Typhoon Tip

I can tell you these 'feel' correct... Approaching 10, and these have another update coming... so, 10 after 10 pushes this deep into stifling and prooobaly more warning level heat than just Advisory from about 1pm thru 5pm... I don't know what the time requirements are on the headlines so not criticizing there, per se... but if we tap 94 ..95/72, that's a damn sizzling HI. By the way, this region appears to be weirdly 2-3 F hotter than everywhere else at this particular time.

Fwiw, NWS' climo Prelims have +2 to +5 at their 4 representative sites for SNE thru the first 10 days of June ORH/BOS are absurd and need to be changed, since climate affects POPULATIONS I suppose the Logan one has a sciency usefulness for how the coupling marine environments and all that jazz... but otherwise? no. Using that for "Boston" is just a thorn that is generations overdue to be pulled out. Doesn't matter what it takes or what hardship is perceived, if I were a fascist god, I would tell them to do so immediately or suffer the wrath of discontent that makes president Dump look like the bed of daisies he's about start nourishing ( ...actually, they'd probably vomit, wilt and die ) ORH is a little less egregious. There are neighborhoods scattered around the AP up there on the hill, but because it's geo-physically always going to be 6 to 8 F cooler up there than the swelter below where there's many orders of magnitude more people actually living - to fairly use that as climate is jack shit, really.

I wonder if data population schemes are more problematic in summer than winter. Maybe a known thing. Tracing that 500 mb vort paneling backward ...it seems the Euro/GFS are both getting an awful lot of momentum arriving out of the Pacific over the western continent around D5/6, then racing it into a bit of non-linear constructive interference triggering a shallow wave break and bombogenesis - originating along the lofty 570 mb height contour is a head scratcher. I guess it's not impossible... I mean, the models have to at least be physically possible otherwise they have 0 meaning.

Look at this pig ... 984 mb low near BUFF, yet ... immersed in only 564 dm thickness, having almost no hydrostratic gradients surrounding all quads, either In summer. This is D7 Euro so... meh, no responsibility to accuracy is really there - yet - but that's an example of too much amplitude ( or likely to be...) on summer mid range charts. I like the triple point secondary low forming at the head of the 576 - that combination of metrics you don't typically see, huh

Oh, yeah.... I posted their disco excerpt ... "...especially away from the coastal plain. Heat Advisories may be expanded further east; however, a backdoor cold front is expected to drop into eastern MA sometime on Friday" But in their defense... they did mention the advisories might extend east - I don't care to be involved with the petty pot shot at NWS thing... just sayn'

? I think there's a pattern relative warm bias that is the CC expression that is sort of unnoticed - or maybe ...everyone knows it but chooses to ignore. I dunno. But what I mean by pattern relative warm bias is that the pattern essences may actually be verifying better than either the temperatures that result, as well as what folk tend to associate what those patterns look like the temps should be. I don't mean that necessarily wrt this last month's behavior ( necessarily...), but I always go ahead and assume two aspects: these 540 dm festering multi contoured hornet stings on the summer D9-13 charts we see over James Bay are not going to do that, and, whatever comes of it...we'll be 2-7F above scalar predictions anyway

Maybe too much of a good thing? Too much data dooms us in here in winter as we needle through all these implications over multitudes of modeling output that starts to paint these ideas on how to get a storm pack to 20" from 3 units of vertical velocity when sometimes a step back and head clearing might make the event at hand a bit more realistic and less ACME coyote planned. LOL... I dunno. Maybe analogous to that they're looking at too many reasons that could happen and not enough at if it's likely. I did annotate a chart that showed a tendency for a west bulged PP on Friday, yesterday morning, but it was very weak... The NAM grid had that numeric suggestion at Logan of 88 to 76 back to 88 wind driven temp flop look. Not sure if that's what they were spooked by. That same 'bulge' is now gone, and the NAM grid has offshore throughout.

It's a standard summer oscillatory pattern. We could have really assumed the models were too deep on the polar side of the ambient jet, a failing particular to the GFS in latter mids and ext ranges... As we get closer, it's converting it to more climo-friendly wave spacing pushing fronts through a more neutral foot. Hydrostats meandering up and down around 560 dm thickness isn't exactly a cold fulcrum. It shouldn't really inspire very BN to be honest. - realize there's some shape likeness to autumn but folks whom are challenged to employ an objective "cold bullshit filter" ...like at all, may find that too hard to resist, however

Yeah, just poking around the NWS non-standard sites and everyone was 68 to 72 for a low. Some in fact are 80 by 80... that's a bit above climo too. We'll see where we are at 10am. I don't frankly see any limitations on high temperature as the nocturnal weakly bounded low on the arm of the warm front has escaped seaward and clearing has enveloped; we're pretty much unobstructed solar, dumping raw radiant power into a very prepped situation/high-ish launch scenario. I'm noticing an AWT moment as NWS has indeed extended the headlines throughout - that weak BD idea in the models was another example of their going from poor detection in previous generations, to being oversensitive and over creating them if you ask me ...

touched 90 here.... tomorrow and Fri look higher probability for at least that number around here

I still think there's a chance that the trough is too progressive in some of these guidance, and that a slower/attenuated total mass results in more EC parallel/quasi parallel flow - i.e., a bit of a Bahama Blue. Admittedly, that is not what this is, ... but it's not far from it considering this frame is about 60 hours in and the trough is still W of 90. My speculations won't be hurt if it doesn't realize just sayn'

NAM grid suggests a hot day tomorrow. 577 dm hydrostats probably means the DPs rich so that'll likely keep the T from going too crazy but you'd be talking about 93 .. 94/76 type stuff ooph

80 at 9:35 "10 after 10" 'll be a interesting test today. We may be 82 or 83 at this rate by the top of the hour, which if that old adage bears any usefulness ...sends us about 7 deg above MOS' around the BDL-FIT-ASH-MHT horn. Although it's probably only 76 at BDL at 10 ... 10 after 10 isn't precise either.

I'm speculating 16.8 to 16.9 C and a new date-relative record wrt global 2-meter mean temp by June 26th

It'll be interesting to test that, the scale/extent/presence of BD over the next two days. Particularly on Friday... I see in the 00z GFS, ultra anal close-up OCD Rain Man inspection, that yeah ... there is a 'bulge' west in the PP over E-NE zones... perhaps as far W as ORH, but we're talking 1 to 2 whopping mb here really... if this is even real. 06z has this less so. I've noticed this about guidance, et al, over the last 5 to 7 years. They have improved significantly in the boundary layer where prior generations of modeling had trouble due to the termination of fields in boundary mechanics. They don't ...or couldn't really, process what is happening as the boundary - in this context, Earth - is approached. That's why they used to miss "tucks" in winter storms of lore, erode cold too fast ahead of warm fronts in general, all that cold lag winning shit. They are better at it, but ... it's like they're getting better assessment by over assessing. I see them create these kind of BD-esque looking features that don't exist, more than they ever used to... right around the same time they've all improved on BL handling in general. So... I've spent probably waaaay to much time on this subject this morning at this point, and it's probably a fool's errand considering the room is empty and no one's even reading this very sentence... hahaha. ...yeah

I mean they're spot on with this conceptually, and to an extent with the detailing but they're blowing it with the spatial layout - not without giving a reason why they thinking metro west and Fitchburg -Lawrence and up to Manchester are not part of the diagnostics, which they don't...? Oh, they do okay... I guess they're okay the way they handled - Confidence continues to increase that heat and humidity will pose a risk Thursday and Friday. As the warm front from Wednesday lifts further north, prolonged southwesterly flow will bring a surge of very hot and humid air, especially as 925mb temperatures increase to +27C Thursday and up to +30C Friday. Surface dewpoints are likely to top out in the upper 60s to low 70s, especially across interior MA and northern CT. These high dewpoints combined with temperatures climbing into the low to mid 90s will lead to heat index values approaching 100F Thursday and likely above 100F Friday across the CT River Valley, prompting Heat Advisories to be issued for northern CT and western MA from noon Thursday until 8PM Friday. especially away from the coastal plain. Heat Advisories may be expanded further east; however, a backdoor cold front is expected to drop into eastern MA sometime on Friday Not sure I agree synoptically..I admit to a flaccid PP but I don't see a very obvious BD mechanism, ether.

76 at 8:20 am isn't bad. Sat's a grungy mess though. Partly to mostly sunny for now but there's convective debris in heavier patch work lurking near-by west, inching east. The sun may alter the sounding such that some of that starts to vanquish - not uncommon - but we'll see. Heat over the next 3 days is going to be battling a bit of cloud pollution though. Most guidance 700, 500, 300 mb level RH fields are contaminated with occasional 70%.

just between you and me ( and the social media'sphere heh)...sometimes I'm wondering if learning AI is being used at NWS offices, and it's not quite up to the task just yet. Like it still needs a helicopter teacher. I've noticed a lot of those kind of hard to explain head scratch nuances. There's not as many in urgent more/obviously significant situations, which makes sense... these latter types are more human eye required? I could see this scenario being "unchecked" yet; in need of doing so. But I'm also a sci fi writer in another life so -

Advisory level headline heat tomorrow and Friday ...cloud depending. I imagine the current layout gets extended into metro west of Boston and up the rt 3 corridor toward MHT eventually. Not seeing why Greenfield MA is going to be warmer than the Framingham MA to Manchester NH axis, but we'll see

Doesn’t this curve look mean? I’m not so sure that fugger’s gonna hook before it top dawgs

Speaking of the NAM grid.... woof. Thickness 572 to 575, first time this season basically sets in now, out thru 60 hours. 850's look like 15C. Lot of a cloud production tho so that probably limits it's already tendency for 2-meter temp retardation a bit. 30C at 980mb in NYC on Thursday tho would probably be 96 in EWR

I am not against, nor a fan of Judah Cohen's contributions ... I realize there's been some banter in here that's ranged from flattery to ... not so flattering opinions of the guy - I'm not part of that one way or the other. Having defined that ... I don't have a problem at all with his surmise/intimation there that it bears some semblance to last winter. I said almost exactly that to Brian in a post yesterday or the day before. Whether it ends up "comfortable" like he suggests is different combinations of metric than just temp though. He needs to be careful there ... or at least, the readers/consumers need to be aware. If it ends up normal temperatures ... that doesn't automatically intimate lower DPs to me. Not at this time of year - nor particularly to what the general synoptic trends look like out there. Particularly, if the transient trough in the Lakes starts to retrograde like the 00z ens clusters all agreed it would do... that means it is challenged to really make it COC -like. It would be more vaginal I guess... heh ( puerile humor ). It's a new-ish signal but the neg anomalies associated move back toward the S/W continent just beyond next week. For a real air cleansing... the trough needs to go the other way ... opening up and progressing E.

Pleezy weezy with sugar on top let's see that happen. ha

I realize the NAM is a dead dog model ... ...are they going to continue running it in parallel for awhile after the fact? Is there going to be gridded data sources from whatever meso madness they're going to, similar to FOUS? May be a Q/A for NWS personnel ... if there's anyone still actually working at NWS since we've gon' and made 'merica all great and all

yeah, there's definitely a kind of neg-head bias about signaling NE of the Maxon Dixie. Because we don't get 55 K foot tropopause stabbing nuclear updrafts with stove pipes carving canyons underneath, 'they're not worthy ...' Kidding... but there's something like a wait-and-see thing up here? I've seen more upgrades than planned scenarios - it's almost like that's their policy.