Dec 24-25 Snowstorm part 2

[jhamps10]

Continue....

[snowstormcanuck]

GL Hamps. I know you're jonesing for a big one.

Apparently the EURO produces 0.1-0.25" here in Toronto. That really blows my mind. If it was a coastal hugger I could see it but not with a track over/east of Long Island. Truly a massive CCB/Deformation zone precip. shield advertised on the EURO.

[ArmyGreens]

I suppose all I can look forward to is an expansive precip shield for a few flakes.

[wxdudemike]

I suppose all I can look forward to is an expansive precip shield for a few flakes.

That's no way to act while on the bus!! guess I'll join too...

[dilly84]

Considering how poorly the models have been doing with system in the Midwest so far, there's still some hope. The system that produced the >50 mph winds on December 11-12 was woefully underforecast until 12-24 hours before. Until that time it looked like a system that would be best described as unremarkable.

I agree, I guess the thing we need to realize is where every model had this storm 4 days ago. All had it north, now all have it south, guess it could go north again. Who knows, I agree with ILN though I'd say Thursday we'll know 100%

[Chagrin Falls]

I agree, I guess the thing we need to realize is where every model had this storm 4 days ago. All had it north, now all have it south, guess it could go north again. Who knows, I agree with ILN though I'd say Thursday we'll know 100%

The models have not done poorly with this storm. The models you look at have done poorly with this storm.

Dilly 84, really?

On December 19th I said:

I'm kind of skeptical about the Christmas time event as well. Per the ECMWF ensembles which seem fairly confident, the flow looks fairly zonal and not conducive to cyclogenisis, the low develops Christmas eve in the southern plains but it doesn't deepen much at all, about 1013 hPa or so. It seems to track south and redevelop as a coastal storm. That energy transfer tends to leave Ohio fairly dry...certainly doesn't look like a whopper of a storm at this point in time.

The upper-air flow seems a bit more likely a coastal storm will develop this weekend, but for the Midwest we just aren't in a pattern that would produce a big snowstorm. Honestly, I think the entire upper-air flow around the Northern Hemisphere would have to reshuffle itself before we need to start talking about big storms.

With the polar vortex where it is I think we are going to stay colder and drier than normal.

And you responded:

I can't throw out the fact of model conensus for it. Never seen so much agreement this far out.

The great thing about the science of meteorology is that verification is so easy and telling, isn't it? However, verification doesn't necessarily fill the psychological need of validation. And thus, no wonder Accu-Wx makes so much money, even from people that know quite a bit about the weather.

[A-L-E-K]

The models have not done poorly with this storm. The models you look at have done poorly with this storm.

Dilly 84, really?

On December 19th I said:

I'm kind of skeptical about the Christmas time event as well. Per the ECMWF ensembles which seem fairly confident, the flow looks fairly zonal and not conducive to cyclogenisis, the low develops Christmas eve in the southern plains but it doesn't deepen much at all, about 1013 hPa or so. It seems to track south and redevelop as a coastal storm. That energy transfer tends to leave Ohio fairly dry...certainly doesn't look like a whopper of a storm at this point in time.

The upper-air flow seems a bit more likely a coastal storm will develop this weekend, but for the Midwest we just aren't in a pattern that would produce a big snowstorm. Honestly, I think the entire upper-air flow around the Northern Hemisphere would have to reshuffle itself before we need to start talking about big storms.

With the polar vortex where it is I think we are going to stay colder and drier than normal.

And you responded:

I can't throw out the fact of model conensus for it. Never seen so much agreement this far out.

The great thing about the science of meteorology is that verification is so easy and telling, isn't it? However, verification doesn't necessarily fill the psychological need of validation. And thus, no wonder Accu-Wx makes so much money, even from people that know quite a bit about the weather.

FTW

[michsnowfreak]

I agree, I guess the thing we need to realize is where every model had this storm 4 days ago. All had it north, now all have it south, guess it could go north again. Who knows, I agree with ILN though I'd say Thursday we'll know 100%

The models flop around like crazy, Ive seen it with every single storm this season. Thursday (once system has been sampled) will have a much better idea, but 100%? No way.

[dilly84]

The models have not done poorly with this storm. The models you look at have done poorly with this storm.

Dilly 84, really?

On December 19th I said:

I'm kind of skeptical about the Christmas time event as well. Per the ECMWF ensembles which seem fairly confident, the flow looks fairly zonal and not conducive to cyclogenisis, the low develops Christmas eve in the southern plains but it doesn't deepen much at all, about 1013 hPa or so. It seems to track south and redevelop as a coastal storm. That energy transfer tends to leave Ohio fairly dry...certainly doesn't look like a whopper of a storm at this point in time.

The upper-air flow seems a bit more likely a coastal storm will develop this weekend, but for the Midwest we just aren't in a pattern that would produce a big snowstorm. Honestly, I think the entire upper-air flow around the Northern Hemisphere would have to reshuffle itself before we need to start talking about big storms.

With the polar vortex where it is I think we are going to stay colder and drier than normal.

And you responded:

I can't throw out the fact of model conensus for it. Never seen so much agreement this far out.

The great thing about the science of meteorology is that verification is so easy and telling, isn't it? However, verification doesn't necessarily fill the psychological need of validation. And thus, no wonder Accu-Wx makes so much money, even from people that know quite a bit about the weather.

well you are one of few people who thinks the models have done good with this storm, I believe when I made my statement every model still had a more northern track. Which was the first time for winter storms this year they all had agreement that far out. Even the NWS was issuing 60% pops over a week out. So like I said you're one the only people who thinks models have done good with this system. And I'd bet money the models flop again, care to wager since they've been so good?

[buckeye]

The models have not done poorly with this storm. The models you look at have done poorly with this storm.

really? I wonder what prompted ILN to issue a HWO for the possibility of a major xmas winter storm late last week, if not the models? Surely they don't care about profit from hype

also, what exactly do you mean by 'the models that you look at". Do you have access to some other official pro-met models only?

[dilly84]

really? I wonder what prompted ILN to issue a HWO for the possibility of a major xmas winter storm late last week, if not the models? Surely they don't care about profit from hype

AMEN. Basically what I said above you lol.

[JayPSU]

really? I wonder what prompted ILN to issue a HWO for the possibility of a major xmas winter storm late last week, if not the models? Surely they don't care about profit from hype

also, what exactly do you mean by 'the models that you look at". Do you have access to some other official pro-met models only?

Come on, buckeye, you're not good enough to see those extra special models that chagrin sees, and even if you were, you wouldn't understand them.

[dilly84]

Looks like the Low is further north at 42 compared to the 12z

EDIT: Probably not though since I am just a stupid idiot. And my name is all bright and red.

[buckeye]

Come on, buckeye, you're not good enough to see those extra special models that chagrin sees, and even if you were, you wouldn't understand them.

what pisses me off is apparently alek gets them too...

FTW

[Chagrin Falls]

really? I wonder what prompted ILN to issue a HWO for the possibility of a major xmas winter storm late last week, if not the models? Surely they don't care about profit from hype

also, what exactly do you mean by 'the models that you look at". Do you have access to some other official pro-met models only?

"The models" are a psychological abstraction. Including ensemble members, there are hundreds if not thousands of deterministic model outputs per day. Saying "model A said this" or "model B said that" is acceptable, but saying "the models" is nothing more than a psychological abstraction that validates one's desires. It has no basis in sound science.

It would be like saying "the economists say this" or "the politicans say that".

http://www.ecmwf.int/products/forecasts/d/charts/medium/eps/ensm/essential!MSLP!North%20America!0!pop!od!enfo!plot_ensm_essential!2010110112!!/

[jhamps10]

Looks like the Low is further north at 42 compared to the 12z

EDIT: Probably not though since I am just a stupid idiot. And my name is all bright and red.

actually i think it is north a bit..

[csnavywx]

When most people say "the models" around here, we are referring to the big 3 (GFS, ECM, GEM). Some take it include the NAM, but frankly the NAM is of limited use.

[dilly84]

When most people say "the models" around here, we are referring to the big 3 (GFS, ECM, GEM). Some take it include the NAM, but frankly the NAM is of limited use.

I look at GFS, EURO, UKIE, GEM, NAM, NOGAPS, JMA, SREF etc.. So whaen I personally say "models" I am not referring to 3 models./

[dilly84]

actually i think it is north a bit..

it's catching back up though lol

[buckeye]

"The models" are a psychological abstraction. Including ensemble members, there are hundreds if not thousands of deterministic model outputs per day. Saying "model A said this" or "model B said that" is acceptable, but saying "the models" is nothing more than a psychological abstraction that validates one's desires. It has no basis in sound science.

It would be like saying "the economists say this" or "the politicans say that".

http://www.ecmwf.int...l!2010110112!!/

is this serious? we gonna split hairs because dilly or others aren't listing the specific models? Im sure i could find many posts here in which posters, including mets, have used the term "the models"....followed by a description of what they show.

[buckeye]

sarcasm lost....

but nice try

[dilly84]

is this serious? we gonna split hairs because dilly or others aren't listing the specific models? Im sure i could find many posts here in which posters, including mets, have used the term "the models"....followed by a description of what they show.

Wish I had the messages I sent him saved from the big MW storm last week. I was asking his opinion. He uses the EURO religiously and I believe he used the term "the other models" in there somewhere, but unfortunately I don't have them saved.

Wait let me rephrase: His Model of choice is the ECMWF. God forbid I use the name euro, need to be technical now.

[jhamps10]

looks like the GFS went not quite as weak but still weak, and a tick north...

[JoMo]

looks like the GFS went not quite as weak but still weak, and a tick north...

Yeah, something is wrong with that depiction. Really weakens the low a lot and phases it faster. It would give me snow though.

[Stevo6899]

Looking at hour 48 of the 18z GFS, you would think it would move at worst due east. Looks pretty weak and moves SE. I know its bombing out on the EC because of phasing but I dont why storms wait until they hit the coast to explode. Why dont we see storms bombing or strenghtening out in the ohio valley without the need of phasing of other energies or features.

[csnavywx]

Yeah, I think it's pretty clear that the scenario has shifted away from one where the confluent zone would be further east and give the wave plenty of time to amplify before heading east. At first, the height fields to the north were very weak and disorganized in association with the block breaking down, but now it appears more energy is going to be left behind under the disintegrating block. In addition, the southern s/w is now progged to be weaker. None of this bodes well for anybody north of I-80, or in some cases even I-70.

[JayPSU]

None of this bodes well for anybody north of I-80, or in some cases even I-70.

The writing is definitely on the wall.

[Powerball]

There's one bright side to all of this, it's the first storm this season where we don't have to say "congrats MSP!!!"

[csnavywx]

There's one bright side to all of this, it's the first storm this season where we don't have to say "congrats MSP!!!"

Problem is, I'm not seeing a good pattern after this storm goes through. No blocking = substantial warm up on the way for most, especially if the GoA trough sticks around in this Nina.

[hawkeye_wx]

The NAM and GFS are still hanging on to a light/moderate snow for parts of Iowa(esp. nw to central) as a piece of energy dives southeast. However, any further south shift will leave me with little more than light snow/flurries.