Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,584
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

March 2nd/3rd Winter Storm Potential


joey2002

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Most of the storms never really had a chance so it's not really a miss. This one comes close...but you can't say there was good agreement either.

LOL, just weeneiing out on ya and being the rev. But yeah, I've been spoiled up here this year with more storms I can remember being modeled in the LR and actually happening, at least GFS wise. GFS has been going back to it's usual behavior in this pattern ... since the last warmup that is.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of the SREF's are still on the higher side of the totals.  Gut feeling is this storm still comes north enough to give southern CT/RI/MA advisory level snows.  So 1-3" north of Hartford/Providence/Taunton/Plymouth, 3-6" south of those points, with the 6" totals very close to the south coast/cape/islands.  Probably only dusting north of Worcester/Boston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ryan had a great blog on Thursday explaining the uncertainty, and why.  Wish more of the public could understand that.  

I do think its funny that these kids internet sites are getting the attention. I guess now people can see visually rumors, you all know the I heard we get smoked rumors pre internet. well now there is visual proof. The real mets are feeling pressure to counter act it, like its a new thing. Been going on in the real world since I can remember. If I was in charge I would stay the course, not mention them, remember negative publicity is still publicity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with Box, OKX issued them too early, when you live on the merge point like many down here do, its confusing as hell for those not in the know. I

Oh I bet, especially in CT where you have a relatively small geographical area covered by 3 different offices.

I still think you get a couple inches of powder on Sunday night Ginxy as that boundary slides through and moisture ripples along it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think its funny that these kids internet sites are getting the attention. I guess now people can see visually rumors, you all know the I heard we get smoked rumors pre internet. well now there is visual proof. The real mets are feeling pressure to counter act it, like its a new thing. Been going on in the real world since I can remember. If I was in charge I would stay the course, not mention them, remember negative publicity is still publicity.

 

I think that's generally what we do but the pressure to release "numbers" is growing. The other issue is that with social media it's hard to provide context to a map... whereas 5 years ago I could provide tons of caveats to a map I was showing on air those go away when they're getting posted and reposted across the interwebs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure how many folks read those

 

That's the problem. In general, the public doesn't bother to read detailed blog posts like Ryan's, but jump right in when they see radical hype driven snowfall maps.  Then those same people get mad when it doesn't pan out, and associate bad forecasts with all meteorologists.   :axe:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple of notes.  As I didn't participate directly in the threads I kind of feel it provided an interesting perspective:

 

1.  Sampling.   It's generally true that the data network is solid now to the point where we no longer absolutely need to have features over a UA station to get a good forecast.  But for some reason many still seem to think it's critical AND any changes that result will inevitably be positive in terms of snowfall.   It's probably a 50/50 split better/worse on the eventual snowy outcome.

 

2.  Ensemble support means very little when it comes to specifics in this pattern beyond 3 days.  All it really does is target a threat that may hit somewhere +/- 500 miles and in reality the OP models are good enough at telling us that.  This one had good ensemble support most of the way and as each run shifted it was "supported" but the respective ensemble.

 

3.  The GFS and NAM are entirely unreliable in this pattern.   If the GFS and GEFS were disregarded 2-3 days ago and a consensus of all other forecasts taken people would be less disappointed today.

 

4.  The UKMET is right about 1 in 10 times when it's over amped.

 

5.  The EURO is merely another model now.  When it's right it's terrific but it's had some really poor performances this year.

 

6.  Weenie fights inevitably follow every big disappointment.

 

 

This was over two days ago outside of SNE and even there the coast and eastern sections always had the best chance for snow.  The general orientation of the precip changed just a little from earlier runs as a lobe on the PV smashes down.  CMC stuff led the way with that although it was a smidge overdone it barely ever bought into this being a big deal.   CMC will always have a D6-10 mega storm but it's had some good systems this year. 

 

It'll be interesting to track this, I expect a few inches here which will fit the seasonal pattern of these extra suppressed systems.

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...