and never had an issue. The other new thing is opening up natural terrain "in bounds". Vail opened blue sky which is a whole mountain of mostly natural terrain to play with. Revelstoke's whole north side has huge areas of natural terrain in bounds. You don't really have to go out of bounds to get the out of bounds experience anymore. I want to ski Europe someday...just has never worked out.

By mid December I knew we were in trouble...and by Xmas I knew we were completely screwed and likely headed for a total dud winter. We were looking at a combination of the worst possible pacific pattern and NAM state possible...and judging by the onset of those two patterns combined with the typical duration of both when they present at that level of anomaly...history said both were likely to continue through the majority of our snow climo. The history of such years with that pacific and high latitude look was really ugly. Right now everything up top looks more favorable. The pacific is more murky. The Euro weeklies resume the central pac ridge look week 3 and keep it locked in straight through...there is a -AO most of the time but mostly ruined by the awful pac. However...the models were doing that by Xmas not long ago and then backed off. It seems they "think" we should be going to that out in time...but like it past years when they thought things would get better, keep pushing that look out. What has ended up the reality is a mediocre but not completely hostile pacific. If that continues and the AO remains negative we should have a decent winter. So far things look better then I expected.

The bottom line is there are indications the PV might be a weakling this winter. That is opposite what we’ve had recently.

Sounds a little like Revelstoke. They have about 6000 ft of vertical. Bombing down that really burns by the last 1000 feet.

YES!!!

There is some overlap of the domains so usually yes. This pattern we had was good enough imo. This is kind of a perspective thing. CAPE isn’t wrong that had the block been centered further south it could have shifted the confluence south and limited the ridging and warm surge ahead of the low. But then if the system hasn’t dug so far west it also could have suppressed the whole thing! Had we got a better mid level pass and close we would have been ok. Plus we are still suffering the effects of the November continent wide torch in that the cold was shallow. Not true arctic air. So no it wasn’t the best most perfect pattern ever but we’ve had tons of snow in worse looking patterns. I would be happy this this look keeps repeating. Especially mid winter we can do just fine with the block centered in the AO domain with some ridging extending into Greenland. But December isn’t forgiving around here. Like I said yesterday it’s easier to snow before Xmas with a progressive wave that doesn’t pull in the warmth from the Atlantic. Amplified coastals are a really tough sell this early.

The problem is we probably care way more then whoever made the decision. I was lucky. Didn’t learn until I was 18 and everyone said how hard it would be and it took me about 3 runs to just figure it out. But I think it helped that I was in shape (then) from playing soccer at PSU plus I had played street hockey on roller blades growing up in NJ. A lot of the balance is somewhat similar. Just took a few runs to figure out the details. Now golf....I feel like someone invented that sport as a bad joke.

Yes this. Wes did an amazing correlation chart and DC snow correlates to the AO more then any other single factor. Adding to this...if you want a HECS then you need a -NAO. Only one of our region wide 18”+ storms in the last 50 years didn’t have a killer block and that one PD2 featured a perfectly timed Arctic high. We got kinda lucky. But that still changed to a LOT of sleet...so had timing been any less perfect...you get it. But oddly the really big ones that feature a great block also usually feature what under a non blocking regime would be a bad pacific. I talked about this some in the snow climo thread. Our HECS look is a weird combo that doesn’t work under normal circumstances. That kind of block would often suppress an event...but a trough near AK that amplified the ridge/trough downstream or a trough crashing the west that tries to ridge in the east actually helps get something to force its way up into what is likely locked in cold and a high pressure due to the confluence. It’s a weird combo that leads to those crazy anomaly storms. But if we just want snow...a good old fashioned warning event snowstorm, a -AO and a PNA or EPO ridge are the way to go.

A somewhat -NAO with a VERY -AO is just fine.

You probably aren’t balancing your weight properly or transferring weight between skis on turns. Without proper weight distribution the mechanics become difficult. Your weight should be centered on the balls of your feet when aimed downhill. Most beginners lean back as a defensive reflex and end up riding the tails and that’s bad because most of your control comes from the front of the ski. As you turn always distribute your weight to the downhill ski. When I’m teaching people I often lift one ski up and ski entirely on one ski at a time to make the point. Once you master the weight distribution the rest comes easier. To stop you execute a turn only sharper. But right as you would begin to turn uphill instead you lean into the slope and dig your edge into the snow. The first few times you will likely spin out a bit. That’s ok. At some point the “feel” just clicks and you’re good to go.

Can’t argue. I’m sure I measured 6.9” exactly right before it flipped to sleet. Then I measured just over 1” of mostly sleet with some snow during the mix period. So we were at 8 going into the last band of snow at 10pm. But after that I have no idea. Way to windy to get a measurement. But I doubt it was less than 2” so 10 is a good solid conservative #. I’ll go with that. 10” snowfall. My depth is 8” in most places. The bottom 6” of that is a solid glacier.

Start a thread

It is very encouraging that all 3 major ensembles temporarily spike the AO as two TPV lobes merge but all 3 immediately give it the boot and tank the AO again within a couple days. The best news is we are well into the point where the last few years there was ample evidence the look up top was going to be trouble. Especially last year when huge warning flags were there. This year we have the opposite with every sign pointing to a favorable base state of the NAM.

My depth is a little over 8” because the initial 7” of powder compacted down to 5” of cement after the ice. I measured an inch of sleet and snow mix during the mess period. After that it was impossible to get an accurate measure but 2.5” seems about right. It snowed for several hours. It all blew into drifts up here. Your total seems right to me. This was a tough one to get an accurate total. The post I responded to 3 days ago and that I am referencing now was specifically about you implying guidance wasn’t showing enough moisture for 20” totals. At that time most guidance was putting out 2”+ QPF across our area in the deform zone. That zone shifted north. The argument you were making was not that the deform was going to shift north due to a future model trend. You were specifically questioning whether the qpf on guidance AT THAT TIME supported big totals. They obviously did because that zone and the 2” qpf area shifted to northern PA and that area got 30”+. I doubt we get the ratios here they got even if it had not trended north but 20” in our area certainly wasn’t crazy had the storm not trended north.

Over the years that Miller’s report a couple miles east of me (they are about 200 feet lower) aligns with my snow depth at the end of storms better then snowfall. Sometimes the two are the same but sometimes when snow came in different parts with lots of mix and compacting they can be a bit off and their total almost always matches my depth.