The Mystical Month of February--Long Range Discussion

[aldie 22]

3 minutes ago, C.A.P.E. said:

EPS kinda makes me wanna yell fire, but I wont.

Just say what it says that's fair game I don't think I'm discouraging that I'm just saying the color commentary and artistic license is a bit different than that. But it's a free world...I'll keep quiet and let you guys have at it.

[CAPE]

16 minutes ago, leesburg 04 said:

Just say what it says that's fair game I don't think I'm discouraging that I'm just saying the color commentary and artistic license is a bit different than that. But it's a free world...I'll keep quiet and let you guys have at it.

Ha I was just playing.

I dont like the overall look or progression on the EPS in the LR, and after showing good blocking for a couple runs, it's gone back to weak sauce, which wont get it done with whats being advertised in the EPAC . None of this is new though, and I have gotten tired of repeating the same thing. I am at the point where I will let things play out for a few days and see where it goes. I'm gonna enjoy the snow today, then I will look forward to the beginning of torcherama tomorrow.

[Wonderdog]

FV3 looks to be fairly consistent in its last two runs for a frozen storm for us next weekend. I'll hang my hat on that. Even GFS came close at 6z.

[Chris78]

Just now, Wonderdog said:

FV3 looks to be fairly consistent in its last two runs for a frozen storm for us next weekend. I'll hang my hat on that. Even GFS came close at 6z.

I think next weekend is our next legit chance. After that who knows.

[snowmagnet]

5 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

The heavy hitters aren’t out yet. I’m not making any judgements on the 0z until we see the euro products later. Just analyzing the run. But I didn’t like the high pressure representation as much. But in general I think the gefs is out to lunch with the mjo and so everything is shows is suspect.  On the other hand the gem and jma agrees with its mjo more than the euro so nothing is a lock. There are a lot of conflicting signals showing up and confidence is extremely low even for long range right now. But I’m not going to only point out good things each run to placate the emotionally unstable. I do point out the good.  (There are still some nice snowstorms on the gefs members)  I’m not debbing. But the bad is there too and people should have all the evidence and then can make their own assessments. 

Showmesnow mentioned the jumpiness of the GEFS lately, not to mention to Op, which makes it unreliable (more than usual). Also, wasn’t the fv3 supposed to take over last month but didn’t because of the Shutdown?  I wonder when that will happen now. 

[showmethesnow]

For those that have been living and dying with each run of the GFS/GEFS. Why? It has performed horribly the last several days and you are stressing yourself over nothing. Just a quick example of what I mean is below. These are 5 day means from 1 day ago and now overnight. Keep in mind this is just a 24 hour period. If you can't see the differences without me pointing them out then maybe you should take up knitting as a hobby instead of tracking. 

Yesterday

Overnight

 

Now to be fair the GEFS has thrown up 3 runs in a row now that have had continuity and it now fairly closely matches the EPS so maybe we can start giving it some weight. But lets see if it can hold a somewhat similar look for another day of runs before we really start really buying into its solutions. One thing I do want you to note between the two maps above is the 50/50 region. I will get back to that shortly.

 

Now let's compare the EPS from 2 days ago to what we saw overnight.

2 days ago

 

Overnight

Notice that they are very similar for being 2 days apart. Not only that but the runs in between were very similar as well. Good continuity showing that maybe the EPS is the model to be following at this point. The one feature that we do see change though is once again in the 50/50 region as the EPS is now picking up on strong neg anomalies there just as the GEFS is now seeing it. This has possible implications for our snow chances in a positive way.

 

Now let us look a little closer into the overnight 5 day mean (Day9-14)

 

Now short of seeing massive changes within the PAC and the west (unlikely IMO) the key here is what we see happen in the N Atlantic. We need at the very least to see blocking (-NAO). Without that we are more then likely SOL given the look in the west. And that is exactly what we are seeing on both the EPS and the GEFS at this time eta: In the NAO region. Not only that we are also seeing strong indications the last day or two that we will also have lows rotating through or getting trapped in the 50/50 region. This setup (-NAO and 50/50) is exactly what the doctor ordered to cure our woes in the west. Now some may argue that the models have been advertising a -NAO for awhile now and have yet to deliver the goods. BUT... I think this time there is a strong possibility that this is the real deal and this is because of what we are now seeing in regards to the 50/50 region. The fact that we are seeing strong neg anomalies in that region and for such an extended period of time imply that something is trapping this feature. And that would be a -NAO. Now the models have hammered hard on a -NAO for a good deal of the winter only to back down as we have neared in time. But in this case the models have been progressively more aggressive with the 50/50 feature and are moving forward in time with it. This in turn implies that the models are seeing a -NAO as well and are moving forward with that feature as well. All in all, I see this as a very positive sign that in fact we may see blocking verify in the near future.

Let's look out west. Full latitude trough into the southwest. Not a good look but one we can still possibly score from if the blocking in fact exists. What we are seeing is that the EPS is dumping too much of the NS into the southwest. This in turn is bumping up the SE ridging. If this plays out this way we are probably talking flawed systems as they will have a tendency to cut to our west. So possibly front end snow to rain scenarios. Now if you consider the energy dropping down from the NS in fact mostly remains intact and progresses eastward (Red arrow) then we see a so, so look morph into a very good look. With both a weaker trough in the southwest, and the corresponding weaker SE ridging, as well as a stronger NS energy rotating to the east we would see a tendency for the boundary (which storms track on) shifted farther to the SE. So instead of a track to our west we would probably see it shifted through the general Mid-Atlantic region. Now you may be thinking, 'But that isn't what the EPS shows'. Well the EPS has a tendency to over play the dump into the SW. We have seen this bias for many years now. It could be right this time (has been a few times already this winter) but I think the bias is showing in the case. And what it all goes back to is what we have been hammering on, a -NAO. If in fact the blocking is real (fingers crossed) we more then likely see the NS for the most part bypass the SW and progress eastward carving out an upper latitude trough separate from the one in the southwest. The blocking (-NAO) most likely will force the issue as it influences the NS flow. One last point on the above. The pv will play a factor in the setup as well. Deeper drop and we see the boundary shifted south and subsequently a shallower drop and it will be shifted north.

Thought I would also throw this up for those who just wish the SW trough and the SE ridging would go away. What in fact these two features are doing is putting the SS jet into play in a big way as it is bumping it up into the east. This jet is basically pulling moisture all the way from Hawaii and dumping it into the SE and east coast. Where we see the warm/wet air from the jet meeting up with the pv related cold/dry is where the boundary will setup. The differences between these two air masses will be somewhat extreme so there will be a lot of potential running around this boundary. It will all come down to where that boundary sets up at any given time as energy runs through. And at this point, looking over the EPS, the boundary looks to fluctuate between N Virginia and Southern PA. But this will more then likely change over the coming runs. Whether for the worse or better is any ones guess at this point.

 

Now if my thoughts are somewhat accurate on things above we could be looking at a very active period of time in the extended. Now whether it is wet or white will really come down to where the boundary sets up. There is a good deal of potential if it can be realized. There is also a possibility of a significant event, especially towards the end of the extended from what I am seeing. But there is really much to hash out and we are talking the extended which the models have had difficulties with. So let's let it play out and see where we stand 5 days down the road.

 

Couple of final maps to show you that the EPS is picking up on the potential. Notice there are quite a few nice hits in the mix.

 

 

  ETA: Forgot I had one last map. We are seeing lower pressures to our south and through the gulf states for quite an extended period of time. Starting at day 9 and running through the whole extended. Very good sign and exactly where we want to see them showing up.

[Ralph Wiggum]

I think some of the folks here that are not only debs but even a couple of the 'crowd favorites' need to step away for a day or two and I dont mean that disrespectfuly.

Oz EPS by day 10 is already moving the neg PNA eastward while other guidance had it locked over the SW. Now for the euro to move a trof out of the SW and slowly replace it with a pos PNA before other guidance should be a red flag for those of you who have been round. Oh and keep in mind we already punted thru the 9th so I wouldnt be too hung up on any negatives or positives next week. Here's the LR eps on TT where the gradient pattern is setting up and the pna trof is starting to shift pack to the east:

 

[Ralph Wiggum]

GEFS and GEPS very good looks....especially the GEFS. HL blocking, 50/50 low, sti energy. I'm not sure what happened overnight but I'm no4 seeing anywhere near the dire looks some of you saw. This is a VERY favorable le Feb look and progression in my eyes:

 

[Ralph Wiggum]

I think people are worrying too much about the PNA tbh. I've seen plenty a neg PNA with energy sitting over the baja ejecting waves out in pieces and giving significant overrunning February gradient events. This is NOT a flush down the toilet pattern that some think especially with how cold departures are just to the N and strong hints that the NAO finally goes neg.

I like the how we are NOT seeing a purple ball of NAO rudging showing but rather a more realistic and dampened out but consistent neg NAO look. 

[Ralph Wiggum]

19 minutes ago, Chris78 said:

I think next weekend is our next legit chance. After that who knows.

I'm opposite....I think we punt thru about the 10th give or take a day until the pattern resets then we actually fasten the seatbelts for frequent threats and waves thru the end of the month.

[Ralph Wiggum]

@showmethesnow we are basically echoing each other especially irt to the pineapple Express and a Feb gradient flow out of the SW that we see this time of year with a neg PNA. Morning crew working OT today!

[Chris78]

5 minutes ago, Ralph Wiggum said:

I'm opposite....I think we punt thru about the 10th until the pattern resets then we actually fasten the seatbelts for frequent threats and waves thru the end of the month.

I'm not buying into anything past next weekend lol

[psuhoffman]

18 minutes ago, C.A.P.E. said:

Ha I was just playing.

I dont like the overall look or progression on the EPS, and after showing good blocking for a couple runs, it's gone back to weak sauce, which wont get it done with whats being advertised in the EPAC . None of this is new though, and I have gotten tired of repeating the same thing. I am at the point where I will let things play out for a few days and see where it goes. I'm gonna enjoy the snow today, then I will look forward to the beginning of torcherama tomorrow.

Eps was a minor step back. It muted the blocking some which also shifted the trough west some and the baroclinic zone in the east northwest some. Correspondingly it shifted the snowfall target area northwest slightly for the 3rd straight run. 

Now all those things on their own as a single run analysis are very minor. And it’s too soon to make an overreaching declarations, but you’re right that there is a theme here all winter that the guidance right now is playing into once again and that’s tough to ignore. 

So taken by itself the eps wasn’t that bad. But within the context of the winter trends and that it was a step back from previous runs...it’s concerning. 

[showmethesnow]

6 minutes ago, Ralph Wiggum said:

@showmethesnow we are basically echoing each other especially irt to the pineapple Express and a Feb gradient flow out of the SW that we see this time of year with a neg PNA. Morning crew working OT today!

I can understand people being gun shy here. Models have promised us mounds of gold in the extended only to deliver piles of Horse sh*t. 

But what I have been seeing with the last couple of days of runs with the EPS (and possibly now with the GEFS) are indicators that in fact we might actually get an appearance from that ever elusive unicorn (-NAO). 

[Ji]

Euro pretty much kills mjo

[psuhoffman]

55 minutes ago, leesburg 04 said:

Just say what it says that's fair game I don't think I'm discouraging that I'm just saying the color commentary and artistic license is a bit different than that. But it's a free world...I'll keep quiet and let you guys have at it.

I posted maps to back up and show my point. There was no artistic license. I said exactly what the run showed. It was a bad trend with the pressure pattern.  I was careful not to use any unnecessary colorful adjectives to exaggerate anything. Should I just not say anything when there is a bad run?  Ignorance is bliss?

@Ralph Wiggum

First of all your area (and mine) have much better prospects in a -pna gradient pattern. But in here I post from a dc perspective. They need something to suppress the baroclimic zone south of typical in those patterns. I can think of quite a few such patterns that worked ok for PA and my area but were mostly fails for DC. Feb 1993, 1994 being the most famous.  A muted NAO might not be enough.  

Secondly my analysis was of the 0z gefs, yours is the 6z which was a significantly better run.  For whatever that’s worth. But I also stated I didn’t buy it and pointed out how jumpy and useless it was and that my comments were simply saying what it showed.  

Everything I said was specifically about the 0z gefs.  I left before the geps or eps or 6z gefs came out.  I said this isn’t a judgement of the overnight at all just an analysis of the gefs.  

Maybe the people who cannot handle when there is a bad run of guidance should stop instead of implying that we should ignore or keep it to ourselves so they don’t get depressed and crap all over the thread!  Ignoring the gefs doesn’t make it go away and even if it’s havibg issues and should be given less weight right now (which myself and bob both said) it’s still there and should be mentioned. I’m not catering my guidance analysis to the weenies who can’t handle bad news. 

Officially I am where I was before last night. Conflicting signals and low confidence what happens. The one thing I will say was frustrating about the run was we got a day closer to whatever is coming and we failed to take a positive step towards good. If the pattern is actually going to get good at some point ambiguous runs don’t cut it and we want to see a positive move with better confluence and more blocking or a shift south in the baroclimic zone. If anything the opposite is happening with a slight (I said slight darn it) degradation of all those features as they get closer.  But taken as is the guidance is ambiguous and close enough to a good pattern not to lose hope.

There if that is enough to send people into fits of depression so be it. But it’s the truth and me not saying it won’t make it any more likely it will snow. But not saying stuff will make the discussion here fake and crap and that’s worse than not getting snow. 

[psuhoffman]

14 minutes ago, Ji said:

Euro pretty much kills mjo

That’s yesterday’s and everyone was fine with it then. Eps took a very minor step back with blocking overnight but let’s not make more of it then that until we get more indications. 

[BristowWx]

A positive I took away from 6z GFS was at hr 168 as the boundary pushed south.  That was a stark change from previous 3 runs.  With no near term threats there is plenty of time to focus on this for a while. 

[MD Snow]

17 minutes ago, BristowWx said:

A positive I took away from 6z GFS was at hr 168 as the boundary pushed south.  That was a stark change from previous 3 runs.  With no near term threats there is plenty of time to focus on this for a while. 

There's one thing that appears to be showing up run to run on all guidance between the Feb 8-12 time frame. There will be a boundary with plentiful precip. My gut says this is the time for Northern MD into the NE to score big. That doesn't mean the corridor won't score, I just think there will be plentiful opportunities for areas to the North to score. Remember, all we need is roughly one more 6"+ event for much of VA into central MD to reach climo. Set that as the bar over the next 7 weeks and I think many will be happy. I think the NE ultimately plays catchup for the next 7 weeks and we score 1-2 more accumulating events. That's my bar for the rest of the winter. 

[Ralph Wiggum]

16 minutes ago, MD Snow said:

There's one thing that appears to be showing up run to run on all guidance between the Feb 8-12 time frame. There will be a boundary with plentiful precip. My gut says this is the time for Northern MD into the NE to score big. That doesn't mean the corridor won't score, I just think there will be plentiful opportunities for areas to the North to score. Remember, all we need is roughly one more 6"+ event for much of VA into central MD to reach climo. Set that as the bar over the next 7 weeks and I think many will be happy. I think the NE ultimately plays catchup for the next 7 weeks and we score 1-2 more accumulating events. That's my bar for the rest of the winter. 

I dont like getting into specific individual threats much past 5 days but I will add my $.02 to the discussion. I think most of us agree we punted next week at least thru Thursday, yes? The way I can see it unfolding is this first wave or feature some folks are keying in on for Thursday-Friday *probably* wont have much going for it BUT it sort of sets the stage for what is coming down the road ie a boundary/baroclinic zone/stationary front/gradient.....choose whichever term gives you the warm fuzzies. The subsequent waves riding along that boundary as we move past say Feb 10 are where we need to be watching. The front also isnt likely to just sit in one spot....these tend to fluctuate N and S with the upstream and downstream changes. Any hints of a neg NAO (or opposite) will greatly impact the gradient allowing for either a push S (congrats RIC-DC type setup) or nudge N (congrats PHL-NYC type setup). Im trying to NOT be specific but use those cities and features as a general guideline on how most Feb gradient patterns try and play out. After late week (or should I say 'beginning late week') the stj and pattern is going to get extremely active with a train of waves riding along the gradient. I dont honestly see any indications of a HECS setup or unicorns and rainbows but I do see a threatening pattern where many of us could cash in from Feb 10 (give or take) going forward. Now being devil's advocate, a transient NAO feature would probably give many places in the East at least a shot at one of the waves coming thru. OTOH, if the Atl locks into a specific look for 7-14 days then depending on where the boundary sets up the zones that favor snow (setup dependent) are probably going to jackpot repeatedly while those S of the boundary are going to need therapy. I dont see the ATL locking in tho.....if this season (aside from the WAR) is any indication the NAO will likely remain transient between + and - and fluctuate.

[aldie 22]

1 hour ago, psuhoffman said:

I posted maps to back up and show my point. There was no artistic license. I said exactly what the run showed. It was a bad trend with the pressure pattern.  I was careful not to use any unnecessary colorful adjectives to exaggerate anything. Should I just not say anything when there is a bad run?  Ignorance is bliss?

@Ralph Wiggum

First of all your area (and mine) have much better prospects in a -pna gradient pattern. But in here I post from a dc perspective. They need something to suppress the baroclimic zone south of typical in those patterns. I can think of quite a few such patterns that worked ok for PA and my area but were mostly fails for DC. Feb 1993, 1994 being the most famous.  A muted NAO might not be enough.  

Secondly my analysis was of the 0z gefs, yours is the 6z which was a significantly better run.  For whatever that’s worth. But I also stated I didn’t buy it and pointed out how jumpy and useless it was and that my comments were simply saying what it showed.  

Everything I said was specifically about the 0z gefs.  I left before the geps or eps or 6z gefs came out.  I said this isn’t a judgement of the overnight at all just an analysis of the gefs.  

Maybe the people who cannot handle when there is a bad run of guidance should stop instead of implying that we should ignore or keep it to ourselves so they don’t get depressed and crap all over the thread!  Ignoring the gefs doesn’t make it go away and even if it’s havibg issues and should be given less weight right now (which myself and bob both said) it’s still there and should be mentioned. I’m not catering my guidance analysis to the weenies who can’t handle bad news. 

Officially I am where I was before last night. Conflicting signals and low confidence what happens. The one thing I will say was frustrating about the run was we got a day closer to whatever is coming and we failed to take a positive step towards good. If the pattern is actually going to get good at some point ambiguous runs don’t cut it and we want to see a positive move with better confluence and more blocking or a shift south in the baroclimic zone. If anything the opposite is happening with a slight (I said slight darn it) degradation of all those features as they get closer.  But taken as is the guidance is ambiguous and close enough to a good pattern not to lose hope.

There if that is enough to send people into fits of depression so be it. But it’s the truth and me not saying it won’t make it any more likely it will snow. But not saying stuff will make the discussion here fake and crap and that’s worse than not getting snow. 

Say anything you want man we obviously interpret your style differently...carry on 

[psuhoffman]

1 hour ago, showmethesnow said:

I can understand people being gun shy here. Models have promised us mounds of gold in the extended only to deliver piles of Horse sh*t. 

But what I have been seeing with the last couple of days of runs with the EPS (and possibly now with the GEFS) are indicators that in fact we might actually get an appearance from that ever elusive unicorn (-NAO). 

Nothing wrong with your take.  But I can see where cape was coming from. The 50/50 representation improved.  And that could be what we need. But this run the blocking anomalies degraded in the NAO domain and the trough axis shifted west. The baroclimic zone shifted north some too and so did the snow mean. So while I can see the optimism regarding the 50/50 developments I can also see how on the whole it was a minor step back. 

I think my frustrations continue to be that it’s not showing significant enoughimprovements as leads shorten. When the first cold shot first showed on the eps day 15 that period is now day 8/9 and it’s gone.  Totally muted and shifted to our north as blocking degraded. Now there are some signs the same “might” be happening to the next attempt to get cold into the east.  If you go back to when day 11 was at day 15 it looked better. To sum up my frustration things continue to look best at day 20 on the weeklies. They enter day 15 of the eps looking “good” then slowly degrade into mediocre by day 10. That trend has continued. I went over my saved h5 plots from several days ago. It’s happened again. 

Your right that there are pathways to snow in that look.  Day 10-15 is ok looking. But at the same time the continued degradation as leads shorten is hard to ignore. So I see both points. 

As for the issues with analysis. There is room for both. Often you point out things i missed in my look at things. Different perspectives is good. But I was careful lately not to use any exaggerated statements or make too much of a bad run, qualifying everything and minimizing it even when I don’t like something. But it’s still apparently too disturbing to some. Apparently saying the gefs was a bad run and showing plots that show why is beating a dead horse.  I didn’t make a plethora of posts on the same thing. I said what was ok and what wasn’t and showed visuals to explain what I saw. You’re a friend so im asking you...are we supposed to just ignore bad runs?  Should I ignore that the eps degraded the height anomalies near Greenland again and ONLY mention that it improved the 50/50?   Do we need to just stick our heads in the sand so some can feel better?

[aldie 22]

4 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Nothing wrong with your take.  But I can see where cape was coming from. The 50/50 representation improved.  And that could be what we need. But this run the blocking anomalies degraded in the NAO domain and the trough axis shifted west. The baroclimic zone shifted north some too and so did the snow mean. So while I can see the optimism regarding the 50/50 developments I can also see how on the whole it was a minor step back. 

I think my frustrations continue to be that it’s not showing significant enoughimprovements as leads shorten. When the first cold shot first showed on the eps day 15 that period is now day 8/9 and it’s gone.  Totally muted and shifted to our north as blocking degraded. Now there are some signs the same “might” be happening to the next attempt to get cold into the east.  If you go back to when day 11 was at day 15 it looked better. To sum up my frustration things continue to look best at day 20 on the weeklies. They enter day 15 of the eps looking “good” then slowly degrade into mediocre by day 10. That trend has continued. I went over my saved h5 plots from several days ago. It’s happened again. 

Your right that there are pathways to snow in that look.  Day 10-15 is ok looking. But at the same time the continued degradation as leads shorten is hard to ignore. So I see both points. 

As for the issues with analysis. There is room for both. Often you point out things i missed in my look at things. Different perspectives is good. But I was careful lately not to use any exaggerated statements or make too much of a bad run, qualifying everything and minimizing it even when I don’t like something. But it’s still apparently too disturbing to some. Apparently saying the gefs was a bad run and showing plots that show why is beating a dead horse.  I didn’t make a plethora of posts on the same thing. I said what was ok and what wasn’t and showed visuals to explain what I saw. You’re a friend so im asking you...are we supposed to just ignore bad runs?  Should I ignore that the eps degraded the height anomalies near Greenland again and ONLY mention that it improved the 50/50?   Do we need to just stick our heads in the sand so some can feel better?

You're getting carried away from being critiqued by one individual.  You don't have to care what I say plus your characterization of what I'm saying is not correct but of course you know that. Your narrative is if someone says something about your analysis of a bad run then they must not want to hear bad news. Sure some are like that...me...I've proven many times that I like snow and enjoy each event as it comes. If the model run is bad...meh...on to the next run. You like to hammer home your points...you yourself have admitted that...debate coach and all. Beating a dead horse has nothing to do with bad news and has everything to do with hammering home your point...good bad or otherwise. Look I'm just a casual observer on this site I like to banter and goof around. I know that it can be annoying but I also pull back when the shit is getting real with storm threats. 90% of my posts are in banter...that's where I belong. You do you man...dont mind me.

[AdamHLG]

Groundhog saw his shadow. Not a good sign.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

[Ji]

1 hour ago, psuhoffman said:

That’s yesterday’s and everyone was fine with it then. Eps took a very minor step back with blocking overnight but let’s not make more of it then that until we get more indications. 

sorry...is this better?

 

[showmethesnow]

30 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Nothing wrong with your take.  But I can see where cape was coming from. The 50/50 representation improved.  And that could be what we need. But this run the blocking anomalies degraded in the NAO domain and the trough axis shifted west. The baroclimic zone shifted north some too and so did the snow mean. So while I can see the optimism regarding the 50/50 developments I can also see how on the whole it was a minor step back. 

I think my frustrations continue to be that it’s not showing significant enoughimprovements as leads shorten. When the first cold shot first showed on the eps day 15 that period is now day 8/9 and it’s gone.  Totally muted and shifted to our north as blocking degraded. Now there are some signs the same “might” be happening to the next attempt to get cold into the east.  If you go back to when day 11 was at day 15 it looked better. To sum up my frustration things continue to look best at day 20 on the weeklies. They enter day 15 of the eps looking “good” then slowly degrade into mediocre by day 10. That trend has continued. I went over my saved h5 plots from several days ago. It’s happened again. 

Your right that there are pathways to snow in that look.  Day 10-15 is ok looking. But at the same time the continued degradation as leads shorten is hard to ignore. So I see both points. 

As for the issues with analysis. There is room for both. Often you point out things i missed in my look at things. Different perspectives is good. But I was careful lately not to use any exaggerated statements or make too much of a bad run, qualifying everything and minimizing it even when I don’t like something. But it’s still apparently too disturbing to some. Apparently saying the gefs was a bad run and showing plots that show why is beating a dead horse.  I didn’t make a plethora of posts on the same thing. I said what was ok and what wasn’t and showed visuals to explain what I saw. You’re a friend so im asking you...are we supposed to just ignore bad runs?  Should I ignore that the eps degraded the height anomalies near Greenland again and ONLY mention that it improved the 50/50?   Do we need to just stick our heads in the sand so some can feel better?

<shrug> Think you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. If you don't post the bad with the good you are going to be called out as dishonest by some. On the other hand if you do post the bad there will be some that take issue with that as well. All I can say is be true to yourself and the threads intent, which is to have an honest discussion of both good and the bad the models have to offer and ignore the criticisms that now seem rampant within the thread. After all discussion/debate can not exist without examining all angles and having countering views.

As far as your concern about the degradation with the blocking. Taken alone I would tend to agree with you that it would be a concern that we may eventual lose this in future runs. But the aggressiveness we are now seeing with a 50/50 feature actually tends to bolster my belief that in fact we do see some form of blocking set up and potentially for a good deal of time. The fact that the models are now starting to hammer on the 50/50 lends credence to the fact that there will in fact be some sort of blocking to hold the 50/50 in place. And taken as a whole, -NAO and the 50/50 is a much better and forgiving setup then blocking just on its own. With the 50/50 we will not need to see the strong and/or west based blocking that the models were initially advertising, all we need to see is sufficient blocking to lock in the 50/50 and let that feature pick up the slack from a weaker -NAO. So the weaker NAO solutions are not as much as a concern to me nor do I now believe that they are foretelling a loss of the -NAO in future runs. We see that 50/50 feature start taking a hit along with a weaker NAO, then yes my concern level will start to spike. But until then my expectations are that those two features will be real.

eta: And @leesburg 04brought up a good point that i did forget to mention. Maybe not hammer so much on the negative. Post a couple things on it and then move on. Lately you have had a habit of throwing post after post about the negatives and in truth it does get a little wearying and depressing after a time.

[psuhoffman]

18 minutes ago, leesburg 04 said:

You like to hammer home your points...you yourself have admitted that...debate coach and all. Beating a dead horse has nothing to do with bad news and has everything to do with hammering home your point...good bad or otherwise. 

So last night the maps showing the problem were too much?  Should I just say it’s bad and not explain?  I explain what’s going on when it’s good and bad. I like to analyze why it might snow and when it’s wrong why it might not. Are you saying when it’s bad not to dig into it and analyze the train wreck?  I’m trying to figure out what the problem is...

[psuhoffman]

10 minutes ago, Ji said:

sorry...is this better?

 

That’s still yesterday’s run. Lol 

[WinterWxLuvr]

Look past the colors on those anomaly maps and often there’s very little or slight differences in the actual height lines.

Also the MJO forecasts have been awful. They can’t even get one day right.

[psuhoffman]

29 minutes ago, showmethesnow said:

eta: And @leesburg 04brought up a good point that i did forget to mention. Maybe not hammer so much on the negative. Post a couple things on it and then move on. Lately you have had a habit of throwing post after post about the negatives and in truth it does get a little wearying and depressing after a time.

Not criticizing you and leesburgs criticism just trying to understand. I can’t fix what I honestly don’t see.  I thought I was limiting my negatives. Last night I kept my analysis of the gefs brief (by my standards) with only a couple posts and a paragraph each.  And the gfs op I basically dismissed.  When things are good I often write up 3 pages of analysis and dig deep. When it’s bad I try to keep it to a paragraph and move on. But I do still like to analyze and get into what’s wrong to understand the good AND the bad. No one complains when there is a page on how great it looks but a paragraph on what’s wrong is too much?  

I went back and looked. I made 4 posts. One dismissing the op. One saying the gefs was mostly ambiguous, conflicted, and useless. Pretty neutral. Then one pointing out the pressure pattern trend that wasn’t good with one paragraph of analysis and a comparison plot.  Then the last post I carefully pointed out that I didn’t put any stock into the gefs just pointing out it wasn’t a good run imo but I would reserve any judgement until after the whole overnight guidance came in.  That was it. 

This isn’t a criticism of you or leesburg. Others have said the same thing. And not just this year, many times over the years. The problem is obviously me. But I can’t fix it because I don’t see it.

At times I thought I was being careful to not overdo it with bad stuff. I edited what would have been my typical 3 pages down to 1. I used innocuous words. I tried to qualify things. And still had people tell me I’m being too negative. 

So im trying to use last night as a case study so I can see what I’m doing wrong. What exactly did I do in those 4 posts that rubbed people the wrong way?  I honestly thought I was keeping it benign and pretty neutral. I’m honestly not trying to be defensive I truly don’t understand and I want to so I can analyze the negative stuff but without getting this reaction.