Typhoon Tip

Meh you guys are chasing giga motions with needling obsession over sensibilities of loss Meaningless noise. Nothing really changed.

You wanna get rid of this thing in a timely fashion if you want next weekend

Hm hm hm hmmmm God you’re deviant

Where you guys are hung up with snow… I just like interesting weather events. So I guess under the circumstances that makes us allies. LOL

Better presentation on the GEFs First time since the index signal was detected, that’s been the case

My God… This thing‘s been billed 18+ inches and so it shaves a couple inches on recent runs and people are like this sucks this is total bullshit ha ha ha ha ha ha

That’s called “warm air seclusion” by the way if anybody’s curious… Phenomenon not uncommonly found in bombing cyclones.

Wtf ... Channel 7/NBC affiliate out of Boston is buckin' for a 24-36" of eastern Mass ??!! tell me that's some kid with a free afternoon and a chapgpt meme kit

NMBs latest storm projection

I think you were onto that aspect last week if memory serves... some post along the way. And I agree... The problem with this being an index -based signal ( meaning it seems to only be in the indexes) is that it doesn't qualify aspects like the actual positioning of features into sweep or key-slot positions. Bad locations still fit. That's the reason why I've only been discussing the window in time and not really pushing an actual event. Yet... I mean this can formulate - there's time I don't think that is impossible; one aspect I keep noticing is that the +PNA ridge in the west is actually relatively fixed at along a MT longitude thru the period. It's not clear why the models have such a boner for positioning the trough couplet so far E of that total wave space like that. stretch city!

yeah .. you know, fair enough point. Thing is, if we look back at climatology... we don't typically see 20" this and then 20" that, < 10 days apart. Regardless of cause, that's just a flat fact. If we can count the number of times that's happened in 50 years on one hand, that is by definition rare. But maybe in the sample size, we just haven't had a huge overrunning anomaly next to a cyclone bomb, anyway. In other words, you just can't get the circumstance to arise that often. The problem with huge storms with huge output, they are doing that because there is a huge restoring deficit. Those have to be rare. But look at it this way ... we have not had two huge events spaced closely in time since ... 2015 FEB maybe? that's 11 years ago. Why not? LOL seems pretty f'n rare to me.

I haven't heard ( haven't run out to NWS afds just yet, either ) mention of specific PWAT values in this air mass transporting up underneath the boundary... Given the source is from the deep S/proximity to the Gulf Of Wet Fart Mexico ( I refuse to honor the idiocy of the renaming ...)...it seems we could be shitting a ton more than people are really aware with this whole beast. But we'll see. It's possible to choke-snow fall rates from isentropic lift, tho. I'm also wondering if just gets so extreme that there's thunder, too.

It's a huge index signal centered around the 1st, + and/or - a couple of dates, which are derived from the ensembles. Somewhat ironic, the same ensemble mass -fields that are analyzed in deriving those same index values, do not actually carry a significant event through that period That is oddly troubling. Meanwhile, the operational versions have at least been off and on .. perhaps 50% of the time, plotting then not plotting significant events within that index-signaled window. That's what we are dealing with. Sometimes... the ensemble means will actually collapse toward the denser physically applied operational flagship versions. Rarer...but can happen in that direction. If that is going to be the case this time... proooobably start to see some at least tentative operational agreement on which dates to center on. So far...we've really seen 29/30th to 02/03 and all dates in between. Not really centering... This may also come together/coalesce in guidance better after we get this present major off the boards. I will also add... purely from a climatology of major events historical perspective it is seldom that major winter storms occur in short order. We've seen two moderate impact events pull that off in the past; aggregating to a major by weight of both kind of thing. But this thing on Sun/Mon ... then having an 06z GFS 5 days later is rarely observed.

I mentioned a while ago ( while I was in a meeting and should not have been doing so - ) that the RGEM was a better choice for me overnight. The NAM has a N-W bias over this region of eastern conus/western Atl - which I've been hammering for years ... I know. But with that in mind I was just suspicious that 06z solution was a bit latitude happy. The RGEM 00z-06z were essentially identical within a range of irrelevant noise as well... and also were respectful of 9 degree cold for f-sake. At a larger philosophical approach, this whole situation is like two elephant asses on a collision course - namely...the instance -EPO loading and resulting arctic outbreak, smashing head long into a Phase 6 MJO atmosphere ( the correlations of which are a heat wave in the OV...) trying to rebound. The momentum is established. Two huge weights moving at one another ..Usually, events that are rooted in huge corrections like that are going to happen. It's really not a question if... it's just becomes a needling detail as to what backyard gets what. The scale and amp of Monday's possible lagging coastal impacts is still, believe it or not, a bit of a wild card. I still sense that trying to see through the hugeness of the IB in the foreground ... to then handling the escape capture tendency of surface features is kind of stressing the guidance vision.

overnight RGEMs are better than overnight NAMs for this