Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

January Medium/Long Range Discussion


WinterWxLuvr

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Bob Chill said:

18z gefs looked pretty good though d9. Still a lot of spread on the various waves but overall the run increased the chances of one of them working out in some fashion 

I think because we had a week of good runs and positive trends when things took a step backwards yesterday many jumped to "it's not gonna snow" mode.  Yea it sucked to see a pretty good thread become ambiguous but overall we still have a good solid period with cold and our chances to get on the board at least are still relatively good.  And while at first the trend towards more western ridge and eastern trough was a problem as it blew up the west to east waa gradient type threat we had, now it's trended so far in that direction it may open up the possibility of a system to have space to amplify in the eastern trough  if the trend continues that way.  It's getting close.  I still liked the simpler look of before just to get us on the board but if something pops up the coast like the para gfs I'll gladly eat those words  

18z was the opposite of 12z. Lower mean overall but a better signal for a storm. The mean dropped about an inch but that's because it totally lost the 3rd threat. So the 4" are from the first two threats vs 5" spead over 16 days. I don't think it's unrelated either. Seems members that have a stronger second wave then have little threat from the next. Makes sense as a more amplified wave day 7-8 would slow things down in the pattern, prevent something from surviving a trip east quickly behind it, and so by the time anything else gets close we have warmed. More amplification of the trough probably also has the counter effect of more ridging when it moves out. But it's a net positive because a better day 5-10 signal trumps a bunch of low prob threats over 16 days imo. 

Long long range I think it's now time to admit we're facing an unfavorable period likely in the day 12-16 and maybe a bit longer. I do not think it's long lived or a total no hope pattern but we've been bleeding the wrong way for days now in that period and I think the forecast of the mjo to emerge from the COD into some unfavorable phases in about a week might be the reason.  

Thats a double edged sword though as if that happens it also looks headed towards better phases quickly if it holds together.  If it doesn't then the negative impacts fade anyways. Either way I don't see that as a long term problem.   There is also enough ridging showing up in the nao region and signs the pna could be headed the right way to believe something could cut through during the period and it might not necessarily be wall to wall crap.  But I do think after about a solid week of cold and several threats if any of these shorts can do something, we get a worse look for awhile. 

If I had to guess I think it's likely by Jan 20 or soon after we get a better look again. It's really like reading the tea leaves that far but what evidence there is argues for it. The natural progression of what we are seeing. The transient nature of patterns so far. The mjo possibly headed towards phase 8/1 by then. The correlation between west qbo and cold enso and more blocking later in winter. The hints at pna help plus just the fact it's unlikely the hostile look lasts that much longer. Law of averages. 

With some luck we score a good hit early Jan. Then the relax is one week and not that bad. Maybe even get a sloppy mix event in there if we time a system up with a transient high. Then we head back into a good window during our max climo late Jan into feb. if so this could become a fairly decent winter. If unlucky this early January pattern comes and goes with nada, the relax drags 10-14 days and we head into late January still sitting on a goose egg, people get edgy and desperate , at even if we get a good pattern after we're probably looking at a bad winter overall just playing averages at that point. Both options are still equally on the table imo right now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
25 minutes ago, kurtstack said:

7 of the gfs ensemble members provide 4+" for dca through 192 hours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let's not forget the discrepancies of the para. (in a good way!) Am I the only one who really likes the output trends from this model?! The previous gfs has been so inconsistent that the differences compared to the para to me shows good promise.

12z para:

gfs_namer_192_850_temp_mslp_precip.gif

12z op...

gfs_namer_192_850_temp_mslp_precip.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's not forget the discrepancies of the para. (in a good way!) Am I the only one who really likes the output trends from this model?! The previous gfs has been so inconsistent that the differences compared to the para to me shows good promise.

12z para:

gfs_namer_192_850_temp_mslp_precip.gif&key=615971cf32edffa17308de4b3cd8c7516884d1341cf7275c031d0633e328e6fa

12z op...

gfs_namer_192_850_temp_mslp_precip.gif&key=ed4081face0b91171d8cbab440eeb6d456d7b70145b6d9fad9ab8cfeb9809230


that 1052 high to the north of the storm is interesting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

Let's not forget the discrepancies of the para. (in a good way!) Am I the only one who really likes the output trends from this model?! The previous gfs has been so inconsistent that the differences compared to the para to me shows good promise.

12z para:

gfs_namer_192_850_temp_mslp_precip.gif

12z op...

gfs_namer_192_850_temp_mslp_precip.gif

I haven't noticed the para being particularly accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

Lately I haven't seen any op very accurate at that time range.  That's pretty far out there.

Besides the nice arctic High placement we need, the para has a system phased right over us while the op has the two waves separated with us in between, so the chances are one of these scenarios would verify better I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NorthArlington101 said:

 


I'm more excited that the GEFS significantly improved from 12z to 18z... from 5 members having any snow in a 6 day period to 11, some with good hits.

Add an extra day and you get 7 or so solid area wide hits... friendly trends.

Also the gefs mean looks slightly better for temps for the region than its op.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

On the 0z GFS, wave out west is stronger vs 18z so far.  Not sure of downstream implications yet

It can't be bad. I think that's the actual threat btw. The day 4-5 thing is running into way too much hostile flow behind the bombing system in the maritime to have a chance. Sometimes I like seeing the change we need in the short term even if the gfs loses its way later on in the run. Get something to eject out of the Rockies with enough energy while it's still cold and we have a chance. The table is set so to speak. Then we just see what happens. If everything is stuck out west we have no chance. I see the changes as good even if they don't lead to digital snow this run. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...