March 12th - 13th Scraper

[USCG RS]

That's all well and good, but we're running out of time.  A near miss is still a miss.  Isn't it at all concerning that the only runs that seem to show hits are the "off runs" at 6z and 18z?

I posted this on the other forum a few days ago.

When people make the time argument, what they really mean is that the models have truly sampled everything, mainly the players on the field (how they are behaving), and should in theory be taking the mystery out of the forecast. While, at times, this argument stands to reason, many times it also does not. 

As has been said by others, models have to put out a projection, period. Good, bad or indifferent, they will always make a prediction. Just because it does not look conducive for a storm on models does not mean it will not happen, and visa versa. 

Getting back to the time argument.. Yes, with more straight forward situations, the closer we are to an event, the more accurate the models should be and the less drastic the shifts should be. However, we also need to use pattern recognition and the evolution of the atmosphere. We are still in a dynamic pattern with blocking. Models do not have a good grasp on blocking because the physics of blocking are much more about nuance and ever so slightly shifts in atmospheric conditions. Hence, here, chaos theory can take effect (one error multiplies leads to choas - to paraphrase rather lossoely) and models can still have drastic swings, even as we close in on what should be a models accurate range. 

With regards to this storm, the true answer is at h5. The capture of this storm is a matter of hours and the n/s and s/s both attest to this. We speed one or the other up and the counterpart throttles back by an Hr or two and we have a much cleaner phase in our latitude. Likewise, the NAO is progressings towards neutral, however we still have some blocking and although indicies may show one thing, when the change is rapid, the atmosphere still needs time to adjust to that factor. In other words, though the NAO may be technically neutral, the atmosphere will still need a couple of days to adjust and therefore the atmosphere will still act to slow down the storm.

[EasternLI]

Nam really tries for the phase early. Holy crap if we somehow get that accomplished. 

[NYCGreg]

9 minutes ago, USCG RS said:

I posted this on the other forum a few days ago.

When people make the time argument, what they really mean is that the models have truly sampled everything, mainly the players on the field (how they are behaving), and should in theory be taking the mystery out of the forecast. While, at times, this argument stands to reason, many times it also does not. 

As has been said by others, models have to put out a projection, period. Good, bad or indifferent, they will always make a prediction. Just because it does not look conducive for a storm on models does not mean it will not happen, and visa versa. 

Getting back to the time argument.. Yes, with more straight forward situations, the closer we are to an event, the more accurate the models should be and the less drastic the shifts should be. However, we also need to use pattern recognition and the evolution of the atmosphere. We are still in a dynamic pattern with blocking. Models do not have a good grasp on blocking because the physics of blocking are much more about nuance and ever so slightly shifts in atmospheric conditions. Hence, here, chaos theory can take effect (one error multiplies leads to choas - to paraphrase rather lossoely) and models can still have drastic swings, even as we close in on what should be a models accurate range. 

With regards to this storm, the true answer is at h5. The capture of this storm is a matter of hours and the n/s and s/s both attest to this. We speed one or the other up and the counterpart throttles back by an Hr or two and we have a much cleaner phase in our latitude. Likewise, the NAO is progressings towards neutral, however we still have some blocking and although indicies may show one thing, when the change is rapid, the atmosphere still needs time to adjust to that factor. In other words, though the NAO may be technically neutral, the atmosphere will still need a couple of days to adjust and therefore the atmosphere will still act to slow down the storm.

I get it, maybe we'll get a shocker.  I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[Rtd208]

Even though I still think this is an eastern areas special you can't rule out places further west getting in on the heavier snows especially if an earlier phase occurs. I do agree that the 00z runs should be interesting to say the least. 

[SnowGoose69]

Always have to watch for surprise snows with these even if they miss east due to the interaction with the northern branch shortwave.  It was what saved 2/2013 from being a bust near NYC  

[USCG RS]

I get it, maybe we'll get a shocker.  I guess we'll have to wait and see.

My point is that it wouldn't be shocker. We are not light years away from a huge hit and we're clinging to hope that the storms will jump thousands of miles to merge and be a storm. We are very close to a huge hit and a couple of slight variations at h5 would make a large change in terms of sensible weather

[Wetbulbs88]

1 minute ago, SnowGoose69 said:

Always have to watch for surprise snows with these even if they miss east due to the interaction with the northern branch shortwave.  It was what saved 2/2013 from being a bust near NYC  

We've seen time and again this winter that banding sets up further NW than models anticipate. 

[Ace]

Just now, USCG RS said:

4 minutes ago, NYCGreg said:

I get it, maybe we'll get a shocker.  I guess we'll have to wait and see.

My point is that it wouldn't be shocker. We are not light years away from a huge hit and we're clinging to hope that the storms will jump thousands of miles to merge and be a storm. We are very close to a huge hit and a couple of slight variations at h5 would make a large change in terms of sensible weather

Well said. We don't need a 90 yard Hail Mary miracle to have any shot at significant snow accumulation. 

[sferic]

Won't take much of a shift west

[Franklin0529]

Any chance of Jersey Shore getting in on decent numbers 

[NJwx85]

Don’t have time to draw up a snow map right now but my thinking is 6-12” for Suffolk County, 4-8” for Queens and Nassau, 3-5” for Brooklyn, 3-6” for SI, 2-4” for Manhattan, and 2-4” for most of NE NJ and the LHV with a bit more possible to the East of the Hudson River up by 84. The cutoff for significant snows is probably near the 287/80 interchange with this one and it could actually end up closer the GSP.

[F5TornadoF5]

Rgem on black and white looks a bit further east compared to 12z. 

[allgame830]

What did the 3km show? 

[White Gorilla]

Family and friends in Eastern New England are very unhappy right now, especially those who lost power with the last storm.  Looks like blizzard conditions there with more  power outages likely. 

[Doorman]

12 minutes ago, Franklin0529 said:

Any chance of Jersey Shore getting in on decent numbers 

https://www.weather.gov/phi/winter

0529 check the link above.....yes your totals can improve-imo

[Sophisticated Skeptic]

Lightning strikes galore already in tenn, Kentucky, Illinois area.

Current pressures right now in that area are right on the money with the NAM at 1008 mb.  No further strengthening is expected there...focus tonight for nowcasting will be right off the coast of South Carolina..as the low develops.  Expect fireworks / significant pressure drops.  Even if it develops just 50 miles more N or W than models...would b significant .

[weatherpruf]

19 minutes ago, Wetbulbs88 said:

We've seen time and again this winter that banding sets up further NW than models anticipate. 

I was just thinking this; while ( as usual ) it was not a big storm for me we still had around 6  and when you expect nothing, it was quite a surprise. Now when we had 6 and expected 20, that's seems like a letdown to people who enjoy these setups. Depending on one's perspective; my neighbor doesn't want to see anything white, ever. 

[allgame830]

I really wonder what PB thoughts currently are on this... would be interesting to hear. 

[weatherpruf]

39 minutes ago, USCG RS said:

I posted this on the other forum a few days ago.

When people make the time argument, what they really mean is that the models have truly sampled everything, mainly the players on the field (how they are behaving), and should in theory be taking the mystery out of the forecast. While, at times, this argument stands to reason, many times it also does not. 

As has been said by others, models have to put out a projection, period. Good, bad or indifferent, they will always make a prediction. Just because it does not look conducive for a storm on models does not mean it will not happen, and visa versa. 

Getting back to the time argument.. Yes, with more straight forward situations, the closer we are to an event, the more accurate the models should be and the less drastic the shifts should be. However, we also need to use pattern recognition and the evolution of the atmosphere. We are still in a dynamic pattern with blocking. Models do not have a good grasp on blocking because the physics of blocking are much more about nuance and ever so slightly shifts in atmospheric conditions. Hence, here, chaos theory can take effect (one error multiplies leads to choas - to paraphrase rather lossoely) and models can still have drastic swings, even as we close in on what should be a models accurate range. 

With regards to this storm, the true answer is at h5. The capture of this storm is a matter of hours and the n/s and s/s both attest to this. We speed one or the other up and the counterpart throttles back by an Hr or two and we have a much cleaner phase in our latitude. Likewise, the NAO is progressings towards neutral, however we still have some blocking and although indicies may show one thing, when the change is rapid, the atmosphere still needs time to adjust to that factor. In other words, though the NAO may be technically neutral, the atmosphere will still need a couple of days to adjust and therefore the atmosphere will still act to slow down the storm.

You have an excellent nontechnical way of explaining things. 

[Doorman]

https://digital.weather.gov/

updated hourly

[Rjay]

3 minutes ago, allgame830 said:

I really wonder what PB thoughts currently are on this... would be interesting to hear. 

Last i heard from him was he admits it's not working out the way he thought.   In reality he wasnt too far off.  Prob 100-200 miles too far west.  He think it's a blizzard for LI especially eastern LI which I'm inclined to agree with.

[Rjay]

Omg the rgem is euro like and super east

[Rjay]

And eastern LI is certainly not a blizzard on either of those models

[North and West]

Omg the rgem is euro like and super east

My kids are ready to play baseball, soooo... 🤙🏼


.

[Ace]

Not liking the look of the 18Z GFS so far. Heights are lower in the NE and the Northern Stream shortwave is not as sharp.

[Rjay]

gfs

[Rjay]

The 18z runs are a kick in the nuts

[Ace]

Just now, Rjay said:

The 18z runs are a kick in the nuts

Yep. Only the the 12KM Nam was better. Everything else was a fail.

[Wetbulbs88]

1 minute ago, Rjay said:

The 18z runs are a kick in the nuts

We'll always have the NAM

[Ericjcrash]

18 minutes ago, Rjay said:

And eastern LI is certainly not a blizzard on either of those models

Or Boston. It's pretty obvious this is one hell of a fish storm unless there are very drastic changes at 00z.