psuhoffman

@losetoa6 @Ji root for the NAM solution. More amped wave but south/colder also. Better confluence at 84hr then the 18z Gfs same time.

You can’t tell by QPF or snowfall in a specific location. Have to look at mslp and h5. On the euro runs all are juiced up but colder and snowier runs here were from a less amped wave that allowed the cold to press more. But...after checking 18z eps the correlation between waves wasn’t as clear as 12z. Could be due to the other factors out west I noticed on the 18z op mitigating. And this Monday wave is trending colder with more upside. So whatever. I’m done. Bring on the Monday snow. Then we roll the dice. Not worried about the correlation. ETA: until it kills us and I write a 12 page document saying I told ya so...kidding not kidding.

Ok I fold. If I get 10” Monday I can live with whatever happens after.

Yes but the more amplified solutions also tend to be further north and warmer because we’re on the wrong side of the boundary. It’s not universal. It’s possible to get a more amplified colder solution but that’s a razor thin margin on this. I’m being specific to the majority of guidance. The clueless Gfs can obviously get more amplified and colder since it’s still drastically underestimating the wave compared to other guidance.

There are ways to get snow on snow. The main correlation with Monday being south was to a less amplified 50/50. But there are other variables that could offset. Or the Monday wave could walk the thin line. Be amplified but colder also. There were a few snow on snow solutions but that’s playing with fire. Get a weaker south wave that doesn’t produce the heavy rates needed and we get snow TV and give up the better setup 48 hours later. This is also a preference thing. I’m a big dog hunter. I’ll gladly give up a guaranteed 3” for a 25% chance at 12”. Part of that is where I live. 3” snows are kinda common. I totally get having a different attitude when you haven’t seen an inch in 2 years. So I don’t begrudge anyone’s different opinion. This reminds me of a setup in 2015. 2 waves. In this case we had too much cold and confluence. But the chance to amplify was better for wave 2. And runs that had a weak front runner had a gorgeous bomb for wave 2 a couple days later. Wave 1 ended up a 4-6” snow in DC and about 3.5” up here. Most were happy but HM and me were lamenting the lost chance as an east coast monster for a mundane progressive wave.

It’s annoying because they come true. But that’s our climos fault.

she had been joking around some lately...what's wrong with a casual comment now and then? When things get really nasty and its nothing but a litany of attacks and complaints is when we need to reign it in a little...some fun is harmless.

The other day when I looked at the GEFS I did NOT notice the same correlation. But the GFS in general is much less amplified on EVERYTHING next week...and imo its wrong on that. So if I think its mishandling the longwave pattern I would not put much stock into its handling of the details of how the two waves are playing off each other. But that is just my opinion. Just affirming your observation regarding the GFS is correct but explaining why I didn't put much weight into it.

You are 100% right. There are other variables that could make snow on snow a possibility here. One would be if the Monday starts south but still amplifies...but that one is kinda difficult since its washing out and being absorbed into the developing vortex to our north. If it starts de-amplified it probably ends up even more so. Another option would be a more amplified NS system that bombs out regardless of a less amplified monday wave. So far those 2 features seem to be acting in conjunction but that does not mean they will continue to do so. Or the 50/50 could be less amplified but move out slower. Most likely way to mitigate would be like I discussed on the 18z plot at 90 hours. There are some things out west that could offset a less ideal 50/50. One would be a more positively tilted system that goes neutral later. A flatter flow on top. Even with an obviously less ideal 50/50 its not apparent from that 90 hour 18z euro that the storm would end up north. Those other 2 factors could end up making it further south...who knows. So it's not a 1;1 correlation. But I do think its fair to say...a colder monday solution PROBABLY increases the chances that we have a less amplified 50/50 low and that is a net negative if we think the bigger risk Wednesday is a warm/north trend.

somehow several posts didn't load when I updated the thread...

nevermind i see the other thread...I am ok with that too...I am not the superstitious type.

with it being only a few days away why don't we just move the Monday stuff to the obs thread unless it becomes worthy of its own thread in the near future. Discussion of how that wave effects Wed can stay here.

That's just our christmas blizzard.

@Ji That isnt a crazy scenario... the 10 or so 12z EPS members that managed to give our area pretty much no snow next week did it that exact way. A suppressed monday wave that was just too warm to snow anywhere...then a crazy far north wednesday system where the snow started north of the mason dixon line. That is how this all falls apart. I would argue that its not JUST the monday wave though...the monday wave is acting in conjunction with the more significant wave on top of it...and that is what becomes the 50/50...so a weaker monday system is indicative of a weaker wave that turns into the 50/50. The pattern is good...but its still only mid December, with an only ok antecedent airmass, and a block that is a little north of ideal, and a pacific that is only mediocre...if you remove the ideal 50/50...this is probably an interior northeast storm.

That is the total fail scenario

My gut tells me it is way too soon to be making detailed predictions for a storm 5 days away. I don't like to pretend I am confident or know something when the truth is I don't know. I am comfortable admitting when I don't know. But...this is a pretty good setup in terms of the longwave pattern. I would like that block to be centered a little south of where it is...like CAPE has said. But we have snowed with a similar H5 look often. I would like that 50/50 hanging around a few hours longer and the system coming from the west to go neutral just a little further east. I would like a slightly colder thermal profile in front of it but its December...is what it is. But there is a reason big all snow events are VERY rare in DC this early in the year. I do think this ends up pretty amplified when its all said and done...and that in a way reduces the chances of an all snow south track some. My "gut" says this is probably going to be DC's first accumulating snow of the season and break the snow drought...but the really big totals are going to be further north/west. Even up here...if you asked me what I am more worried about...a north trend and rain is a way bigger concern for me att then missing heavy snow to the south. Now watch 0z come in suppressed lol.

I would yes but the 18z op doesn't quite go out far enough to know where its headed for Wednesday yet...but we can see the effect of a less amped Monday wave...and I can speculate... 12z MSLP for the Monday wave 18z MSLP a few MB less and further south... More importantly h5 was less amped at 18z... 12z h5 Monday wave 18z h5 Monday wave The result to our 50/50 and confluence to our northeast is evident...look at the 50/50 12z Look at the change 18z...but there are some other factors that improved slightly that are unrelated to the Monday wave effects that could help mitigate...so I am not saying its impossible to get a cold solution Monday and Wednesday...but that the colder Monday is...the harder it will be to get Wed because it PROBABLY means higher heights to our northeast ahead of the next system. But the system is further south ejecting from the Rockies...and the flow is a little flatter on top of it. Those 2 factors could offset the less ideal 50/50 due to the less amplified Monday wave. I can't extrapolate from those minor details. But I would take the better 50/50 if I had the choice.

I’m talking about the eps. It trended slightly suppressed Monday at 18z and so warmer Wed. 12z I looked at every eps member to confirm. Of the 7 most north amplified members for Monday 6 had extremely south and snowy solutions for Wed. Of the 11 more suppressed they all had extremely north warm solutions Wed. The correlation makes sense. The more amplified Monday the more it will knock down heights in front of the wed wave.

It trended less amplified/south Monday and warmer Wed. There is an inverse correlation between the two waves.

Careful what you wish for. There is a correlation between how far south Monday’s wave comes and how far north Wednesday’s goes. We want Monday as amped and north as possible to suppress heights in front of Wed.

It has sucked but in fairness the other globals didn’t cover themselves in glory with those 2 storms from that range either.

Aww man I was getting a laugh out of every one of those posts. Why ya gotta ruin the fun.

Do you at least have a name on the script or do they just refer to you as "ensign#3"

@DTWXRISK JK nice map

I looked at the EPS members. There is a relationship. I identified the 7 most amplified members for Monday and 6 of them had the most south/cold solution for Wednesday. Those 6 had the axis of heaviest snow south of DC. Some were a total miss south. The 7th had a weird all NS solution with not much of a storm anywhere. Inversely the 11 members that I pulled as being flat and weak Monday had the warmest north solutions Wednesday. 9/11 were north of the mean Wednesday. And the 2 most suppressed Monday members were by far the most extremely north members Wed. Obviously this isn’t scientific but it seems on the Eps anyways a more amplified system Monday leads to a colder solution Wednesday. Less obvious is any correlation to the amplitude or organization of the Wed storm. There were amplified but qpf producers in both camps. Some weaker in both. But the warm/cold correlation was like 90%