February Medium/Long Range Disco Thread 2

[BTRWx]

3 minutes ago, PivotPoint said:

 

Bob- your graphic (from what I see) shows some promise nao space albeit a little concerning there are no negative anomalies in all of Canada. Doesn't that bother you?

Nut- I see your point... And yes the "proposed" look is a better chance setup. I was simply saying that it doesn't look like buckle up to me... I've seen teleconnections that have lined up (ala 2009-10). Just saying I believe that there may be a slightly better chance we get something, but given persistence, probably not.

What I said is relative.

Listen to Phil.

 

[psuhoffman]

9 minutes ago, BaltimoreWxGuy said:

The Canadian still says "what storm" for the most part. The Euro is out to lunch on this one

I don't put much stock in the GGEM but it in no way supports the GFS here.  Just because they both show no snow does not mean they are in agreement.  The GGEM would lend support to the euro more then the GFS, actually the euro is simply a compromise between the under amped GGEM and the over amped GFS.  I have no idea how this will go, I am not going to pretend to have any special insight here others do not.  Some relatively minor changes will have a huge impact on the location of the boundary this system will run along and pinning that down is difficult.  And I am just as pessimistic as everyone else given the awful year we are having, but the GFS is currently pretty much on its own with no support for this over amped solution.  Doesn't mean its wrong, but I am not going to make up support either.  It has the "we keep getting screwed" index on its side though.  

[BaltimoreWxGuy]

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

I don't put much stock in the GGEM but it in no way supports the GFS here.  Just because they both show no snow does not mean they are in agreement.  The GGEM would lend support to the euro more then the GFS, actually the euro is simply a compromise between the under amped GGEM and the over amped GFS.  I have no idea how this will go, I am not going to pretend to have any special insight here others do not.  Some relatively minor changes will have a huge impact on the location of the boundary this system will run along and pinning that down is difficult.  And I am just as pessimistic as everyone else given the awful year we are having, but the GFS is currently pretty much on its own with no support for this over amped solution.  Doesn't mean its wrong, but I am not going to make up support either.  It has the "we keep getting screwed" index on its side though.  

True. I see the point. Systems that essentially develop right over us usually dont work out well. I know we all know the issues with this set up but I would be shocked if we scored an accumulating snow out of this

[Bob Chill]

6 minutes ago, PivotPoint said:

 

Bob- your graphic (from what I see) shows some promise nao space albeit a little concerning there are no negative anomalies in all of Canada. Doesn't that bother you?

 

Doesn't bother me at all. That was a 5 day mean panel. At the end of the GEFS you can see some real promise. EPO ridge building into AK and a trough traversing the mid latitudes. Once that get's to the east it can't really go north. It's blocked. That could set up the eastern trough underneath the block with the EPO ridge dropping cold continental air into the upper mid west and east. We don't need an arctic connection. Fill all of Canada with above normal heights. Especially far NW and far NE. Storm track can undercut everything in the conus. 

All we need is normal cold and a storm track south of us. It's pretty much that simple. And we might actually get there before climo catches up and it's too late. 

 

[mitchnick]

4 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I don't put much stock in the GGEM but it in no way supports the GFS here.  Just because they both show no snow does not mean they are in agreement.  The GGEM would lend support to the euro more then the GFS, actually the euro is simply a compromise between the under amped GGEM and the over amped GFS.  I have no idea how this will go, I am not going to pretend to have any special insight here others do not.  Some relatively minor changes will have a huge impact on the location of the boundary this system will run along and pinning that down is difficult.  And I am just as pessimistic as everyone else given the awful year we are having, but the GFS is currently pretty much on its own with no support for this over amped solution.  Doesn't mean its wrong, but I am not going to make up support either.  It has the "we keep getting screwed" index on its side though.  

I have no idea either, but my default setting is pure skepticism. It would be nice to have some model agreement that it will snow, that's for sure. Until we get that, I think an expectation of fail is the only way to go.

[MDstorm]

Euro should be telling. 

 

MDstorm

[MD Snow]

Anybody got the Ukie? 

[Bob Chill]

Here's another good image illustrating what me and PSU are thinking. Southern tier pac jet would drive a storm track we haven't seen a single time this winter. If the EPO ridge builds along with ridging over the PAC NW then we would most likely have NW upper level flow with storms traversing the southern third of the conus. This jet panel is only missing one piece (ridging in the pac nw). 

 

[Bob Chill]

4 minutes ago, MD Snow said:

Anybody got the Ukie? 

Ukie looks good enough

[psuhoffman]

10 minutes ago, PivotPoint said:

 

Bob- your graphic (from what I see) shows some promise nao space albeit a little concerning there are no negative anomalies in all of Canada. Doesn't that bother you?

Nut- I see your point... And yes the "proposed" look is a better chance setup. I was simply saying that it doesn't look like buckle up to me... I've seen teleconnections that have lined up (ala 2009-10). Just saying I believe that there may be a slightly better chance we get something, but given persistence, probably not.

We don't actually want a lot of lower heights over Canada for snow.  If you want an arctic outbreak yea but most of our coldest periods didn't include a big snowstorm.  To get a big snow we want higher heights up over Canada and lower heights across the CONUS centered south of us.  Yes we would want some lower heights in southeast Canada near the 50/50 space but that rarely shows up that far out on ensembles.  Think back to Feb 2010.  Even with all that snowcover most of the days were in the upper 30's and 40's.  And that was with 2-3 feet of snow keeping temps down 5-10 degrees.  Without the snow it would have been 40-50 degrees during that period.  Or seasonal.  Our best snow patterns are not the same as our coldest patterns.  When you get a lot of lower heights up in Canada often you will end up with lower pressures going to our north, and the STJ will have trouble because it promotes higher heights in the southern CONUS cutting off the STJ.  We can get really cold when the boundary sinks south but its not the right setup for a lot of snow.  Its workable, but not great.  The big snow h5 look is posted below for reference.  Not much cold up in Canada there...  The long range isnt there yet, euro is getting close though with lower heights to our northeast and lower heighst building across the south, GEFS is headed that way but not there yet, but its closer to that look then we have been all winter for sure.  

[mitchnick]

1 minute ago, Bob Chill said:

Ukie looks good enough

Yesterday's run

[Bob Chill]

 

 

Just now, mitchnick said:

YESTERDAY'S-SAYS INITIALED SUNDAY 2/5

Ukie panel I liked is getting cached from Sunday for whatever reason. I copied the link from today's panel. It's looks decent with a low off VA beach.

Someone else can link it. The new board does this sometimes. Not sure why. 

[psuhoffman]

11 minutes ago, BaltimoreWxGuy said:

True. I see the point. Systems that essentially develop right over us usually dont work out well. I know we all know the issues with this set up but I would be shocked if we scored an accumulating snow out of this

Janaury 22 2014 developed right over us and worked out.  I am NOT saying I expect that again but this can work.  But we have to get lucky.  Its a balancing act between the cold pressing behind the cutter,  and the strength of the system riding that boundary.  Stronger tries to pump ridging in front and press the boundary back north.  We need a perfect combo of the front pressing far enough south, then enough energy to get a good storm but not enough to push the boundary back north ahead of it.  Good luck getting that right from more then 48 hours out.  These type systems are not long lead time tracking things as many have pointed out.  Were getting close enough now to start worrying about it run to run but its still likely to adjust until the final 24 hours.  

[Paleocene]

 

[mitchnick]

1 minute ago, Bob Chill said:

 

 

Ukie panel I liked is getting cached from Sunday for whatever reason. I copied the link from today's panel. It's looks decent with a low off VA beach.

Someone else can link it. The new board does this sometimes. Not sure why. 

http://meteocentre.com/numerical-weather-prediction/map-explorer.php?lang=en&map=na&run=12&mod=ukmet&stn=PNMPR&comp=1&run2=12&mod2=ukmet&stn2=PNMPR&hh2=060&fixhh=1&stn2_type=prog&mode=latest&yyyy=latest&mm=latest&dd=latest&hh=072

Looks way warm though.

Ps. My cap lock was on and I'm actually working.  Sorry about that. 

[kurtstack]

GFS Op has a nice Miller A system at day 10.  Not much support from the ensembles yet, but seems to fit in with the improving pattern we are seeing, fwiw.

[mitchnick]

Just now, mitchnick said:

http://meteocentre.com/numerical-weather-prediction/map-explorer.php?lang=en&map=na&run=12&mod=ukmet&stn=PNMPR&comp=1&run2=12&mod2=ukmet&stn2=PNMPR&hh2=060&fixhh=1&stn2_type=prog&mode=latest&yyyy=latest&mm=latest&dd=latest&hh=072

Looks way warm though.

Ps. My cap lock was on and I'm actually working.  Sorry about that. 

Actually,  temp map isn't out yet for 12z run

[BTRWx]

8 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

We don't actually want a lot of lower heights over Canada for snow.  If you want an arctic outbreak yea but most of our coldest periods didn't include a big snowstorm.  To get a big snow we want higher heights up over Canada and lower heights across the CONUS centered south of us.  Yes we would want some lower heights in southeast Canada near the 50/50 space but that rarely shows up that far out on ensembles.  Think back to Feb 2010.  Even with all that snowcover most of the days were in the upper 30's and 40's.  And that was with 2-3 feet of snow keeping temps down 5-10 degrees.  Without the snow it would have been 40-50 degrees during that period.  Or seasonal.  Our best snow patterns are not the same as our coldest patterns.  When you get a lot of lower heights up in Canada often you will end up with lower pressures going to our north, and the STJ will have trouble because it promotes higher heights in the southern CONUS cutting off the STJ.  We can get really cold when the boundary sinks south but its not the right setup for a lot of snow.  Its workable, but not great.  The big snow h5 look is posted below for reference.  Not much cold up in Canada there...  The long range isnt there yet, euro is getting close though with lower heights to our northeast and lower heighst building across the south, GEFS is headed that way but not there yet, but its closer to that look then we have been all winter for sure.  

These analog maps are becoming game changers for the science!

[PivotPoint]

10 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

Doesn't bother me at all. That was a 5 day mean panel. At the end of the GEFS you can see some real promise. EPO ridge building into AK and a trough traversing the mid latitudes. Once that get's to the east it can't really go north. It's blocked. That could set up the eastern trough underneath the block with the EPO ridge dropping cold continental air into the upper mid west and east. We don't need an arctic connection. Fill all of Canada with above normal heights. Especially far NW and far NE. Storm track can undercut everything in the conus. 

All we need is normal cold and a storm track south of us. It's pretty much that simple. And we might actually get there before climo catches up and it's too late. 

 

I'll take your word for it. 

It's just been a very warm year surface wise. 2m temps have really struggled this winter even under -10/12 850s. Just seems like surface is warm comparatively to other years.

So when I see Canada running running above departures it concerns me. Even though I understand we don't need artic cold to get a storm... All we need is for the stupid Bermuda high to flex its muscles just slightly and that "great" look for us has temp/boundry issues. I feel like we need solid "cold" margins here where we live and with very marginal cold to our north, everything can (and more times then not) will go wrong for us temp wise imho.

i just really don't buy a good pattern delivering this year.. Even though you're right that things shape up better at the moment

[mitchnick]

This Ukie map looks pretty darn good. Temps should cool a bit from prior runs I would think.

http://meteocentre.com/numerical-weather-prediction/map-explorer.php?mod=ukmet&run=12&stn=PNM&hh=072&map=na&stn2=PNM&run2=00&mod2=ukmet&hh2=072&comp=1&fixhh=1&lang=en&yyyy=latest&mm=latest&dd=latest&mode=latest&stn2_type=prog&date_type=dateo

[PivotPoint]

17 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

We don't actually want a lot of lower heights over Canada for snow.  If you want an arctic outbreak yea but most of our coldest periods didn't include a big snowstorm.  To get a big snow we want higher heights up over Canada and lower heights across the CONUS centered south of us.  Yes we would want some lower heights in southeast Canada near the 50/50 space but that rarely shows up that far out on ensembles.  Think back to Feb 2010.  Even with all that snowcover most of the days were in the upper 30's and 40's.  And that was with 2-3 feet of snow keeping temps down 5-10 degrees.  Without the snow it would have been 40-50 degrees during that period.  Or seasonal.  Our best snow patterns are not the same as our coldest patterns.  When you get a lot of lower heights up in Canada often you will end up with lower pressures going to our north, and the STJ will have trouble because it promotes higher heights in the southern CONUS cutting off the STJ.  We can get really cold when the boundary sinks south but its not the right setup for a lot of snow.  Its workable, but not great.  The big snow h5 look is posted below for reference.  Not much cold up in Canada there...  The long range isnt there yet, euro is getting close though with lower heights to our northeast and lower heighst building across the south, GEFS is headed that way but not there yet, but its closer to that look then we have been all winter for sure.  

Got it. I see what your saying better now. I always thought  that lower heights were pinned underneath Greenland for our bigger storms (high heights over and just under Greenland then lower heights middle of Canada).

Didn't  realize they were actually centered down south

[Bob Chill]

1 minute ago, PivotPoint said:

Got it. I see what your saying better now. I always thought  that lower heights were pinned underneath Greenland for our bigger storms (high heights over and just under Greenland then lower heights middle of Canada).

Didn't  realize they were actually centered down south

This is obviously nothing to think is real but you can see at the end of the GFS run what we're talking about. Ridge in the NW, trough in the east, energy in the SW undercutting everything, and a fresh cold high dropping out of Canada. This is exactly what the potential a pattern me and PSU are describing can be.  Cold NW upper level flow, confluence as the closed upper level low in Canada progresses east, and a shortwave coming up from the SW. 

 

 

 

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

10 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

This is obviously nothing to think is real but you can see at the end of the GFS run what we're talking about. Ridge in the NW, trough in the east, energy in the SW undercutting everything, and a fresh cold high dropping out of Canada. This is exactly what the potential a pattern me and PSU are describing can be.  Cold NW upper level flow, confluence as the closed upper level low in Canada progresses east, and a shortwave coming up from the SW. 

 

 

 

 

Great description!  As you said, one cannot take the details seriously yet (it being 384 hours out!), but something like that would "fit" into the overall pattern scheme you and PSU have been talking about.  So it's not out of nowhere.  I think I see what you're talking about if you sort of progress that forward in time (I found it best to look at the North American sector to see everything).  The 500 mb trough/low in southeast Canada is kind of rotating toward the 50/50 region, there's that nice 1039 high at the surface pressing in from the upper midwest, and the developing low in TX/OK.  The ridging out west is pushing up near the Pole, and though it is nothing spectacular, there are indications of higher heights building toward GL.  Will it happen and give us something out this way?  Who knows...but the possibility is there and is not totally out in left field.

[Bob Chill]

3 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Is it better than last night?

A lot better. The 0z run was warm with the low tracking through the WV panhandle. 

[WinterWxLuvr]

Why has nobody posted the gefs members?

What the hell is going on here?

[Bob Chill]

10 minutes ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

Why has nobody posted the gefs members?

What the hell is going on here?

Cuz they suck. lol. Very supportive of the op but that is pretty normal for the GEFS. They don't stray from the op much inside of 3-4 days. 

[NorthArlington101]

14 minutes ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

Why has nobody posted the gefs members?

What the hell is going on here?

If you're dying to know...

This is a little generous too, since this includes the snow showers the day after that don't really count IMO. 

If I can't share this image lemme know and I'll take it down.

[snowmagnet]

5 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

Cuz they suck. lol. Very supportive of the op but that is pretty normal for the GEFS. They don't stray from the op much inside of 3-4 days. 

Holding out hope that the Euro will keep us in the game. 

[WinterWxLuvr]

Thanks guys.

E3 is a curiosity 

[psuhoffman]

44 minutes ago, PivotPoint said:

I'll take your word for it. 

It's just been a very warm year surface wise. 2m temps have really struggled this winter even under -10/12 850s. Just seems like surface is warm comparatively to other years.

So when I see Canada running running above departures it concerns me. Even though I understand we don't need artic cold to get a storm... All we need is for the stupid Bermuda high to flex its muscles just slightly and that "great" look for us has temp/boundry issues. I feel like we need solid "cold" margins here where we live and with very marginal cold to our north, everything can (and more times then not) will go wrong for us temp wise imho.

i just really don't buy a good pattern delivering this year.. Even though you're right that things shape up better at the moment

Think of it this way, the average high temperature in February for Churchill Canada on the west shore of Hudson Bay is -6 F.  So lets say they are absolutely torching at 15 degrees above normal with a high of 9 degrees.  Balmy right.  So lets take that air down into our area and assume it warms about 30 degrees on the way.  So here were talking a high of 39 degrees about on a nice sunny day with no snowcover.  But the dp is probably around 24 and so get a storm to track under us and suddenly its 30 degrees and snowing.  Then the next day its sunny and mid 30's with the snowcover keeping temps down a bit.  But still...we don't need Canada to be an ice box by their standards to get cold enough to snow here.