weatherwiz

The broad brush ranges certainly makes things much easier lol. But I can understand why there has been more of a movement to include more ranges and place greater emphasis on max/min zones. If you're in say an emergency planning vertical or DOT, landscaping, etc. the broad brush ranges often don't serve a great value (this is where the private sector come in because you can pay for greater local detail). Anyways very impressive to see that the short-term guidance and mesos absolutely nailed how this would evolve...literally to a T, especially with the evolution of the two bands and what would happen in between and even more impressive, the timing this would begin. These large events (or really any event) so there is much focus and so much sweat on analyzing QPF and QPF trends, snow maps and snow map trends and comparing from one model to another and one run to another run...that's a pretty terrible way to assess storm trends and evolution, IMO. In fact, on one of my lecture slides the professor even has stated in bold...these products do not explain why trends in storm track or precipitation intensity are there. This shall be another fun case study storm

Very annoyed with myself because that was a glaring signal on all guidance...extremely glaring signal but for some reason I didn't want to buy it and buy into exactly how bad the potential for subsidence would be in the valley. The signals were all right there, laid out right there and just totally overlooked. Great stuff on the differences in alignment regarding 850mb fronto and 700mb fronto and what happens when the two become stacked. Moving forward I am going to give stronger attention to this. Anytime there are situations where models are big with the 700mb fronto, I've disregarded what's happening at 850 in terms of fronto. I wonder if this stuff would be covered in my course this week focusing on isentropic analysis. The other challenging part when dealing with the potential for subsidence zone(s) is how to portray that on a snowfall forecast map without making the map look stupid (Speaking for myself here). I guess maybe one way to do this is don't go crazy with the ranges and then add some text or an outline indicating where max totals may be. It's much easier to highlight max zone versus min zone I think anyways

I actually wouldn't be surprised if the degree of warming temps is a bit understated, especially during the precip. Possible maybe we see some late afternoon highs?

Yup. And I think we should be relatively active right up to probably mid-March. Don't see a hole heck of a lot too screaming warm so we're going to have potential to continue adding to seasonal totals for sure

Should be a fun morning for sure, except for those traveling. Also, some of the mesos are hinting at some potential squalls to move across northwest CT and Mass late afternoon or early evening with some very weak instability in place. Could see some spots pick up an additional 1-2" with those, albeit localized.

27.1" for EWR

Gusts have to be pushing 45-50 here. Hell, even just saw a snowtornado Bunch of snow blew off the neighbors roof and developed into a rotating column of snow. Dissipated when it hit the house next to it.

wind seems to be getting stronger here

Maybe he had to cross state lines to find some donuts

Metfan?

The system has occluded by now so the moisture inflow is starting to cut off. Probably won't see much more enhancement from that western band but it could help to add to that eastern band once they converge

If these two bands converge across RI/SE MA someone for sure will get 35-40"

Its been snowing steady here but the intensities aren't anything great, I'm not even sure its efficiently accumulating, however, the wind makes it impossible to really know.

Here you go

I was expecting to get screwed here in the valley, though not as bad as what happened, however, this is still extremely enjoyable and its a blast reading the reports and feeling the energy of others getting slammed.