Typhoon Tip

That's really neat looking on Rad and Sat this hour east of the Jersey coast. There's thunder there... and the expansion/cooling cloud shield over top immediately assumes a cylone curl, as though there is a tight internal cyclonic nucleus imploding there. Which, that's may be confirmed in surface/buoy PP obs.... Or, it could be more mid level - hard to say. But that's cool... Meanwhile, fire hose in NYS -

Presently there are heavy showers with thunder looking pixels popping off E of Jersey - hint hint...

I don't know who's said what or what was posted recently among too many pages ... but man, that 00z GFS surface evolution was a face smack for storm enthusiasts. How often does one see a 975 mb low stall collocated on top of Nantucket Island for like 9 to 12 hours, and have almost nothing put down on Earth to show for it, NW of the CC Canal ? Answer - it's like impossible. Yet, the GFS has no compunctions in attempting to sell that rarefied and particularly special kind of butt banging - But, in more rational terms ... I wonder if this first wave escaping seaward is taking too much moisture/baroclinic parameters with it relative to the GFS evolution. Seems a viable reason. In that paradigm, this thing is dynamically challenged do to our greed on the first wave - haha. So not so rational but that's funny... There is a reason we typically don't get "two" snow storms inside of 30 hours. I've seen it happen ... 1996 did that in December - or darn close. But this is no analog even remotely to that circumstance back whence, and what we do have is middling mid/U/A vestigial vortex moving along a favorable climate track ... with seemingly less left over from last night's 'wringing out' to work with... Such that QPF is challenged ? I almost wonder if there is a deformation band or two around that NW arc, possibly as far NW as mid western NH, but it's like transparent CB's in the summer. ...I mean, in deference to the GFS model run. Haven't seen any other guidance. The NAM is is a teaser -

Less consolidation with the first pulse/cyclone developing after a couple runs trying to move toward more... It appears it's reverted back to this one now eventually stripping away the baroclinic instability seaward and starving the mid and upper level mechanics once they arrive. May not be real - wonder if the 18z gets the full compliment of grid input, too.

2" in Ayer; uniform tiny aggregate snow at 1/2 mi vis. 28/27

That stuff on rad moving through CT this hour is either bright banding or someone is going to get walloped by a short duration stacking event.. That almost reminds me of the rad image the hour before the 0 visibility Dec 23, 1997 spread up over Worcester and Middlesex Co.

I would be leery of an ageo whiplash/flash if you are liquid now, yeah... I suspect if this consolidation trend continues though, this thing will transition into more a CCB and y'all down that way might get end gamed by that some -

Amazing so early in the year that the Euro gets us thru D7 protecting the ground snow after the fact, too... wow -

not really related to this storm but Wednesday looks WINDEXy during the day

Haha lol... Just gibbin ya shit... But seriously, I'm not sure that wind-up CCB stuff for early Tuesday will get that far back west. I mean it could - but right now it's not being modeled to do so. You should do fine prior to that tho.

Oh god ... now we gotta bring the dreaded B word into the fray

mm hm

Well... I feel vindicated... Consolidation is clearly happening on this Euro run folks. There's less two events, and more one event with perhaps a lull - if that? - as Will mentioned... And, the climo argument of ORH to SE NH is hugely demonstrative in this run as falling into line. Now...it won't happen -

Guys... these charts rarely verify - just wanna re-ignite the realization

Exactly - superb analysis.

Climo has best snow ORH - interior SE NH

are we still looking at two rounds ... or is this trying to consolidate -

Yeah, it does, doesn't it -

Yes to the first question ... sort of yes to the second ... As the season progresses the ocean cools off considerably at our latitude. Low 50s now may be 40 or even upper 30s at seasonal SST minimum ...usually late March or thereabouts. In fact, an ocean influence can even help a spring nor-easter find it's way down to wet snow, where contrasting to early season it is a detriment in that regard. However, this situation has other meteorological, along with what are termed "local studies" factors to consider. We get "coastal fronts" at times; this is a candidate for such a feature. The warm ocean ( relatively warmer...) air doesn't penetrate west of those boundaries, and there can be impressive temperature variations across just a few short miles on either side. Boston Common might be 44 F and misting/sheet rains and it's parachutes at 33 in Cambridge, and powdered snow up on Arlighton Heights... and even 50 F out at Logan Airport. We have a cold air mass entrenched across the area, and a high pressure banked into eastern Canada/Ontaria. This latter feature perpetually feeds cold into the coastal plain and that flow banks off the warm ocean air and the coastal frontal evolves... Cambridge is right on the fence... Coastal fronts can be aligned right over you... Sometimes west ... and other times, suppressed down toward SE zones.

You know what... we might actually be looking at a short window correction west after all... We've seen this countless times in the past. I mentioned this in that diatribe's ending thoughts, but the speculation is that this unusually large circulation size and fast mid and upper level wind speeds might be over -sensitively generating a lead wave too much in the guidance. Might be seeing that phasing out... The GFS still strips tho - but, we'll see how much that looks that way 18z and 00z ... etc..

So, naturally ... if this lead/#1 detonation is less effectively stripping the baroclinicity eastward, than a 2nd low could certainly evolve back closer to the coast.. Boy the 12z NAM narrowly misses Eastern Mass with choking snow. I know I'm convinced the more I look at this that I'm right about this tho. This lead gawking snow and early low sequencing is actually a detriment to what could be a better performance - in total. I mean, as modeled.... it's going to to be interesting to see what happens of all this. nice.. On Dec 2 ... fuggin early folks.

Yeah perhaps ... but, I should also be clear: what I mean is, "if" we end up with an initial/#1 coherently separate event, any 2nd one might end up E. I don't even know if these won't exactly consolidate - it's just a distraction/possibility to that needs to be considered is all ...

I haven't looked at that particular guidance as of late... not this morning either, so I'm not sure why that is there with that "bite" out of the QPF look. It doesn't make a lot of "spacial" reasoning sense, not when combining all guidance that I have seen, together with climatology and experience with coastals and closing mid level circulations off actually S of CT ... The 700 mb level has an axis S of both CT/RI so it's interesting that the NAM has had so much warm intrusion going on -... particularly considering the high in eastern Canada; not appreciably massive, no...but, 1020 and holding is certanly enough to continue to ageo the interior right down the CT valleys and probably up through the 850 mb either way, the whole duration to me. That's the conceptual 50,000 foot perspective from my chair on this.

Heh... I just returned late last evening. I think I made it pretty clear I was heading out of town for the holiday, and probably wouldn't be reachable ? At least I thought I did Anyway, interesting system here, but there are some distractions to consider. I'm not fully onboard after getting caught up with trends over the last three days that a double hit/impact scenario is a "definite" on the tote-board. It could be a passe characterization deal, annoyingly subjective that starts fights in reanalysis and imby opinion making. Tongue in cheek there... but, there are scientifically appropriate limitations for the double-whammy idea. Namely ( one ) despite the "cut-off" structure of this, the progressivity of the flow is still there. I've read back a few pages; there's some tendency to conflate that appearance of this vortex with cut(ing) off. That's not reeeally what's happening here in terms of what it typically means to cut-off a mid level vortex due to total wave space/cyclogenetic feed-backs from UVM/thermodynamic processing ( deepening the core to the point that internal heights fall beneath the trough's ambience) a time span amid the coastal low model in which they tend to do their most damage. That's hint number one that in general...this could behave oddly; hence a bit distracting. This is already closed off, progressively rollin' along, and therefore toting along already occluded structures with it. That said, yes ... it's still getting some kick-backs from cyclogenesis/processing ( particularly exemplified in the 06z's "however" quite bizarre total behavior surface and/to aloft). The 500mb surface plumbs to 528 or a touch beneath, and moves from S of ISP to east of PWM out there between 36 and 48 hours, ... a rather ideal climate track actually for Worcester up to SE NH; even if the deepening is modest from around 534 that is true. Climate alone on the mid level "magic" egh... little dicey here. Kind of off-setting flavors. The next distraction: Both the speed of the flow surrounding the trough, combined with the fact that the trough is so anomalously large, are imposing an interesting(anomalous) surface evolution tendency along and off the Mid Atlantic to east of Cape Code. Those two factors working together arrange for cyclogenesis parameterization to excite a "premature" low along the Delaware/NJ lat/lons, which reading back several pages folks are referring to event #1? That spin-up is a wave along a quasi warm front ..fine, typical detonation point for 2ndary and so forth anyway, if not along a triple point, that's understandable. However, this is happening way out ahead of our deeper later/better mechanical forcing associated with the vortex. I guess a simple way to say, the 2ndary Miller B model is being unusually stretched (circumstantially) here. The mid level velocities way out ahead of that better forcing are high, and this increasing in time is acting like a diffluence ...floating a match over gas fumes, igniting a surface low that then becomes problematic: It is sufficiently capturing the baroclinic field and strips a good bit of it away seaward in the extended rich velocity field. Then of course the more important Q-G forcing associated with the closed vestigial trough/vortex approaches that same area, but ends up initially challenged to detonate a new/'real' supportive low. That's why we are seeing this tendency in the GFS and NAM to belay the new, I guess we'd have to call it "tertiary cyclogenesis" in this case. Fascinating how the 06z GFS tries to atone by capturing and foisting a long seaward exposed low way back NW toward the Maine coast Tuesday morning. Man, talk about a model suffering a migraine! Thing is ... these models don't really depict scenarios that are 'physically impossible' ? No ... they are still governed by the principles of geophysics in their make-up... We can only deduce which outcome is more or less possible based upon experience, climate/empirical past, local time-scale trends/seasonal tendencies, education, and yes ... a bit of art ( ha, sometimes the latter happens too liberally in the weather -related social media, too, but that's another story...). We've seen premature ejaculations many times in the models along the M/A spanning yesteryears in the modeling behavior. Troughs encroach hyper volatility scenarios/set-ups and we've watched successive model runs correct toward a more cohesive western low as the near term came into focus. I don't know about that, this time, however. The hotness of this prom date is there but ...this trough migration and quasi-closed vortex (again) being so anomalously large, along with unusually high mid and upper level wind speeds surrounding its rampart approaching a sexy deep layer baroclinic field presently situated(ing) along and off the M/A is certainly a viability for early ... ah, fun. Heh..so I'm not readily sure the typical westerly correction vector applies because of this total scenario's uniqueness. But if the first low does develop earnestly ... I wouldn't be shocked if the 2nd system ends up E. .

Yeah my question from this morning's been answered ... We appear to have saturated from the bottom up ... which likely means the dry air/hygroscopic stuff was too thin and not so deep in the sounding that we could wet-bulb the right way. So, 33.5 to 35 F regionally in a WWA cancellation scenario may be the destiny. Tomorrow looks unstable to me though with that v-max running up overhead. Squalls? So... as pathetic as it may be to try and recoup anything interesting out of this pattern/event, we've been reduced to not even having that fail. Amazing to put up this kind of negative departures for two solid weeks and simultaneously bear witness to this. We've had 12" Novie snow bombs in warmer months on several occasions. I mean, yeah yeah yeah November climate, but ... mm, it's still a deep enough seasonal month that when your at -5 or lower, things should be working out more entertaining. interesting. Welp, kind of concur with Scott there that we appear destined to a doldrum patterning here for a while. The GFS has limited support from it's ensemble members, but it keeps trying to flag some sort of dynamic windy cyclone toward the weekend abutting t-g day. Maybe something of cinema can come of that.