SnowGoose69

Overall pretty close, they got the high risk area almost exactly correct. The north end of the high risk in AL looks like it won't verify, does appear they trimmed it back slightly on this latest update.

For the time being I believe a federal judge has stopped this, unless I am misunderstanding. If true I guess these employees would all be reinstated for the time being and have to hope that in the time it takes for this to go to the SC they can be convinced that cutting from this sector is not smart. It would almost certainly be upheld there but they'd have a few months probably to prove their case they should not go ahead with it

I think anyone with 365 days or less since their hire date is probationary. So this will have a totally unbalanced impact because some WFOs probably have 0 people with that status and some probably have 2 or even 3 in rare cases so that impacts them very differently. I actually personally know 4 people who got terminated during their probationary period in the NWS since 1992. One for just being the hostile person they were and still are, a second for breaking vital equipment, one for entering the office during off hours intoxicated (they mistakenly told the taxi that was their house), the other for being just awful at the job and having some personal issues with mental health (they should never have been let go and gotten the help they likely needed).

It can be easier to get something in March that might miss to the east in Dec/Jan/Feb. My memory is the April 82 storm did not have a very favorable pattern and probably would have missed to the east in winter due to things being progressive.

Still looking like another weak or even chance of a borderline moderate Nina at the moment. The QBO may be more favorable next winter though

This close in I don't like using ensembles anyway, the cut off to me on those is 84, once to 72 I often won't even look

JB is sorta right, PSU echoed this in the MA forum that even if you looked at the CIPS analogs, many show the 500 setup from like Chicago to the Delmarva being one where we had storms that were so far west the coast changed over. Its likely just a case here thats an extremely rare circumstance where a couple of things being slightly off are leading to an atypical result given the setup. Or the NAM is gonna pull another January 2016 on us...

I definitely lean more towards a total shutout here now. obviously we’re not seeing that on any ensembles or models yet but at this stage given the changes we’ve seen I suspect that once we get inside about 84 or 90 we’ll probably see this at a high risk of flattening out even further. I just warned some people online I said you might even have to be worried in DC, which I was telling people about here yesterday

As of 4pm it was LGA 0.3 JFK and EWR 0.4 NYC T

Should be between 0.5-1.0, I'd say its like 0.4 so far

Yeah the 18Z ICON was like a Nemo redux, saved by a late capture but realistically that is a worse trend from the prior run

It was east

I think its a miss for DC if it misses the rest of the coast, orientation and everything to me argues if its not an across the board big city hit its more or less a miss outside of the Delmarva/SE NJ/Cape and Islands

Which I don't think is realistic, I think the window for this to hit DCA/BWI and miss everyone else is a narrow one. I suspect this hits all the big cities or none. Could see it where the Cape/Islands/SE NJ and maybe Delmarva are hit but not a case where the former occurs.

Be wary of those 06 or 18z EPS jumps. Seen it before in recent couple of years and then the ensuing main hour run reverts back to what the tendency had been prior. At least the AI made a jump which is unusual from what I've seen from that model so far