Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

Feb 9th-? MW/GL/OV Threat


SpartyOn

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 979
  • Created
  • Last Reply

wouldn't it have been cool to have something like '78 happen in a time where we had this website and all access to these models. Imagine some of the crazy solutions some of these models would have been throwing out. Thread titles like "JMA has a 933 over Pitt!!!!"

And then you would have the NAM with its overcooked convective blobs releasing too much unrealistic latent heat into the upper atmosphere with a 1000 hpa low over the lakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the sake of us actually having a storm to track, I think we all need to tone it down on these once in a century-esque storm mentions. About 20 people (exaggeration, but still too many) have mentioned 1950, 1978 and 1993. I know it's all in good fun, but it seriously needs to stop.

Everytime someone brings up the 1993/1978/1950 analog they end up jynxing the storm and it never ends up happening or its very weak. We certainly wouldn't want another Roger Smith (again, no disrespect to him) Peak Energy Bomb fiasco.

I agree with the analog talk, lets get this inside of 5 days before we should even bust out the analogs, the key here is that there is a potential for a seasonally strong system that could track in our favor for the region.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the analog talk, lets get this inside of 5 days before we should even bust out the analogs, the key here is that there is a potential for a seasonally strong system that could track in our favor for the region.

This is a very sensible post of what we can take from this at this time. Being a non met I probably wouldn't understand an explanation of why some models are so extreme with this system at this time but am curious nonetheless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until browing this thread, I never realized this was a threat for a BIG storm. If we get a significant snowstorm, the snow depth and snowbanks around here are going to be something Ive never seen before!

Agree. Deep snow pack. Have not seen it this deep in 2 years. Reminds me allot of 2009. Its good for the Lakes and insulates the ground against this cold. Helps in many ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree. Deep snow pack. Have not seen it this deep in 2 years. Reminds me allot of 2009. Its good for the Lakes and insulates the ground against this cold. Helps in many ways.

The difference is, this was the cutoff point in 2009 before the Feb thaw. As it was in Dec 2000 before the Jan thaw. This snowpack looks to only get deeper. Jan 1999 or bust? Better than Jan 1999? Im salivating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, I would be lying if I didn't say this one has a higher ceiling than the last storm.

Yeah, as hard as it is to believe, there may be even more potential with this event. Some of these GFS/Euro jet and surface depictions are almost mind boggling. I'd love to get baro's thoughts on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...