February 2019 General Discussion and Observation Thread

[purduewx80]

Just now, SnowGoose69 said:

It does appear the NAO is finally going negative in the next 7-10 days.  The problem is it appears the PNA isn’t going positive so I’m not sure the pattern gets markedly better.  I do think NYC might end up seeing double digit snowfall this month.   The thing is it might all be washed away each time by rain.  Think February 1993.  I think we had 3 SWFEs and about 11-12 inches that month but nothing was on the ground for more than 12 hours 

Agreed. The last few runs of the op GFS have shown a substantial -NAO block that develops by the middle/end of next week. EPS/GEFS have it to a lesser degree but that has been the case for a good part of the past month, to no avail. There does seem to be a pattern in the past ~decade to see a -NAO in spring rather than winter, so if that comes to fruition, I think it could stick around through March.

[JustinRP37]

3 minutes ago, SnowGoose69 said:

It does appear the NAO is finally going negative in the next 7-10 days.  The problem is it appears the PNA isn’t going positive so I’m not sure the pattern gets markedly better.  I do think NYC might end up seeing double digit snowfall this month.   The thing is it might all be washed away each time by rain.  Think February 1993.  I think we had 3 SWFEs and about 11-12 inches that month but nothing was on the ground for more than 12 hours 

Yes that is exactly the type of snow that is so frustrating. It goes into the record books yet it doesn't make anyone feel like winter was actually around.

[purduewx80]

2 minutes ago, NYCweatherNOW said:

I beg to differ I think we have a lot of snow and it could stay for 7 weeks

Expecting snow to stick around for 7 weeks in NYC in a warming climate and ever-expanding urban heat island is highly unreasonable any time of year, let alone Feb-March.

[MJO812]

Just now, purduewx80 said:

Expecting snow to stick around for 7 weeks in NYC in a warming climate and ever-expanding urban heat island is highly unreasonable any time of year, let alone Feb-March.

Well we did have a snowy march last Year

[purduewx80]

1 minute ago, Snow88 said:

Well we did have a snowy march last Year

I'm not saying it won't snow like crazy, I'm just saying it's unreasonable to expect snow on the ground for 7 weeks straight. 

[bluewave]

7 minutes ago, purduewx80 said:

Expecting snow to stick around for 7 weeks in NYC in a warming climate and ever-expanding urban heat island is highly unreasonable any time of year, let alone Feb-March.

Yeah. Our big extended snow cover winters for the 2010’s were 10-11, 13-14, and 14-15. But snowstorm quality with the other years except 2012 has been phenomenal. I don’t really mind lack of extended snow cover as long as the quality snowstorms are there. Big warm ups following epic snowstorms of last several winters didn’t really bother me. 

[purduewx80]

Just 1 operational run as an example, but last night's 00Z GFS:

That is a monster +height anomaly showing up.

[MJO812]

2 minutes ago, purduewx80 said:

I'm not saying it won't snow like crazy, I'm just saying it's unreasonable to expect snow on the ground for 7 weeks straight. 

I agree

Not sure if he said on the ground or 7 weeks left for winter.

[Ericjcrash]

24 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

I'll take last night's UK...

Generally speaking for our area I agree with this. Lock it up. Typical SWFE numbers.

[Brasiluvsnow]

Wow you guys piling on Snow88 are just unreal. 88 is a homer/weenie thats well known but for you guys to dismiss him because of that and not take into account the the guy "is actually knowledgeable " and knows his stuff is comical. If we are not to take into account what other posters are saying in other threads and we only will consider what actual METS say then I guess the majority here should not even bother posting as that criteria eliminates most of us ! The weenie in me is now kind of hoping that the models show zilch up until Tuesday and that they have the strength and placement all wrong just so this all settles down as it did in Nov with that one. I enjoy everyones posts here and learn a lot from all of you guys but the pettiness is awful = keep up the good fight 88 now back to these ridiculous model runs. 

[SnowGoose69]

Just now, Ericjcrash said:

Generally speaking for our area I agree with this. Lock it up. Typical SWFE numbers.

The model numbers at this range for a SWFE are unusually high given we are almost 5 days out.  At this range you usually see 1-2 inches maybe 3 because they don’t see the impact of the CAD or high at this range.  Seeing amounts of 4-5-7 inches showing up could mean we still see a drastic change in how this whole thing evolves 

[Ericjcrash]

Just now, SnowGoose69 said:

The model numbers at this range for a SWFE are unusually high given we are almost 5 days out.  At this range you usually see 1-2 inches maybe 3 because they don’t see the impact of the CAD or high at this range.  Seeing amounts of 4-5-7 inches showing up could mean we still see a drastic change in how this whole thing evolves 

I'm not saying its par for the course in general model trends...just that it resembles a lot of SWFE's in our area when all is said and done.

[Ericjcrash]

3 minutes ago, SnowGoose69 said:

The model numbers at this range for a SWFE are unusually high given we are almost 5 days out.  At this range you usually see 1-2 inches maybe 3 because they don’t see the impact of the CAD or high at this range.  Seeing amounts of 4-5-7 inches showing up could mean we still see a drastic change in how this whole thing evolves 

So with that statement, do you think this is more likely to increase or decrease as we move forward?

[purduewx80]

1 minute ago, SnowGoose69 said:

The model numbers at this range for a SWFE are unusually high given we are almost 5 days out.  At this range you usually see 1-2 inches maybe 3 because they don’t see the impact of the CAD or high at this range.  Seeing amounts of 4-5-7 inches showing up could mean we still see a drastic change in how this whole thing evolves 

We really aren't that far off a Virginia/OuterBanks to Benchmark track for the secondary on a lot of the ensemble means. Given the source region of the high coming into the Plains now, there will be plenty of low-level cold air around. If anything, I think a lot of the interior could end up starting as snow and ending as freezing rain/drizzle, with any substantial warmup above freezing limited to the coast.

[SnowGoose69]

Just now, Ericjcrash said:

So with that statement, do you think this is more likely to increase or decrease as we move forward?

Increase.  I could see the system not being able to cut up as far into the high like we see on the 00Z Op Euro and just sliding more off the coast to our south 

[JustinRP37]

9 minutes ago, Brasiluvsnow said:

Wow you guys piling on Snow88 are just unreal. 88 is a homer/weenie thats well known but for you guys to dismiss him because of that and not take into account the the guy "is actually knowledgeable " and knows his stuff is comical. If we are not to take into account what other posters are saying in other threads and we only will consider what actual METS say then I guess the majority here should not even bother posting as that criteria eliminates most of us ! The weenie in me is now kind of hoping that the models show zilch up until Tuesday and that they have the strength and placement all wrong just so this all settles down as it did in Nov with that one. I enjoy everyones posts here and learn a lot from all of you guys but the pettiness is awful = keep up the good fight 88 now back to these ridiculous model runs. 

Not at all what I am trying to do. I am just pointing out that we need to stop relying on the LR this winter as that has not panned out. Further, we have been really lucky in the past decade to get these epic storms. Some of it was just dumb luck. People forget the 80s and 90s. We had many 'favorable' periods and yet we just did not get much. Problem is many people now expect that NYC sees 40+ inches a year. Historically that just has not been the case, ever. This decade though year. Maybe it continues to increase substantially in the future. Keep in mind most climate models do have us continuing to warm, but do see increased snowfall in the 'short' long term. These models so far have been pretty spot on. Going back to this season though, my own forecast for the season was for 100-120% of our annual average. However, I must acknowledge at this point that if we do actually hit that number it is truly because of dumb luck with a properly timed storm and not because of what I was seeing in the LR in autumn. Anybody who tells you that they called for this type of winter back in October is lying. 

[NYCweatherNOW]

10 minutes ago, bluewave said:

Would probably mean more sleet with the warm tongue coming in 750-850 mb. But we have to see if the high verifies as strong as modeled first. This is one of those rare winters when long range CAD has been overdone. But models have done better with the WAA above the deck longer range this year.

There’s never any sleet with these systems maybe for five minutes. It’s either snow to freezing rain or snow to rain and two minutes of sleet

[Juliancolton]

43 minutes ago, NEG NAO said:

< speechless

42 minutes ago, JustinRP37 said:

7 weeks? Now that is hyperbole! That brings us into the first and second week of April and even our best years have never had total snow cover on the ground then. This isn't January 8th, it is February 8th. We have left the solar minimum now. 

42 minutes ago, purduewx80 said:

Expecting snow to stick around for 7 weeks in NYC in a warming climate and ever-expanding urban heat island is highly unreasonable any time of year, let alone Feb-March.

The mute feature would work better if y'all would quit quoting him, thanks.

[MJO812]

2 minutes ago, bluewave said:

Same old story this winter...rinse..repeat...

Cmc is alot colder

This might be a cad event so the Gfs would be last month to use in that regards. Cmc I wouldn't use either.

Let's see the euro

 

Gfs thermals usually suck in cad events. Look at November event. Not saying it's the same thing but gfs usually does terrible in cad events.

 

This still looks like snow to rain with a few inches.

[NorthShoreWx]

29 minutes ago, JustinRP37 said:

Not at all what I am trying to do. I am just pointing out that we need to stop relying on the LR this winter as that has not panned out. Further, we have been really lucky in the past decade to get these epic storms. Some of it was just dumb luck. People forget the 80s and 90s. We had many 'favorable' periods and yet we just did not get much. Problem is many people now expect that NYC sees 40+ inches a year. Historically that just has not been the case, ever. This decade though year. Maybe it continues to increase substantially in the future. Keep in mind most climate models do have us continuing to warm, but do see increased snowfall in the 'short' long term. These models so far have been pretty spot on. Going back to this season though, my own forecast for the season was for 100-120% of our annual average. However, I must acknowledge at this point that if we do actually hit that number it is truly because of dumb luck with a properly timed storm and not because of what I was seeing in the LR in autumn. Anybody who tells you that they called for this type of winter back in October is lying. 

The winter forecast that NOAA put out back in October is the one that's been closest so far.  They were not gung ho on much winter in this area

[MJO812]

3 minutes ago, NorthShoreWx said:

The winter forecast that NOAA put out back in October is the one that's been closest so far.  They were not gung ho on much winter in this area

They always go warm and snowless every winter

Worked out this winter

[495weatherguy]

1 minute ago, NorthShoreWx said:

The winter forecast that NOAA put out back in October is the one that's been closest so far.  They were not gung ho on much winter in this area

Excellent point.   I remember wondering why the NOAA had such a different outlook than others that I read 

[mikem81]

4 minutes ago, Snow88 said:

Cmc is alot colder

This might be a cad event so the Gfs would be last month to use in that regards. Cmc I wouldn't use either.

Let's see the euro

 

Gfs thermals usually suck in cad events. Look at November event. Not saying it's the same thing but gfs usually does terrible in cad events.

 

This still looks like snow to rain with a few inches.

GFS in only bad with surface temps. problem is the 850 temps will skyrocket if the HP doesnt block the primary low from going way NW of the area. Need something to shred the primary earlier and transfer to the delmarva. The models showed that concept yesterday, but have trended much worse in the last 2 cycles. I can see this turning into an all rain event similiar to the 1/20 storm

[MJO812]

1 minute ago, mikem81 said:

GFS in only bad with surface temps. problem is the 850 temps will skyrocket if the HP doesnt block the primary low from going way NW of the area. Need something to shred the primary earlier and transfer to the delmarva. The models showed that concept yesterday, but have trended much worse in the last 2 cycles. I can see this turning into an all rain event similiar to the 1/20 storm

Snow to rain for the coast is most likely. We need an earlier transfer.

[David-LI]

Another cutter next week on GFS

[RU848789]

GFS bad, CMC good - we're simply seeing normal variability this far out, IMO.  Probably not going to hone in on final details for another day or two, since it's such a fine line between a little and a lot frozen, especially for the 95 corridor.  

[qg_omega]

58 minutes ago, purduewx80 said:

Just 1 operational run as an example, but last night's 00Z GFS:

That is a monster +height anomaly showing up.

meaningless, will be gone in 12 hrs.

[purduewx80]

11 minutes ago, NorthShoreWx said:

The winter forecast that NOAA put out back in October is the one that's been closest so far.  They were not gung ho on much winter in this area

As a reminder:

 

Dec 1 - Feb 2 anomalies (from Maue's twitter):

 

[qg_omega]

3 minutes ago, purduewx80 said:

As a reminder:

 

Dec 1 - Feb 2 anomalies (from Maue's twitter):

 

not bad at all, one of the best for sure

[MJO812]

8 minutes ago, qg_omega said:

meaningless, will be gone in 12 hrs.

Why is everyone not looking at the Mjo?