Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,589
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

January 3-4 "Threat"


anthonyweather

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 448
  • Created
  • Last Reply

6z rgem and gfs really cut qpf west of I95. Track pretty much unchanged. Havent been able to get this to track to within 50 miles of Hatteras which is my benchmark for this storm for SE PA big snows. Really hoping the 12k NAM didnt just NAM us and really praying hard that 12z guidance gets back to a wetter look back this way. Even the CRAS went considerably drier. Down to the wire.

 

Eta: removed 3k nam accidentally placed in first sentence 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NAVGEM barely a flake in SE PA. All guidance now coming in line. Right now my best call for extreme SE PA is a 2-5" snowfall Eastern Delco, PHL, far NE Montco, Southern Bucks with amounts dropping rather quickly W of there. I wish I could love the NAM and want to but it is a complete outlier with its superstorm fully phased and closed off 500mb scenario. I would not complain.....72 hours ago this was headed east of Bermuda so to score a few inches back this way is a real win and Im excited for yet ANOTHER snowfall!!! Praying we dont see any last minute changes to the negative.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lmao at 6z NAM. would give me close to a foot. it is either on to something and we will see precip increase across the board at 12z or it is just being the NAM and you can likely cut totals by 3/4th. could go either way at this point. this storm was in Bermuda 2 days ago so who really knows lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Ralph Wiggum said:


Fox is 100% exactly the same. Its like they are too timid to make their own call.

Yeah, I seen that.

Really, I don't think the morning Mets have the authority to make/change the call. Most of them are just personalities. You gotta think they would have to get to work at 1:30-2:00am (which I'm sure they don't) to look at the late GFS and EURO, analyze it, make a call then the graphics. I bet you they don't have a clue about the GFS/EURO till they arrive at work at 3am-ish since broadcast begins at 4-4:30am.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Currently Mount Holly has no watches, warnings or advisories up west of the river. I'm going with 0"-4" IMBY. Whatever happens, there's a model we'll be able to look back on and say, "such & such nailed it from x days out".

Good luck everyone, let the radar hallucinations begin!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't speak for anyone but my self, but since I'm a go big or go home type of guy when it comes to snow, I'd just as soon smoke the eastern cirrus clouds than have to deal with an inch of snow out of this thing. One inch is enough to bring the salt trucks out and make everything even sloppier than it already is. Not to mention having to sweep/shovel because it's going to be too cold afterward for any kind of melting. Now, I'd feel different if we were progged to get a 6 inch plus storm, but we aren't, so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't speak for anyone but my self, but since I'm a go big or go home type of guy when it comes to snow, I'd just as soon smoke the eastern cirrus clouds than have to deal with an inch of snow out of this thing. One inch is enough to bring the salt trucks out and make everything even sloppier than it already is. Not to mention having to sweep/shovel because it's going to be too cold afterward for any kind of melting. Now, I'd feel different if we were progged to get a 6 inch plus storm, but we aren't, so...

Glad it was only the NAM showing the big hit overnight. If the gfs or euro had done that then pulled the rug it would be ugly. I think most here realize the NAM isnt going to verify and is all alone in how it gets to that solution. Most folks in this subforum have been very realistic and smartly set their expectations low for this one.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Iceman said:

give me 3 inches to keep chugging along towards an above average snow year from this, get below zero afterwards and some good wind and the storm will have exceeded expectations. if the nam verified I wouldn't b**ch about another storm screwing me for at least 2 years ;)

Yep, that's what I have in my head. No less than 2"....3" hopefully...3+" a bonus then wind and frigid temps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ralph Wiggum said:

Glad it was only the NAM showing the big hit overnight. If the gfs or euro had done that then pulled the rug it would be ugly. I think most here realize the NAM isnt going to verify and is all alone in how it gets to that solution. Most folks in this subforum have been very realistic and smartly set their expectations low for this one.

 

what? I'm preparing for a meltdown if I see any less than 8 inches after the 6z nam. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

btw very interesting write up out of Greenville Spartanburg NWS

 

"Currently, water vapor imagery shows the amplified system already attempting to acquire a neutral tilt as it moves into western Mississippi. Additional height falls are indicated upstream over the plains and the fear is that an injection of cold and dry air into the back of the trough axis will deepen the feature more sharply and farther west than indicated by the models"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mt hollys 6 am map looks pretty good though I think SNJ is too low. I understand the caution though. I expect a Wwa for se pa (bucks/mont/del/phila counties) and totals to inch up later this afternoon across the board. i think the mt holly guys have done great handling the storm. not overly conservative and not bullish either. have communicated the potential for more and less based on track very effectively. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, The Iceman said:

btw very interesting write up out of Greenville Spartanburg NWS

 

"Currently, water vapor imagery shows the amplified system already attempting to acquire a neutral tilt as it moves into western Mississippi. Additional height falls are indicated upstream over the plains and the fear is that an injection of cold and dry air into the back of the trough axis will deepen the feature more sharply and farther west than indicated by the models"

 

 

they might be onto something. first glance at radar down in Florida and I thought the same.  even the snow line seems a bit further south than expected. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ralph Wiggum said:

Fox future cast radar has cirrus nw of i95, nary a flake lol. She is being extremely cautious and conservative.

After last march's debacle of the news stations hyping widespread 18-24"+ and blizzard conditions that turned to be 3-6" of mostly sleet for most of the area, it's hard to blame her. And that storm had a much better consensus than this one. I really think most stations would rather forecast a period of snow with fairly low totals right now so people will expect accumulating snow and honestly for most places with the start time of the storm will be enough alone for closures. The stations don't mind busting low on this as there is a high risk factor on forecasting significant snowfall outside of the shore. kind of a win-win for them. If it verifies higher they can say well at least we informed our viewers days in advance of accumulating/snow covered roads on Thursday morning but it ended up just being a bit more than forecast, and if it is lower they can say they didn't expect it to be a big deal anyway. Even if guidance fully shifts towards the NAM, I don't think they will drastically increase totals until the event is underway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ralph Wiggum said:
10 minutes ago, Sophisticated Skeptic said:
 
 
they might be onto something. first glance at radar down in Florida and I thought the same.  even the snow line seems a bit further south than expected. 

We want to see the snow line farther n and w actually to let us know the lp is also accordingly n and w.

But wouldn't a further south rain-snow line indicate the faster intrusion of cold air, leading to the trough going neutral-negative earlier as the discussion above mentioned? which I think would bring the associated low further west correct? I think the precip distribution being further n and w is what is important on the low's locations, not the r/s line? Or am I missing something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...