FXWX

5.5 Burlington CT

4.5"... 21 f

Too bad it's hauling along at break-neck speed...

Thanks; for some reason I keep in forgetting the have link on homepage of BOX...

Where do you see this graphic of running totals...

0z GFS keeps the eastern Mass love going!

Agree Tip... If that's your concern on Jan. 19th during a generally cold period, it might be time for a break. Just be happy we have a moderate event to track...

The last thing the vast majority of the forum needs to be worried about is surface temps. Any marginal surface temps at onset will vaporize quickly... mid-January during a long running cold pattern with solidly cold / frozen ground surfaces losing much to melting at onset is not an issue.

Win some; lose some!!! https://x.com/i/status/1880070171982778694

Yes, yes, and yes.

I hear ya... general trends are all I deal with; there are no (zero) experts when it comes to the long-range stuff...

Wiz... I actually see a lot of that in your forecasting... might be a good thing; might be a bad thing; lol

I know Walt well, he's a good friend, great forecaster and a mentor; we often chat prior to noteworthy events. And while we all have different takes on various models; and I favor ones that have a long solid track (not perfect) record, and its known biases can be adjusted and applied to its current depictions. Even the lowly NAM is quite useful if you know how to read and adjust its tea leaves... Forecasters should use the models and techniques that they are most comfortable with; I have not been a big fan of the GGEM over the decades. I have found the Reggie good with significant ice accumulation events. The good thing about this science there is room for a variety of forecasting techniques depending on one's experiences. I have made a wonderful living doing this successfully for 40+ years, so what I use and prefer works for me; likely not for others. There are no perfect models, and they all fail miserably from time to time. The key to being successful is to know the strengths and weaknesses of the modeling, and more importantly don't take your eyes off of the meteorology; modelology (made up word) should not completely over-rule the actual meteorology of a particular event setup. As many of the mets on here have said over the years, you have to be able to say, does a particular model's output make sense with what we know about how the atmosphere usually behaves in a given setup. If not run away from it... My apologies if i sound snarky, but just not a big Reggie or GGEM fan, but if they works for others that's wonderful.

I hear ya, and I do give a "glance" when close to a major event, but if I didn't have access to it, that wouldn't bother me; I feel that same about the ICON.

Agree... A degree of my post was a bit in jest; I fully understand folks looking at as much info as possible, and looking for trends; once inside 36 hours, I also sneak a peak at the reggie during really big potential events in case a radically different solution points to a red flag...