Winter 2014-2015 Pattern Discussion Thread III

[mackerel_sky]

Yeah, on 6z , it still looked a little icy on Wed, not a ton of precip, but enough to cause problems. Then the Thursday low or energy , looks too far S or off the coast and almost 0 precip, one blip of rain moving over GSP

[FallsLake]

RAH keeping the door open for some wintery precip.

 

UNCERTAINTY INCREASES A GREAT DEAL FOR TUESDAY THROUGH THURSDAY AS
MODEL GUIDANCE HAS TRENDED STRONGER WITH THE MIGRATING SURFACE HIGH
ACROSS THE GREAT LAKES AND NORTHEAST THAT RIDGES INTO THE PIEDMONT
OF VA AND THE CAROLINAS. THIS COLDER TREND AND STRONGER COLD AIR
DAMMING SIGNATURE LEADS TO A MORE SUPPRESSED PATTERN BUT ONE THAT
COULD SUPPORT SOME WINTRY PRECIPITATION...MAINLY ACROSS THE
CLIMATOLOGICALLY FAVORED LOCATIONS OF THE INTERIOR NORTHERN
PIEDMONT. WITH THE SOUTHERN SHIFT OF THE MAIN WEATHER FEATURES FOR
TUESDAY AND WEDNESDAY WE HAVE LOWERED POPS BELOW WPC GUIDANCE AND
SHIFTED THEM SOUTHWARD. THE TREND APPEARS TO BE FOR A LESS IMPACTFUL
SYSTEM. THE PRECIPITATION DURING THIS PERIOD WILL LARGELY RESULT
FROM SOME SHALLOW ISENTROPIC LIFT AND AN EJECTING SOUTHERN STREAM
SHORT WAVE TROUGH. LOW CHANCE POPS WILL BE INCLUDED FOR MOST OF THIS
PERIOD. WE HAVE INTRODUCED A SLIGHT CHANCE OF FREEZING RAIN ACROSS
THE NORTHWEST PIEDMONT FOR LATE TUESDAY NIGHT AND WEDNESDAY MORNING
WITH LOWS NEAR FREEZING...IF MORE WIDESPREAD PRECIPITATION
DEVELOPS...THESE TEMPS WILL BE TOO WARM AND THE WINTRY P-TYPE AREA
WOULD NEED TO BE EXPANDED. HIGHS BOTH DAYS WILL RANGE IN THE LOWER
40S NORTHWEST TO UPPER 40S SOUTHEAST

 

[Webberweather53]

Winter weather advisories are out for freezing drizzle, & light freezing rain for counties well to the south & east of Triangle. Close but no cigar...

[packfan98]

Matthew East has a great video up.  He shows the different model runs from overnight to help you get all caught up and ready for today's runs!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHZgcdCtMvY&feature=youtu.be

[mackerel_sky]

It's amazing that we have 4 or 5 days with highs in the 20s and 30s and touching 40 on Sat, lows in single digits and teens, then boom, as soon as precip is near, mid 40s! #BESTEPICWINTEREVER!

[Lowpressure]

Difficult to believe that with this current pattern, CAD areas go through next week with no ice.

[Brick Tamland]

It's amazing that we have 4 or 5 days with highs in the 20s and 30s and touching 40 on Sat, lows in single digits and teens, then boom, as soon as precip is near, mid 40s! #BESTEPICWINTEREVER!

 

 

Difficult to believe that with this current pattern, CAD areas go through next week with no ice.

 

 

It could end up colder. Look at the freezing rain this morning in southeastern NC. No one saw that coming. 

[mackerel_sky]

The Sun - Mon is a rainstorm , willing to bet money, the Wed - Thur storm is too ! We can't get the timing right!

[FallsLake]

You would think that eventually we'll get one of these systems to work out; but we have to be very pessimistic about each that presents itself. This is till not the optimal pattern. That may very be in February. I think Webber(last month) showed some monthly maps that showed February as the coldest month.

[metalicwx366]

It could end up colder. Look at the freezing rain this morning in southeastern NC. No one saw that coming.

Actually many did see that coming. It was discussed on here yesterday. The same thing was supposed to play out across our area,but nothing formed. Just checked the radar up there and I don't see anything on radar up there either.

[Batman]

WRAL was talking about it yesterday morning, noon, and evening as well.  In fact, that's the first thing I did when I got up this morning...turn on the TV to see if any eastern areas were getting freezing rain.  Then I gave a sigh in honor of Pack.

Kirk Mellish on WSB radio in ATL mentioned this morning the possibility of ice Sun. Tue. Thur. It is not in his forecast, and he does not consider it likely, but mentions it as has been mentioned here the last day or so. We all know CAD specifics is not something that usually gets nailed down days ahead of time. We know there will be CAD, but the strength, depth, and amount of precip each day is very up for grabs still. I would be very surprised if you folks in NC CAD areas don't get some decent ice in the Sun. - Thur. time frame.

[Isopycnic]

That was a bit of a surprise.

Not really. This was discussed and forecast. 

[packfan98]

Well, the NAM is wet at least!

[griteater]

Nice Cold Rain!  Yeah, Little Critter says Yuck in the long range.  It will get real friendly around here if next week is a fail

[superjames1992]

Looks like the NAM starts out our area with some icing, too, Pack.

[Cold Rain]

Nice Cold Rain!  Yeah, Little Critter says Yuck in the long range.  I will get real friendly around here if next week is a fail

Lol...it aint looking good.

[MichaelJ]

Lol...it aint looking good.

And just when has the long range (well anything past 3 days really) been accurate this winter?

[BullCityWx]

I really feel like next week has some potential, even down to the Charlotte area.

[griteater]

I really feel like next week has some potential, even down to the Charlotte area.

 

I do too QC, but we just have to see how the timing shakes out.  Cold air is on the retreat as the week goes on.  I don't think the storm/precip will be as much of a strung out mess (as weak) as the overnight runs show

[LithiaWx]

I really feel like next week has some potential, even down to the Charlotte area.

 

I'm on the positive side for next weeks timeframe.   I think it has potential as well even down into N.GA.  It's currently modeled a touch too warm but nothing out of reach.

[Cold Rain]

And just when has the long range (well anything past 3 days really) been accurate this winter?

Pretty much anything that showed a seasonal and snowless December with no blocking. And anything that's shown no blocking for January.

This stuff about the models can't get it right past 3 days or 5 days or 7 days or whatever the conversation is at the time has to be set in the right context. No, they will not have the details of an individual storm correct. Look at the next week threat for an example. But they can and do have some skill in the sense of the general pattern. Sure, maybe the trough/ridge complex is a few hundred miles west or east, but it doesn't mean they're useless.

The implication with statements like that is that there's no value in looking at them beyond a couple of days. I don't believe that. Sure, you have to allow for the fact that changes can occur, but when you see run after run of a model that shows a zonal pattern that doesn't get pushed back in time and there's agreement across model suites, then yes, there is some value to that.

These blanket statements (or implications) that models are just flat useless out in time are not accurate. I don't mean to lay this on you... but we've seen these statements all winter. It all needs to be kept in the proper context. Otherwise, it comes across as a just because it's not showing what we all want to see.

[BullCityWx]

I do too QC, but we just have to see how the timing shakes out.  Cold air is on the retreat as the week goes on.  I don't think the storm/precip will be as much of a strung out mess (as weak) as the overnight runs show

 

I was honestly less bullish until I saw how cold the soundings were. Lots of time for things to change but that sleet sounding really piqued my interest. 

[BullCityWx]

The extracted NAM data for Lincolnton is totally emblematic of this winter: 

[Southern Track]

Pretty much anything that showed a seasonal and snowless December with no blocking. And anything that's shown no blocking for January.

This stuff about the models can't get it right past 3 days or 5 days or 7 days or whatever the conversation is at the time has to be set in the right context. No, they will not have the details of an individual storm correct. Look at the next week threat for an example. But they can and do have some skill in the sense of the general pattern. Sure, maybe the trough/ridge complex is a few hundred miles west or east, but it doesn't mean they're useless.

The implication with statements like that is that there's no value in looking at them beyond a couple of days. I don't believe that. Sure, you have to allow for the fact that changes can occur, but when you see run after run of a model that shows a zonal pattern that doesn't get pushed back in time and there's agreement across model suites, then yes, there is some value to that.

These blanket statements (or implications) that models are just flat useless out in time are not accurate. I don't mean to lay this on you... but we've seen these statements all winter. It all needs to be kept in the proper context. Otherwise, it comes across as a just because it's not showing what we all want to see.

I do believe after next week's weather the pattern is going to get very boring until the end of January due to the Western ridge relaxing and the Pacific flood gates open for the lower 48.

I'm just hoping we see a -AO and at least a neutral NAO going into the last few days of the month so we can monitor something the first week of February.  I don't trust the CFS forecast for February.

[FallsLake]

Indices are interesting this morning. The AO looks to go negative and the NAO looks to go at least neutral in the LR. BUT the PNA looks to go at least neutral if not negative.  

 

http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/teleconnections.shtml

 

[Cold Rain]

Indices are interesting this morning. The AO looks to go negative and the NAO looks to go at least neutral in the LR. BUT the PNA looks to go at least neutral if not negative.  

 

http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/teleconnections.shtml

Interesting little conundrum. The analog packages and nino climo argue for blocking to start showing up soon. Persistence argues against. The models take the PNA down (at least for a time), but persistence and the +PDO argue for a predominately +PNA.

Also, most all models now take the MJO into Phase 7 and then toward/into the COD and into Larry's favorite quadrant. If that comes to pass, we should start to see a more favorable H5 look show up in the LR.

By the way, in contrast to what I said earlier, MJO forecasts by the models ARE bad, and I wouldn't buy anything they are showing at face value beyond a week or so.

[MichaelJ]

Pretty much anything that showed a seasonal and snowless December with no blocking. And anything that's shown no blocking for January.

This stuff about the models can't get it right past 3 days or 5 days or 7 days or whatever the conversation is at the time has to be set in the right context. No, they will not have the details of an individual storm correct. Look at the next week threat for an example. But they can and do have some skill in the sense of the general pattern. Sure, maybe the trough/ridge complex is a few hundred miles west or east, but it doesn't mean they're useless.

The implication with statements like that is that there's no value in looking at them beyond a couple of days. I don't believe that. Sure, you have to allow for the fact that changes can occur, but when you see run after run of a model that shows a zonal pattern that doesn't get pushed back in time and there's agreement across model suites, then yes, there is some value to that.

These blanket statements (or implications) that models are just flat useless out in time are not accurate. I don't mean to lay this on you... but we've seen these statements all winter. It all needs to be kept in the proper context. Otherwise, it comes across as a just because it's not showing what we all want to see.

And others on here (not laying this all on you here) are constantly throwing up the CFS forecasts like they are accurate most of the time .Now which CFS forecasts are they using? The ones issued 20 days before the month, 15 days, 10 days, 5 days or the ones issued 5-10 days into the actual forecast period? Fact is it is TERRIBLE for the most part and changes almost daily, as do the operational runs of the major models. Personally I think this winter is a bust but cherry picking a model because it shows what you want to think it will be is being a  in the opposite direction. One thing I will hand to Bastardi is he sticks with his forecast (sometimes when he shouldn't) and doesn't change it every day like some do.

[burgertime]

GFS has a 1040 high in the lakes and a 1040 in the midwest with some light precip showing up over NC at hour 96. Probably won't amount to much but might give some a shot at flurries at least. 

[Cold Rain]

And others on here (not laying this all on you here) are constantly throwing up the CFS forecasts like they are accurate most of the time .Now which CFS forecasts are they using? The ones issued 20 days before the month, 15 days, 10 days, 5 days or the ones issued 5-10 days into the actual forecast period? Fact is it is TERRIBLE for the most part and changes almost daily, as do the operational runs of the major models. Personally I think this winter is a bust but cherry picking a model because it shows what you want to think it will be is being a  in the opposite direction. One thing I will hand to Bastardi is he sticks with his forecast (sometimes when he shouldn't) and doesn't change it every day like some do.

I don't entirely agree about the CFS. I've just been posting it for fun, but packbacker did a little study and concluded that going into December, it was generally correct re: what it's forecasted monthly temp anomaly maps were showing as of the last few days of the month. It was something like 9 out of 10 months had been generally correct. But, I have seen it change around a lot, so I don't trust it completely. The maps I posted above were in gest, mostly. I do expect us to have a warm up after next week, but the intensity and duration are in question.

Again, I certainly wasn't trying to call you out. I always appreciate your point of view on things.

[burgertime]

These blanket statements (or implications) that models are just flat useless out in time are not accurate. I don't mean to lay this on you... but we've seen these statements all winter. It all needs to be kept in the proper context. Otherwise, it comes across as a just because it's not showing what we all want to see.

 

For as "inaccurate" as they've been. They have been spot on about one thing. There has not been a consistent cold snowy look in the LR and we still have no real winter storm. I would say for that it's been pretty durn accurate.