ORH_wxman Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said: I always read a range as the lower amount is most likely and the highest amount is max potential. Not sure what is confusing about it tbh. The range is a range...the lowest amount is basically your floor and the highest amount is your ceiling....you can make a caveat and say "isolated amounts up to X inches" if you want to convey a bit more potential....but I don't think anyone has typically forecasted that 3-6" means that 3" is your most likely amount. That means your distribution curve of snowfall is insanely skewed to the left (smaller)...which we know in reality doesn't really happen. Most systems over the long haul will bust high about as often as they bust low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 They're silly software doesnt allow for a 4-7" range but thats what they are telling you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoarfrostHubb Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 4 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said: I always read a range as the lower amount is most likely and the highest amount is max potential. Not sure what is confusing about it tbh. If most likely is 4", but it could go to 6" (or 7" on the next map), call it 3-6" and just make 1 map I understand it fine, but for general public it is confusing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoarfrostHubb Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said: They're silly software doesnt allow for a 4-7" range but thats what they are telling you. This might be it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 And because your in the the 3-6" most will assume they are getting 6".........lol, When it may show 3.4" in the grid for that area Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 4 Seasons Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 I would go 1-3 statewide with this system with iso 4" in the hills of NE CT and call it a day. Most maps from stations seem to be in the 1-3 range. 2-4 is a bit high imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TauntonBlizzard2013 Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 My call is a general 1-2"... maybe a spot 3" amount in ORH. Tough to shake the feeling this may suck...even relative to the already ver low expectations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted January 30, 2017 Author Share Posted January 30, 2017 Hitting squalls hard Snow squall threat. Sheared and stretched impulse through otherwise cyclonic flow yielding weak surface low pressure along an inverted trough from the departing Tuesday low. Cold air advection proceeding through the low- to mid-levels collocated a decent pool of moisture wrapped back along the inverted trough from Tuesdays low, maintained by W flow off the Great Lakes. Steepening lapse rates to H6 within which there is decent W flow around 25 to 35 mph and a fairly moist 0-2 km moist profile with little change in theta-E within the layer. Instability on the order of 25 j/kg and high total-totals indices above 50. No surprise to see the Burlington WRF indicating snow squalls per associated parameter developing around midday and going through afternoon. With these squalls can see white-out conditions with the potential for a quick 1 to 2 inches along with blustery winds and falling temperatures (near-advisory level). Threats highlighted within the hazardous weather outlook as there is confidence of aforementioned impacts. Honestly there is difficulty in nailing down where this will likely occur and will continue to monitor high-res guidance. Evaluating precipitable waters, the better moist profile resides over N/W areas of MA and CT (around 0.25 inches) within the H925-85 layer of better moist convergence / frontogenesis, while less lift and moisture is apparent S/E. Could potentially see some narrow-banding. Keeping consistent with the prior forecaster will keep it likely PoPs N/W. Everywhere else will speculate there is at least a slight chance given synoptic conditions which should at least yield snow showers, potentially near white-out, and coating to 1 inch snow accumulations. Blustery W winds with temperatures around the mid to upper 30s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Qpf with this has been quite limited on all the models so the ceiling is pretty low for higher totals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moneypitmike Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Just now, dryslot said: Qpf with this has been quite limted on all the models so the ceiling is pretty low for higher totals. It's all about the ratios, Jeff.....:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRSno Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Maybe they're betting on ratios and not QPF? Go figure, I'd take 1-3" any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moneypitmike Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 hour ago, Whineminster said: my 76 year old father always talks about Alberta Clippers from the past, says they were real storms back then. Not like these poop clippers we get now. Yup. They were real 'man-clippers' back in those days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 minute ago, dryslot said: Qpf with this has been quite limited on all the models so the ceiling is pretty low for higher totals. They may be a surprise in the IVT though...I could see it happening where someone picks up 8" of fluff. I certainly wouldn't forecast that, but it isn't out of the envelope of realistic outcomes. Coastal Maine might actually have the best chance of a big surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moneypitmike Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 I'll take: Tuesday Night Snow likely...mainly in the evening. Total snow accumulation of 3 to 5 inches possible. Not as cool. Near steady temperature in the lower 20s. East winds around 5 mph. Chance of snow 70 percent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCAPEWEATHERAF Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 I will take 2-5" of snow. They will have to put Cape Cod in the WWA by morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCAPEWEATHERAF Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 GFS already looks 100% better than 12z run. Healthier shortwave and negative tilt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 6 minutes ago, moneypitmike said: It's all about the ratios, Jeff.....:) You can only place so much lipstick on a pig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powderfreak Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 7 minutes ago, dryslot said: Qpf with this has been quite limited on all the models so the ceiling is pretty low for higher totals. We'd go for a 4km NAM type with a general 0.3-0.6" along the Spine. Jack of 6" small dot over Killington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 6 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said: They may be a surprise in the IVT though...I could see it happening where someone picks up 8" of fluff. I certainly wouldn't forecast that, but it isn't out of the envelope of realistic outcomes. Coastal Maine might actually have the best chance of a big surprise. And that is quite possible, Someone pulls .50"+ but that would be in a narrow band if the IVT comes to fruition, But won't know where that ends up until the event is underway if it happens at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCAPEWEATHERAF Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 I would really like the higher amounts being possible right now. This clipper should over perform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCAPEWEATHERAF Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Pretty potent shortwave seen on water vapor imagery over the western Great Lakes region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
78Blizzard Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 19 minutes ago, USCAPEWEATHERAF said: GFS already looks 100% better than 12z run. Healthier shortwave and negative tilt. Looked meh to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTWeatherFreak Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 GFS dry as a bone south of the Pike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTWeatherFreak Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 24 minutes ago, USCAPEWEATHERAF said: GFS already looks 100% better than 12z run. Healthier shortwave and negative tilt. Where are you seeing a negative tilt with this ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 "Not happening Jimmy". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCAPEWEATHERAF Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 minute ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said: "Not happening Jimmy". Yes it is, VVs are highest over South Coast of SNE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 bad gfs run for tom and SB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TauntonBlizzard2013 Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 27 minutes ago, dryslot said: You can only place so much lipstick on a pig Yeah... I mean... the ceiling is pretty low on this.... there is going to be a lot of 1-2" reports. the GFS looks like garbage... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUNNAWAYICEBERG Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 minute ago, USCAPEWEATHERAF said: Yes it is, VVs are highest over South Coast of SNE. Youre torched. 1-2" of snow then its rain bro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USCAPEWEATHERAF Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 How does this system look like garbage, it was an 18z run. NAM is bullish, it is a short range hires guidance also supports the 32KM NAM, convection develops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.