gymengineer Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 All the models are depicting a snowfall gradient (NOT amounts--- just the gradient) very similar to 2/78 for I-95. That would have been a heart-breaker for DC to track, but Baltimore northeastward, and even DC's northern and northeastern suburbs experienced a completely different storm. And as you headed northeastward, each city got somewhat more than the previous city, ending with the Boston jackpot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDweatherman Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Don't be a dick I was trying to help the guy out by saying he was directing his response to the wrong person.Its not an argument, its a discussion. You did the right thing, I completely messed up. Thanks for waking me up, I was shocked when I saw the mistake. All in good heart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Don't be a dick I was trying to help the guy out by saying he was directing his response to the wrong person. I am not i am trying to diffuse the situation, which you are obviously not. But seeing UVV's response apparently you did a good job, sorry for being a dick even though i was just trying to help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtk Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 It is all semantics DTK asked why he said that,and he was defending the GFS as all of us would our work. And UVV was explaining why he thought it was wrong, i don't see why this has blown up into an argument. Let 2 intelligent grown men discuss their differing thoughts. To clarify, I wasn't even defending the GFS. The statement was silly...."I want to believe that the GFS is struggling". It was just thrown out there without any rhyme or reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdsnoelovertoo Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Well I am in Cecil County Colora nowhere near Elkton about 540 feet elevation NW up near PA Line and in December about 16 inches so I say bring another 8 thursday night. Yes Elkton does get the shaft many times I will get 6 or more inches and a thirty min drive down to Elkton a slushy inch......... might have to drive up to Elkton, from White Marsh if you do get a good bit lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Its not an argument, its a discussion. You did the right thing, I completely messed up. Thanks for waking me up, I was shocked when I saw the mistake. All in good heart You're welcome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I am not i am trying to diffuse the situation, which you are obviously not. Psst, he thanked me for pointing out his mistake. If anyone is causing a situation it's you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighStakes Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I can agree with this. I live in Lancaster but my office is in Cecil County and have seen many instances that Pythium describes. Yeah, definitely. The nw corner of Cecil County and then west to northern Harford County is a sneaky good spot. Good elevation especially nw Harford County. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Psst, he thanked me for pointing out his mistake. If anyone is causing a situation it's you. Lol, read my reponse above. I still love you and will be at your pool in April. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtk Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Well what I said to dtk could you please read then. Oops! My apologies to you dtk, hope you aren't offended neither are you chris I hope just getting my point across. Can't believe I didn't notice I'm not offended...it's fine and I assumed it was an honest mistake. I am just sensitive this morning after having spent too much time in the New England Subforum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDweatherman Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 To clarify, I wasn't even defending the GFS. The statement was silly...."I want to believe that the GFS is struggling". It was just thrown out there without any rhyme or reason.In that respect I meant the exact opposite. What I really meant is I wanted to believe the GFS was wrong was said because if I were to just flat out say its wrong that would be weenie if I just blatantly said it was wrong. Sorry for tehe misunderstanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 To clarify, I wasn't even defending the GFS. The statement was silly...."I want to believe that the GFS is struggling". It was just thrown out there without any rhyme or reason. Damn so i guess we will not be getting to see a snow map competition . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usedtobe Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 The GFS and Nam both suggest maybe an inch or two around DC. Right now I'd go with a dusting to an 2". I'm not good enough to parse it any more than that. This still is a complex surface development. I don't see a 78 type storm. I used that storm once before as an analog for snow developing almost right over us and got my butt handed to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I'm not offended...it's fine and I assumed it was an honest mistake. I am just sensitive this morning after having spent too much time in the New England Subforum. Don't tell me you actually go in there and discuss the models with them?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Anyways, Cobb output for 12z NAM shows .339 for Westminster, all snow. Obviously qpf increases as you go east Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparky Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 All the models are depicting a snowfall gradient (NOT amounts--- just the gradient) very similar to 2/78 for I-95. That would have been a heart-breaker for DC to track, but Baltimore northeastward, and even DC's northern and northeastern suburbs experienced a completely different storm. And as you headed northeastward, each city got somewhat more than the previous city, ending with the Boston jackpot. I was thinking of this storm too (2/6-7/78) while reading through the latest posts....NE Balto city where I lived got a foot of snow. I think DC got basically nothing inside the beltway... a rather remarkable gradient.....but I don't think the current setup is quite as dynamic as that great blizzard was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtracker Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 No more than usual. I know you and a few others will hug the snowiest solution until it's partly cloudy so there's gotta be some balance. I've said all along these situations are often considerably better starting in the Balt to PHL corridor and even better NE of there. BUT I think you want as much juice as possible on the good models to feel good as losing a tenth or two (or more) liquid shouldn't be surprising in the end. These things often develop slower than modeled. Yeah, but you seem to be overcompensating lately. Just saying. I mean, I'm probably you mitchnick and winterwxluvr personified....I tend to be more positive than negative, but not unrealistically so. The RGEM isn't as terrible as you make it out to be...it's not a top tier model, but going from what we've heard from some mets, it has some credibility. It's solution with this system prob isn't that credible tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparky Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Anyways, Cobb output for 12z NAM shows .339 for Westminster, all snow. Obviously qpf increases as you go east cool, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usedtobe Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 I'm not offended...it's fine and I assumed it was an honest mistake. I am just sensitive this morning after having spent too much time in the New England Subforum. That's a dangerous place to go, I even hesitate to go there and a lot of the posters are my friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 The GFS and Nam both suggest maybe an inch or two around DC. Right now I'd go with a dusting to an 2". I'm not good enough to parse it any more than that. This still is a complex surface development. I don't see a 78 type storm. I used that storm once before as an analog for snow developing almost right over us and got my butt handed to me. Back to reality. Don't be so modest Wes you are the Tom Brady of weather. The only problem is you don't have Giselle, although i assume your wife is much lovelier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravensrule Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Anyways, Cobb output for 12z NAM shows .339 for Westminster, all snow. Obviously qpf increases as you go east Cobb actually did great with the 12/8 storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gymengineer Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 The GFS and Nam both suggest maybe an inch or two around DC. Right now I'd go with a dusting to an 2". I'm not good enough to parse it any more than that. This still is a complex surface development. I don't see a 78 type storm. I used that storm once before as an analog for snow developing almost right over us and got my butt handed to me. Oh, I know the evolution is entirely different and that storm didn't have the overrunning band ahead of it in the northeast. (And I think you're talking about 12/00 for the busted forecast, right?) But, doesn't that gradient pretty much agree with your thoughts though? That the DC area is in the beggar zone but somewhere northeast of us- not sure where- snowfall amounts will ramp up quickly? Again, I'm not talking about the storm itself, just the idea of a significant, widespread snowstorm for the northeast where we are dusting up on the crumbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 cool, thanks. No prob, here is the link. Westminster site is already in there (w54) it's the site nearest to me. http://www.meteor.iastate.edu/~ckarsten/cobb/cobb.php?model=nam&site=w54 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighStakes Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 The GFS and Nam both suggest maybe an inch or two around DC. Right now I'd go with a dusting to an 2". I'm not good enough to parse it any more than that. This still is a complex surface development. I don't see a 78 type storm. I used that storm once before as an analog for snow developing almost right over us and got my butt handed to me. That's about as good a call anyone can make now. If the models do bump up qpf. I would be afraid if I was a forecaster to bump up totals. So far this morning there have been some pretty aggressive calls from local Baltimore stations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clskinsfan Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Masco's map isn't too bad .. though I'd lean low still, not sure about the sw bend west of here either but climo. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bc500gbCcAAXMuI.jpg:large There is no way i'm getting 2-4 from this strung out mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris87 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 In that respect I meant the exact opposite. What I really meant is I wanted to believe the GFS was wrong was said because if I were to just flat out say its wrong that would be weenie if I just blatantly said it was wrong. Sorry for tehe misunderstanding. sorry if what i said came across as harsh -- it's fine to say a model is wrong but to say the dynamics aren't linked within the model is just plain wrong -- i cringe when I see certain mets use that logic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Yeah, but you seem to be overcompensating lately. Just saying. I mean, I'm probably you mitchnick and winterwxluvr personified....I tend to be more positive than negative, but not unrealistically so. The RGEM isn't as terrible as you make it out to be...it's not a top tier model, but going from what we've heard from some mets, it has some credibility. It's solution with this system prob isn't that credible tho. I never look at the RGEM unless it's posted here.. it's not worth the time IMO. I think some are of the belief that having every single piece of model data makes you have a better picture when in fact it might be the opposite. Even run to run you see most people make sweeping changes in their thoughts when they should be building a brain ensemble over the course of a day or so, compared back to similar as you go. I do sometimes make it a point to be sharp/curt in my commentary. But again it's like swimming against a gulf stream of positivity so maybe that's partly why it's noticeable. So far the end game of this storm has more or less fit in with my thoughts.. so hard to apologize too much, yet at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usedtobe Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Oh, I know the evolution is entirely different and that storm didn't have the overrunning band ahead of it in the northeast. (And I think you're talking about 12/00 for the busted forecast, right?) But, doesn't that gradient pretty much agree with your thoughts though? That the DC area is in the beggar zone but somewhere northeast of us- not sure where- snowfall amounts will ramp up quickly? They could ramp up to our northeast but I wouldn't expect a 78 type megastorm. If Mapgirl gets 3 or 4 inches she should be happy....knowing her she will be even if she only gets 2. I guess my point about was that this kind o storm it is tough to forecast where any heavier banding might develop and that it can sometimes develop later than forecast. Somehow I remember that happening around here more than the opposite except for the veteran's day storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ji Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 its amazing how a storm that tracks west of us will stay on the models for 192 hours plus without shifting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 They could ramp up to our northeast but I wouldn't expect a 78 type megastorm. If Mapgirl gets 3 or 4 inches she should be happy....knowing her she will be even if she only gets 2. I guess my point about was that this kind o storm it is tough to forecast where any heavier banding might develop and that it can sometimes develop later than forecast. Somehow I remember that happening around here more than the opposite except for the veteran's day storm. Im happy whether it snows or not. I've never expected much from this system, too many moving parts that makes forecasting it horrendous. With that said, I'd be shocked if I got up to 4" and pleased with even a dusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.