Holidays 2017-18 Mid-Long Range Disco 2

[Cobalt]

1 minute ago, mitchnick said:

Surprisingly better than I thought it would be. 

Yup. Surprisingly some snowy solutions, and even the majority show snow. If you want to be even more optimistic, double all of the low end snowfalls due to 20:1 ratios since we would be on the far North side and it would be snowing near 20 degrees. Of course that may be pushing it still.

[Chris78]

1 minute ago, mitchnick said:

Surprisingly better than I thought it would be. 

Quite inspiring actually. Looks like There's decent agreement from the members for a light to moderate event.

[Cobalt]

Maybe even better news comes when looking at individual members

I spot 2 rain solutions, which is good since it means that the push north could happen, and there's 1 more rain solution just 12 hours later. This could mean that the GFS and Euro only have room North to move. I don't know, I found it inspiring to see some rain solutions

[mitchnick]

One thing I've noticed over years, not all the time but enough for me to notice, is that 10 day storms have a tendency to reappear after disappearing for a while. The 12/9 storm basically did that. I remain relatively bullish for the end of the week for an accumulating event. Something along the lines of 3-6" is what I'm thinking. 

[Cobalt]

6 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

One thing I've noticed over years, not all the time but enough for me to notice, is that 10 day storms have a tendency to reappear after disappearing for a while. The 12/9 storm basically did that. I remain relatively bullish for the end of the week for an accumulating event. Something along the lines of 3-6" is what I'm thinking. 

I think this year will have many similarities to 13/14 when it comes to snowfall. Many reverse busts. I'll pull it up soon, but I remember looking through that year's threads, and there were enough reverse busts that a list was made where there was a poll asking people which reverse bust was the best. I also think we'll have all types of wintry events just like that year. Powdery high ratio events (maybe next Friday?), maybe 1 or 2 heavy wet snow events in Feb or March, and an ice event or 2.

[Jebman]

NEVER, ever give up. Its gonna snow.

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

There was some question of when we last had 2 weeks straight of BN temps in the DC area.  Not sure if it was mentioned, but Feb. 2015 came close (looking just at DCA, on LWX's climate summary).  Nearly every day was below normal to way below normal for about the last 20 days of the month.  I saw a day with a zero (right on average) and +3 during that time frame to "interrupt" an otherwise straight-up below the mean period and bitterly cold month in general.  First 8 days had some warm days mixed with cooler ones.  Feb. 2007 I think was similar, but don't have the dailies to check...the monthly departure for both Feb. 2007 and 2015 was on the order of -8.5 (with 2015 being a bit colder than 2007).

[psuhoffman]

17/21 gefs have at least 5" at Dca for the period. And a fair number are way over that. Only a couple manage to avoid significant snow from this pattern. That's the best news. 

[nj2va]

3 hours ago, Bob Chill said:

Looks like Bigfoot stomped on all our snow. Drought too!

 

Lol.  What’s interesting is that some of the ensemble precip maps showed that drier (relatively) stamp over our area even when we were getting hit well.  It made me a bit nervous as I thought it was showing the possibility of us getting stuck between two streams.  Lots of chances over the next 10 days though.  

[Cobalt]

2 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

17/21 gefs have at least 5" at Dca for the period. And a fair number are way over that. Only a couple manage to avoid significant snow from this pattern. That's the best news. 

Even better, 16/20 members show 2" of snow or more within 7 days of now, A.K.A 1 event

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

4 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

17/21 gefs have at least 5" at Dca for the period. And a fair number are way over that. Only a couple manage to avoid significant snow from this pattern. That's the best news. 

Not bad news at all given what we saw today in general.  I wonder if they're keying on different short waves (timing) to accomplish that...or if that's the effect of a couple or three total.

[Cobalt]

NAVGEM looks better and more juiced up

[RichmondTarHeel]

Maybe banter, but I have a feeling the 0z suite is going be very good for us. A Christmas miracle, if you will. 

 

This eggnog is delicious by the way. 

[psuhoffman]

13 minutes ago, Always in Zugzwang said:

Not bad news at all given what we saw today in general.  I wonder if they're keying on different short waves (timing) to accomplish that...or if that's the effect of a couple or three total.

Yea they are all over the place on details all they agree on is it should snow sometime in the next 2 weeks. 

[Eskimo Joe]

2 hours ago, real said:

What model is this?

I'm not sure what Tony Pann is sharing, but I'd take what he says with a grain of salt.  The WBAL on air personalities are pretty meh.

[Ralph Wiggum]

NAVGEM looks better and more juiced up

This has the look of one of those systems that develops off the SE Coast, moves towards Hatteras, and from there either goes progressive OTS or comes NNE up the coast. You can see looking at the ens mslp plots and mix of ops that they are slowly going to come around to that sort of scenario.

[Cobalt]

2 minutes ago, Ralph Wiggum said:

20 minutes ago, Cobalt said:

NAVGEM looks better and more juiced up

This has the look of one of those systems that develops off the SE Coast, moves towards Hatteras, and from there either goes progressive OTS or comes NNE up the coast. You can see looking at the ens mslp plots and mix of ops that they are slowly going to come around to that sort of scenario.

And I'm assuming those that go NNE are the best case scenario as of now?

[Ralph Wiggum]

Maybe banter, but I have a feeling the 0z suite is going be very good for us. A Christmas miracle, if you will. 
 
This eggnog is delicious by the way. 

Im not sure about 0z tonight but I will wager by 12z Tuesday the mid atlantic will be staring at a solidly trending SECS (maybe MECS?) on majority of guidance for late week/weekend. That's my story and Im sticking to it.

[Cobalt]

Just now, Ralph Wiggum said:

13 minutes ago, NovaTarHeel said:

Maybe banter, but I have a feeling the 0z suite is going be very good for us. A Christmas miracle, if you will. 
 
This eggnog is delicious by the way. 

Im not sure about 0z tonight but I will wager by 12z Tuesday the mid atlantic will be staring at a solidly trending SECS (maybe MECS?) on majority of guidance for late week/weekend. That's my story and Im sticking to it.

I agree with you. We're still at the point where most models have no idea about the storm (and only know that there will be a storm), maybe a fluke run or 2 that show MECS for DC, and then we will get a gradual trend NW

[Ralph Wiggum]

And I'm assuming those that go NNE are the best case scenario as of now?

Of course.... NNE or due N hugging/tucked. There are clusters on GEFS/GEPS that do just that which werent there as much in prior runs.

[MN Transplant]

1 hour ago, dallen7908 said:

 

Based on the header Deep Thunder may be a configuration of the Model for Prediction Across Scales (MPAS) that is run at 15 km horizontal resolution in the region of interest (coarser resolution elsewhere) and uses the YSU PBL parameterization, WSM6 microphysics, RRTMG radiation, and Kain-Fritsch convective parameterization.  Google MPAS for more information. 

 

Following up on this, here is the CWG article on IBM entering the forecasting arena from earlier this year:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/06/22/ibm-just-threw-its-hat-into-the-weather-modelling-ring/?utm_term=.75034346d4ce

 

MPAS (NCAR) was fighting it out with FV3 (GFDL) to become the next-generation GFS model.  FV3 "won", but it'll be determined whether it was the right choice.  The MPAS folks then teamed up with IBM.  There is also a pretty good chance that MPAS will become the model that the university community uses (like the WRF is now).

[yoda]

Since we're waiting for the big guns of the 00z model suite, looking at the 00z NAM at h5 at 84 hours it looks meh to me, yes?

[BristowWx]

4 minutes ago, yoda said:

Since we're waiting for the big guns of the 00z model suite, looking at the 00z NAM at h5 at 84 hours it looks meh to me, yes?

Yes quite meh

[Buddy1987]

4 minutes ago, yoda said:

Since we're waiting for the big guns of the 00z model suite, looking at the 00z NAM at h5 at 84 hours it looks meh to me, yes?

Funny I thought the same exact thing and was somewhat chastised in the southeast forum for it. I thought precip panels comparing it to the gfs looked meager and it basically wasn’t going to amplify at all.

[mitchnick]

5 minutes ago, yoda said:

Since we're waiting for the big guns of the 00z model suite, looking at the 00z NAM at h5 at 84 hours it looks meh to me, yes?

500mb looks similar to 18z gfs on quick glance

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

5 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

500mb looks similar to 18z gfs on quick glance

Somehow, I am not shocked...

[Bob Chill]

1 hour ago, mitchnick said:

One thing I've noticed over years, not all the time but enough for me to notice, is that 10 day storms have a tendency to reappear after disappearing for a while. The 12/9 storm basically did that. I remain relatively bullish for the end of the week for an accumulating event. Something along the lines of 3-6" is what I'm thinking. 

I agree. It happens enough to not be a coincidence. The tricky part is when a storm reappears it can be a significantly different way of getting there than the one that vanished. This one didn't really vanish though. It's been around in some form or another on various models pretty much daily. An usually high number of significant changes along the way too. Kind of annoying honeslty.

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

1 minute ago, Bob Chill said:

I agree. It happens enough to not be a coincidence. The tricky part is when a storm reappears it can be a significantly different way of getting there than the one that vanished. This one didn't really vanish though. It's been around in some form or another on various models pretty much daily. An usually high number of significant changes along the way too. Kind of annoying honeslty.

Yes, indeed.  I believe sometime earlier you mentioned that this sort of morphed from a southern stream/overrunning kind of situation into more northern stream dominant...not exactly the best way to morph for our purposes!  Unfortunately, this is not the same kind of "easy" (relatively) setup like, say, Jan. 2016 when we knew something major was coming, it was just the precise details that weren't 100% known.  As far as I recall, that storm and some other similar ones didn't just "disappear" on the GFS or get sheared into oblivion for at least awhile.  It stuck around.  But as I said, different set-up for those than the current situation.

[psuhoffman]

6 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

I agree. It happens enough to not be a coincidence. The tricky part is when a storm reappears it can be a significantly different way of getting there than the one that vanished. This one didn't really vanish though. It's been around in some form or another on various models pretty much daily. An usually high number of significant changes along the way too. Kind of annoying honeslty.

There used to be theories about that. If perhaps the phenomenon has to do with timing when the vorts that matter most cross data sparse regions. It could just be perception bias since we don't notice when stuff disappears or re appears in the uber long range because it's all fantasy and once into the short range busts like that become more rare. So if something was going to do a temporary disappearing act thats the time it would be noticed most. 

[mitchnick]

7 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

I agree. It happens enough to not be a coincidence. The tricky part is when a storm reappears it can be a significantly different way of getting there than the one that vanished. This one didn't really vanish though. It's been around in some form or another on various models pretty much daily. An usually high number of significant changes along the way too. Kind of annoying honeslty.

Agree. It's like they sniff out the potential correctly,  get bogged down/confused by the chaos,  then come to a more accurate forecast that happens to prove their original identification of the threat potential as being accurate,  albeit imprecise.