Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,608
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Vesuvius
    Newest Member
    Vesuvius
    Joined

January 2015 Pattern Discussion


CapturedNature

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Well there is a difference though. I took it to mean you were thinking 0 snow the next couple weeks. Inside runners very often can lead to snow to ice events for us..similar to what we're looking at this weekend. Are we going to get copious amounts of snow in this pattern..probably not..but neither is anon in SNE..If I was Dendrite on north I'd be amped for tons of snow. 

 

 

You are getting too specific. The point that should be taken away is the further south you are in this pattern, the harder it will be for snow. There is no magical demarcation line...the probability increases further north and decreases further south. That's all you can say.  

 

In any given storm, it could be different, but since we don't have any details this far out on storms, we go by the general pattern and what type of storms we have historically seen in such a pattern.

 

-EPO, SE ridge, +NAO is a gradient pattern...wagons north is how you would bet them. But again, that doesn't mean you can't have a storm further south.

 

 

You really need to understand what probabilistic forecasting is and stop getting caught up in deterministic rhetoric.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are getting too specific. The point that should be taken away is the further south you are in this pattern, the harder it will be for snow. There is no magical demarcation line...the probability increases further north and decreases further south. That's all you can say.  

 

In any given storm, it could be different, but since we don't have any details this far out on storms, we go by the general pattern and what type of storms we have historically seen in such a pattern.

 

-EPO, SE ridge, +NAO is a gradient pattern...wagons north is how you would bet them. But again, that doesn't mean you can't have a storm further south.

 

 

You really need to understand what probabilistic forecasting is and stop getting caught up in deterministic rhetoric.

But that is not what people want to see. That doesn't tell us anything. Noone is asking for rain/snow lines..but for someone to say it's a snowless 10 day period south of the pike while north of it is super snowy doesn't sit well with me, and shouldn't for anyone else. It's not going to not snow and ice south of the pike and bury places from Springfield north..it doesn't work like that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that is not what people want to see. That doesn't tell us anything. Noone is asking for rain/snow lines..but for someone to say it's a snowless 10 day period south of the pike while north of it is super snowy doesn't sit well with me, and shouldn't for anyone else. It's not going to not snow and ice south of the pike and bury places from Springfield north..it doesn't work like that

 

 

I don't think it will be a snowless 10 day period south of the pike.

 

But I don't know what else to tell you. I don't make deterministic forecasts on a parameter as highly variant as snowfall based on a pattern...all we can do is tell you that the particular pattern will favor further north. It doesn't mean you get zero snow...hell, you could get a foot of snow if things break right. But fewer things have to "break right" further north in order to see plowable snow events in this type of pattern.

 

It's ok to talk in probabilities at this lead time. Embrace it and you'll find the discussion easier to understand. If you don't like it, then my advice would be to stick to the banter thread or other threads that talk deterministic solutions like the model thread and not the pattern thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it will be a snowless 10 day period south of the pike.

 

But I don't know what else to tell you. I don't make deterministic forecasts on a parameter as highly variant as snowfall based on a pattern...all we can do is tell you that the particular pattern will favor further north. It doesn't mean you get zero snow...hell, you could get a foot of snow if things break right. But fewer things have to "break right" further north in order to see plowable snow events in this type of pattern.

 

It's ok to talk in probabilities at this lead time. Embrace it and you'll find the discussion easier to understand. If you don't like it, then my advice would be to stick to the banter thread or other threads that talk deterministic solutions like the model thread and not the pattern thread.

I understand it fine..it's just not the best way to convey information. there's a reason why it's never been used for public consumption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that is not what people want to see. That doesn't tell us anything. Noone is asking for rain/snow lines..but for someone to say it's a snowless 10 day period south of the pike while north of it is super snowy doesn't sit well with me, and shouldn't for anyone else. It's not going to not snow and ice south of the pike and bury places from Springfield north..it doesn't work like that

 

If a few inches of slop over to rain gets you excited then more power to you. In this pattern odds aren't exactly in our favor for appreciable snow events though they certainly can happen. I would rather be 50 miles farther north as pattern recognition and climo will tell you. We'll see what happens... will it be a shut out with 0.0" of snow - highly unlikely... will we get nickled and dimed but some lame events - that's a lot more likely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a few inches of slop over to rain gets you excited then more power to you. In this pattern odds aren't exactly in our favor for appreciable snow events though they certainly can happen. I would rather be 50 miles farther north as pattern recognition and climo will tell you. We'll see what happens... will it be a shut out with 0.0" of snow - highly unlikely... will we get nickled and dimed but some lame events - that's a lot more likely.

That is perfectly fine for me. I'm not like others. I don't need massive storms and jackpots. Just frequent events that give a net gain . 1-3/ 2-4 then ice or ending as cold rain. Fine with me. This winter isn't going to yield big coastals it appears, so I think folks need to take what they can get
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kevin partially melted.

Why are probabilistic forecasts not good? People want to hear specifics but in atmospheric dynamics it's not possible without flat out lying.

I like our chances but understand that if I see frozen they'll be plenty of taint most likely. However, there will likely be at least one system that gives region wide good snow cover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is perfectly fine for me. I'm not like others. I don't need massive storms and jackpots. Just frequent events that give a net gain . 1-3/ 2-4 then ice or ending as cold rain. Fine with me. This winter isn't going to yield big coastals it appears, so I think folks need to take what they can get

Ridiculous conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kevin partially melted.

Why are probabilistic forecasts not good? People want to hear specifics but in atmospheric dynamics it's not possible without flat out lying.

I like our chances but understand that if I see frozen they'll be plenty of taint most likely. However, there will likely be at least one system that gives region wide good snow cover.

That's how I see it, Jerry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kevin partially melted.

Why are probabilistic forecasts not good? People want to hear specifics but in atmospheric dynamics it's not possible without flat out lying.

I like our chances but understand that if I see frozen they'll be plenty of taint most likely. However, there will likely be at least one system that gives region wide good snow cover.

I didn't melt at all. There is nothing more confusing to the average person than seeing some graph or chart that says there's a 30% chance of 8 inches of snow a 25% chance of 10 inches..a 90% chance of >1  etc..they don't understand that . They want to see a range..2-4 /3-6 etc.. it's always been that way..and again is why we don't see this in the public sector..and if you do, it's quickly changed back to the old way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't melt at all. There is nothing more confusing to the average person than seeing some graph or chart that says there's a 30% chance of 8 inches of snow a 25% chance of 10 inches..a 90% chance of >1  etc..they don't understand that . They want to see a range..2-4 /3-6 etc.. it's always been that way..and again is why we don't see this in the public sector..and if you do, it's quickly changed back to the old way

 

 

You don't give snowfall ranges on a pattern outlook unless you are just doing it for complete entertainment purposes...because it won't be accurate.

 

You highlight the areas that have the best shot at seeing plowable snows. Most people here understand that a gradient pattern is more favorable the further north you go. It isn't a new concept on this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't give snowfall ranges on a pattern outlook unless you are just doing it for complete entertainment purposes...because it won't be accurate.

You highlight the areas that have the best shot at seeing plowable snows. Most people here understand that a gradient pattern is more favorable the further north you go. It isn't a new concept on this forum.

Im talking about a forecast in the 1-2 days prior to the storm. I'm not sure if you understood that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im talking about a forecast in the 1-2 days prior to the storm. I'm not sure if you understood that?

 

Well nobody else here was talking about that. We were talking about the pattern and the snow chances within that pattern going forward.  

 

Not sure how it morphed into a theoretical discussion of a 36 hour prediction on a storm. I would certainly feel fine giving snowfall ranges 36 hours out if that is what you are asking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well nobody else here was talking about that. We were talking about the pattern and the snow chances within that pattern going forward.  

 

Not sure how it morphed into a theoretical discussion of a 36 hour prediction on a storm. I would certainly feel fine giving snowfall ranges 36 hours out if that is what you are asking.

It all started when Ryan commented that south of the pike looked less robust for snow. Kevin, being south of the pike took that to mean no snow and the conversation went from there.

If I'm forecasting snow for tomorrow night I would give ranges but mentioned caveats unless we were looking at a huge event.

The public doesn't check the forecast for Saturday and run with it Tuesday without checking back in at closer lead times...lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can't say i've looked too hard to see which ensemble mean has performed better over the last 15 days or so across NA. always tend to lean on the euro but hopefully the gfs package has the right idea long-term. 

 

That area NE of AK seems to be giving models fits today. The EC actually eased off the EPO, but also eased off the troughing over the SW US which then eased off the SE ridge towards the end of the 11-15 day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That area NE of AK seems to be giving models fits today. The EC actually eased off the EPO, but also eased off the troughing over the SW US which then eased off the SE ridge towards the end of the 11-15 day. 

it's not a bad look - though i don't like seeing that PV re-established so far north on ec mean with relatively weak ridging over alaska. something like the gfs would be pretty nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's not a bad look - though i don't like seeing that PV re-established so far north on ec mean with relatively weak ridging over alaska. something like the gfs would be pretty nice.

 

The GFS op tried doing the same almost. I remember the nuances last year up there as well. I know it's an ensemble mean beyond 12 days or whatever out, but I do like seeing the HP in a good spot. Usually it means the H5 setup is conducive for that representation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that is not what people want to see. That doesn't tell us anything. Noone is asking for rain/snow lines..but for someone to say it's a snowless 10 day period south of the pike while north of it is super snowy doesn't sit well with me, and shouldn't for anyone else. It's not going to not snow and ice south of the pike and bury places from Springfield north..it doesn't work like that

Springfield is S.O.P.

Map reading 101 - FAIL.

 

...Unless of course you are referring to Springfield, VT.

...or Springfield, NH.

...or Springfield, ME.

All of which I highly doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like after some weakening, the ridge near the west coast rebuilds in the 11-15 day. We could have a pretty stormy week 2 of Jan, esp after the 9th or 10th. During that time, a mix of systems could occur from cutters to miller Bs. Then, one would guess that more cold may ensue.

Yeah that period of -PNA for a brief time. Prob makes it stormy but there's a risk of a cutter in there.

PNA then goes positive and that's when things could really go well if we have some good shortwaves in the flow.

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...