April 7-8 snow event

[Fozz]

lol... seems like this "storm" will continue the long time pattern of Richmond beating DC in April snow.

[wasnow215]

6 minutes ago, Fozz said:

lol... seems like this "storm" will continue the long time pattern of Richmond beating DC in April snow.

A “Richmond Special”. Great l- Ciovers grass and decks and will be gone in a flash. Still would be fun for April 7 in “the soulfh” though.

[yoda]

45 minutes ago, Amped said:

Going to be interesting with the monday storm.  Got the Canadian low out of the way this run.

Gfs says what storm while GGEM decides to do the usual - skip us and slam SNE

[AfewUniversesBelowNormal]

Pretty big shift in models at 0z. They are trying to bring it back. NWS has 10% chance of 5", they may have to up that. Pretty awesome pattern through the middle of the month. 

[showmethesnow]

 

Just now, AfewUniversesBelowNormal said:

Pretty big shift in models at 0z. They are trying to bring it back. NWS has 10% chance of 5", they may have to up that. Pretty awesome pattern through the middle of the month. 

Just looking over things myself. This storm may not be dead quite yet but we would be looking at a Sat night/Sunday type deal as the initial energy we were keying on runs ahead and a more potent low develops from the energy left behind. Still a ways to go to get that up to our region but I can see the possibilities.

[showmethesnow]

NAM twins are coming in more amped with the developing southern low and shifting the track north and west. Maybe @C.A.P.E. has one more chase to the beaches if he so desires with the NAM twins spitting out 6+ on the 10:1 snowfall maps. The higher resolution 3K in particular made a significant jump northward (roughly 100 miles) with the axis of heaviest snows to where we now see it running from south-central VA up to off the central and lower eastern shore. DC is now only 15-25 miles outside the edge of the heavier band to its south.

[nw baltimore wx]

So now we are really 36 - 42 hours out from any impacts, and we need a 50 - 75 mile shift north? 

I guess it's still on the table, and it would be an overnight event. And I'm just referring to the nam.

[showmethesnow]

6 minutes ago, nw baltimore wx said:

So now we are really 36 - 42 hours out from any impacts, and we need a 50 - 75 mile shift north? 

I guess it's still on the table, and it would be an overnight event. And I'm just referring to the nam.

We have seen several instances this winter where what looked to be an over running event initially has morphed into a more traditional amped up coastal low look. Unfortunately for us the track in these cases has always been to far east to benefit the Balt/DC corridor and instead has impacted the Eastern Shore. This could very well be the case here. Just one more final tease to send the weenie masses cowering even farther into the deep and dark recesses of their padded cells

[showmethesnow]

06Z ICON is pretty much in lockstep with it's last 3 runs in keeping any meaningful precip confined to central VA and the southern eastern shore and south.

[showmethesnow]

06Z GFS is coming in a touch slower and stronger with our southern low and it is tracking a touch inside of the track seen on the 00Z. Some minor improvements are being seen at 500 mb as well. We are also seeing a slight shift northward of the outer edge of the heavier precip. Heavier snowfall amounts are still confined to eastern VA and the southern eastern shore. Improvements are so minor though that this could be nothing more then noise. 

[CAPE]

6 minutes ago, showmethesnow said:

06Z GFS is coming in a touch slower and stronger with our southern low and it is tracking a touch inside of the track seen on the 00Z. Some minor improvements are being seen at 500 mb as well. We are also seeing a slight shift northward of the outer edge of the heavier precip. Heavier snowfall amounts are still confined to eastern VA and the southern eastern shore. Improvements are so minor though that this could be nothing more then noise. 

The comeback is on. NAM and GFS are trying here.

We want our snow tv... Sing it! 

[showmethesnow]

00Z RGEM only goes out to 48 hours so it is hard to compare the 06Z to it. But from what I can tell we do see a decent improvement at 500's and the surface. Snowfall shown is in pretty good agreement with the NAMs.

[showmethesnow]

1 minute ago, C.A.P.E. said:

The comeback is on. NAM and GFS are trying here.

We want our snow tv... Sing it! 

You all can have a singfest because unless I see some drastic changes I am most likely sitting this one out. At this point I am just rooting for those in the cities to score something. 

[CAPE]

1 hour ago, showmethesnow said:

NAM twins are coming in more amped with the developing southern low and shifting the track north and west. Maybe @C.A.P.E. has one more chase to the beaches if he so desires with the NAM twins spitting out 6+ on the 10:1 snowfall maps. The higher resolution 3K in particular made a significant jump northward (roughly 100 miles) with the axis of heaviest snows to where we now see it running from south-central VA up to off the central and lower eastern shore. DC is now only 15-25 miles outside the edge of the heavier band to its south.

Nah not for the chance at a couple sloppy inches. I had my fill. Looking in the rear view mirror it was a pretty decent winter- for the first time in 2 years it feels like I just lived through a real winter.

It was frustrating at times, and I know there are a few areas that got totally jobbed, but it was decent here and I am over it now lol.

[CAPE]

5 minutes ago, showmethesnow said:

You all can have a singfest because unless I see some drastic changes I am most likely sitting this one out. At this point I am just rooting for those in the cities to score something. 

lol

I dont want it. I would prefer it stay confined to the immediate coast. Let those areas pad their snow totals. It has been a remarkably good winter there relative to climo snowfall average.

[Wonderdog]

Definitely a different look for Saturday night now. I will hang in for 2 more runs. Something different is going on.

[donsutherland1]

18 hours ago, Subtropics said:

Hi Mr. Southerland. Do you have data on Raleigh's 10 largest april snows? I'd be curious! Thank you!

Raleigh has had 6 measurable snow events in April. They are ranked as follows:

1. 10.0", April 3, 1915
2. 3.5", April 4, 1899
3. 1.8", April 18, 1983
4. 1.7", April 1, 1887
5. 0.4", April 6, 1889
6. 0.3", April 11, 1989

[Interstate]

So who pissed off the snow gods this year?

[paulythegun]

The trend
Is our friend

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[dallen7908]

06 UT shows 2 part system; snow TV close enough to taste

[psuhoffman]

8 hours ago, WeatherShak said:

Did you study under Titley?

I actually had classes under Jon Neese who went on to TWC for a time. He was brought in to start a meteorology program at the PSU hazleton campus. They even built a weather station there and for a couple years sent a cohort of meteorology majors there.  We used to do daily forecast discussions and guidance analysis in the weather station. I was in that failed experiment. After Neese left they brought in one more guy but I think after he left the program was cancelled but I had changed majors and moved on to main campus by then. 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

11 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

Excellent post. Many of our past snow events didn't even begin to present as a threat until day 3-4 and were still evolving until inside 48 hours. I could lost off dozens of our warning events years past that that weren't even a thought at 5 days out. 

I think the success at crazy long leads of the 2010 and 2016 storms created an unrealistic expectation. And now some were taking guidance at day 4+ way more seriously then we should. Some recently have been referred to 72-100 hour timeframe model output as "short range" that's barely medium range really.  I think part of the problem is perception and we are stretching out expectations faster then the guidance warrants. 

The guidance has had a bad year. But some are expecting too much at long leads also. 

 

10 hours ago, Bob Chill said:

You and I have remarkably similar takes on NWP. I've said this before but I'll reiterate because I often use the short/med/lr terms but it is subjective

Short range = 72 hours and in but 72 is the outer limit of short range

Med range = 72-144 hours but 120-144 is the outer limit. 

Long range = day 6+

This year has had a remarkable number of "events" break the wrong way at all ranges. Especially med range but I don't ever get invested beyond 5-6 days at the longest. Interested in long range? Hell yeah. Bummed or mad at NWP when something vaporizes beyond 5 days? Rarely if ever....

We've had years where things break right more often than not and they become a benchmark for future expectations. But our grading is flawed by emotions. I'm as guilty as the next guy at times. 

The 13-15 stretch had many med range threats morph into different events but considered them a "win" with guidance. In reality, the med range busted horribly but since it snowed anyway it was a "win" so NWP performance got higher grades than they should have. This year NWP is getting bashed in the med range because we barely caught any breaks this year. Lol. Verification scores in general are always improving even if very gradual but our grading scale goes up and down based on ground truth in tiny little Itty bitty postage stamps on the planet called our yards. 

 

I know these are from hours ago, but since there's little going on in this thread it was only a page back, so thought I'd comment!  Totally agree with you, PSU and Bob.  I think both of your comments summarize things well.  Bob...I'm with you on your definition of short vs. medium vs. longer range, though of course it's a bit subjective.  Personally, I might put medium range a tad longer to 7 days, then "longer range" at more like 7-8 days to 2 weeks (then something like "much longer" or monthly beyond that), but that's a minor point.

Agree that there's definitely a confirmation bias that can go on in assessing NWP, and I'm just as guilty as anyone at times especially when it's been a frustrating winter like this year.  Well, OK, it's not perception bias to bash the NAM at any time, haha!  But Bob, you make a good point that in good years like 2013-14 through 2014-15, we scored well in those seasons even if the models didn't quite have it right, so everyone thought they did a great job.  At least for their/my yards.  This year was a tough one, simply because it seemed like everything broke wrong for us in terms of individual events nearly every time.  However, I don't think the models did such a lousy job in an overall sense with the main pattern drivers and even individual large/major storms.  If anything, I think the biggest issues were the precipitation amounts, seems like several times that was overdone by a decent amount beyond 2-3 days only to scale back in the shorter range.  Maybe it's like that all the time and just more noticeable this year, I don't know for sure.  Or maybe they were keying in on southern stream influence more than they should have and more than usual in a given flow pattern.

All-in-all though, and others have said this before, but NWP has come a very long way and in a relatively short time.  Ensemble modeling in particular (at least people's use of it more).  I tend to look at the mid-level 500 mb pattern/flow for periods beyond several days out, and overall models are pretty good at that.  Then ask, "does the pattern support a potential event, and how so?" or "is it really cold, but just too damned northern-stream dominant and dry for us", etc.  Sure, a random storm may pop up at day 16, day 10, etc...but unless it continues to appear regularly as you get closer in, it's kind of unreasonable to take it seriously or "hold the model to that", then call it a failure when that storm doesn't give us snow.  In fact, I'd argue nowadays, several of those "day 10 fantasies" actually do materialize in some fashion more often than we'd admit, whether our area gets a HECS out of it or not.

[Fozz]

3 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

Raleigh has had 6 measurable snow events in April. They are ranked as follows:

1. 10.0", April 3, 1915
2. 3.5", April 4, 1899
3. 1.8", April 18, 1983
4. 1.7", April 1, 1887
5. 0.4", April 6, 1889
6. 0.3", April 11, 1989

That April 1983 event really stands out. I don't think most of the major northeast cities have ever had a snowfall that late in the season.

EDIT: Actually looks like NYC did, in the 1870s and 1880s, but that's ancient history compared to 1983. 

[Cobalt]

That April 1983 event really stands out. I don't think most of the major northeast cities have ever had a snowfall that late in the season.
EDIT: Actually looks like NYC did, in the 1870s and 1880s, but that's ancient history compared to 1983. 

Not in major US cities, but I thought this was cool



.

[PrinceFrederickWx]

It seems like its going to be colder than forecast IMBY today. Not sure if that matters though.

[Fozz]

21 minutes ago, Cobalt said:

Not in major US cities, but I thought this was cool



.

Whoa... that's really cool. I had no idea that it was even possible for them to get measurable snow in May. 

[hstorm]

50 minutes ago, Fozz said:

That April 1983 event really stands out. I don't think most of the major northeast cities have ever had a snowfall that late in the season.

EDIT: Actually looks like NYC did, in the 1870s and 1880s, but that's ancient history compared to 1983. 

One more late season storm was May 9, 1977.  Boston received 0.5", Providence received 7", and there was a trace down to Southern New Jersey.

[87storms]

Saturday evening is looking interesting.  still has an ots look at 500, but if we can the front to stall a little further north then we might be in for at least a period of snow i would think.  no precip type issues either.

[Cobalt]

4 minutes ago, 87storms said:

Saturday evening is looking interesting.  still has an ots look at 500, but if we can the front to stall a little further north then we might be in for at least a period of snow i would think.  no precip type issues either.

And it should be near nighttime too, so that's a plus

[87storms]

3 minutes ago, Cobalt said:

And it should be near nighttime too, so that's a plus

would be annoying if it's another slider, but i wouldn't be tremendously shocked if that wave comes north a bit.