The Mystical Month of February--Long Range Discussion

[showmethesnow]

5 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

It didn’t do it this run but he is right that we don’t want the main feature holding back like that. We have better chances if more comes out sooner. Even a full ejection can work if it’s early. But if weak waves peel off and go to our south then the main energy comes across wed/Thursday that opens the door to being stuck in between.  I think there was a storm like that in a similar setup in 2012. South of us got 4-8” from a front runner, our area got skunked, then north of us got 6-12 from the cutter.  There was another similar one a few years ago in feb 2016 I think. DC got some but south 6-10 from wave 1 then wave 2 was central PA north. I was totally skunked. That’s the fail path here so I agree with Ji I don’t like any run that ejects a weak wave Tuesday then holds back the main wave to Wednesday. That progression can go sideways for us quick. I want to see it all come out Tuesday or at least most of it. 

I guess the irony and humor escaped you with my post.

And as far as how this can all fail? Let me count the ways. I really have no idea what to expect at this point and to prefer one evolution over another probably isn't worth the effort because even in your delayed scenario I can see ways we win. I am pretty much in wait and see mode for the time being until we see a better handle at 500's. Once we see that then I will have a better idea of what we in fact need/want to see.

[frd]

4 minutes ago, jaydreb said:

The follow up storm is sweet.  What a weenie model.  

Hard to believe it is the upgrade.

80 % of all modeled snow for our region you see on it never has happened.   

[BristowWx]

1 minute ago, frd said:

Hard to believe it is the upgrade.

80 % of all modeled snow for our region you see on it never has happened.   

I wonder if being a test model means it gets frequent tweaks/upgrades/adjustments as they see verification scores.  It seems that is what you would do in a testing phase to increase the TRL like an engineering project.  just curious. 

[psuhoffman]

4 minutes ago, showmethesnow said:

I guess the irony and humor escaped you with my post.

And as far as how this can all fail? Let me count the ways. I really have no idea what to expect at this point and to prefer one evolution over another probably isn't worth the effort because even in your delayed scenario I can see ways we win. I am pretty much in wait and see mode for the time being until we see a better handle at 500's. Once we see that then I will have a better idea of what we in fact need/want to see.

I don’t want people to think I’m saying this is a bad setup. A 1040 high boxed in by a 50/50 with a SW to NE moisture feed is a good setup. Unfortunately even good setups fail here often. 

[frd]

9 minutes ago, showmethesnow said:

I know this will bug @mappyno end but I will take the FV3 GFS. Take it and run. Throws up another system over the weekend following our day 6/7 storm which is almost an exact copy. Only in this case it is a colder version and it hammers the region. Not only that it looks as if it is setting up yet another run for our region at 330 hr. It's a machine at delivering the good. Yep, take it and run I would.

Whats your gut telling you about the -NAO modeled in the GEFS?

You think it is there later in the run due to the expected MJO phase?  and,  I mean late as in past 300 hours.  

Would indeed be nice to get that after 3 false attempts so far this winter season. Checked the SOI this AM.,  still positive but I think the decline is not for another 3 days. 

 

[frd]

1 minute ago, BristowWx said:

I wonder if being a test model means it gets frequent tweaks/upgrades/adjustments as they see verification scores.  It seems that is what you would do in a testing phase to increase the TRL like an engineering project.  just curious. 

Maybe one of the mets here knows, but also wondering the effects of the Gov. shutdown.

I am sure the model has value, but the amount of snow it forecasts versus reality is just a bit off. 

 

[MillvilleWx]

1 minute ago, frd said:

Maybe one of the mets here knows, but also wondering the effects of the Gov. shutdown.

I am sure the model has value, but the amount of snow it forecasts versus reality is just a bit off. 

 

Even working in NWS, I don't get all the scoop on the model updates unless it gets passed to our SOO (Science Operations Officer), and emailed back to us. Nothing on the FV3 progression for several months. I'm sure NCEP knows the full scoop, but I haven't heard anything new in a while. 

[psuhoffman]

6 minutes ago, frd said:

Whats your gut telling you about the -NAO modeled in the GEFS?

You think it is there later in the run due to the expected MJO phase?  and,  I mean late as in past 300 hours.  

Would indeed be nice to get that after 3 false attempts so far this winter season. Checked the SOI this AM.,  still positive but I think the decline is not for another 3 days. 

 

Soi crash is still 5-6 days away. By day 10 it looks very negative. 

By day 10 convection is centered where we want and gets better from there.

I haven’t even looked yet but just from this I would expect the long range to look good. 

 

[SnowGoose69]

23 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

@showmethesnow one last thing not to like about the split wave idea...even if we get hit by wave one if it holds too much energy back it can cut something right behind it. It would be kinda bittersweet if we get 4-8” then it’s pouring rain and washes away 12 hours later. The more it holds back the more threat it ends as a rainstorm.  Personally I find it hard to be happy with a storm if it ends with bare grass.  

Let me be clear I am not predicting that now. So save the deb posts. But I’m pointing out how I could see a fail here. I can also see a win if the high holds, or the energy ejects faster. I wish my fail scenarios didn’t happen so often though. 

The whole setup is pretty close to 2/8-2/11 1994.  As of now the models are weaker with the first wave and stronger with the 2nd.  It’s also a somewhat colder setup than that was.  Particularly for wave 2.  However that first disturbance  can definitely change things as you said 

[BristowWx]

3 minutes ago, frd said:

Maybe one of the mets here knows, but also wondering the effects of the Gov. shutdown.

I am sure the model has value, but the amount of snow it forecasts versus reality is just a bit off. 

 

In fairness all of the models we look at have given us false hope with regards to snow.  perhaps we are just harder on this one because its new or maybe we are just hyper focused on every weenie run.  its not like the Euro is a lock at 7 days or anything.  Neither is the CMC.  at the end of the day its just complicated atmospheric data from everywhere being fed into a computer...there are bound to be major adjustments.  

[osfan24]

32 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

It didn’t do it this run but he is right that we don’t want the main feature holding back like that. We have better chances if more comes out sooner. Even a full ejection can work if it’s early. But if weak waves peel off and go to our south then the main energy comes across wed/Thursday that opens the door to being stuck in between.  I think there was a storm like that in a similar setup in 2012. South of us got 4-8” from a front runner, our area got skunked, then north of us got 6-12 from the cutter.  There was another similar one a few years ago in feb 2016 I think. DC got some but south 6-10 from wave 1 then wave 2 was central PA north. I was totally skunked. That’s the fail path here so I agree with Ji I don’t like any run that ejects a weak wave Tuesday then holds back the main wave to Wednesday. That progression can go sideways for us quick. I want to see it all come out Tuesday or at least most of it. 

This is my fear. This is going to end being pushed back a day or two later and the high will already be gone.

[showmethesnow]

9 minutes ago, frd said:

Whats your gut telling you about the -NAO modeled in the GEFS?

You think it is there later in the run due to the expected MJO phase?  and,  I mean late as in past 300 hours.  

Would indeed be nice to get that after 3 false attempts so far this winter season. Checked the SOI this AM.,  still positive but I think the decline is not for another 3 days. 

 

My gut tells me I am hungry.

Honestly I have no idea what to expect. I would be lying if I said I did. About the only thing I somewhat expect is that we will eventually see it become reality. Now whether that is in time for us in regards to snow or whether it just means a cold and wet spring I couldn't tell you.

[BristowWx]

4 minutes ago, osfan24 said:

This is my fear. This is going to end being pushed back a day or two later and the high will already be gone.

everyone's fear.  but interesting when you toggle prev run of the GFS and see how far we have come with this.  it was ugly 2 days ago.  makes a great point about not getting invested in op runs good or bad.  we will still do it but its not wise. 

[CAPE]

10 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Soi crash is still 5-6 days away. By day 10 it looks very negative. 

 

By day 10 convection is centered where we want and gets better from there.

 

I haven’t even looked yet but just from this I would expect the long range to look good. 

 

Pretty favorable h5 look on the 0z GEFS towards the end of the run. Nothing I would complain about.

[CAPE]

8 minutes ago, osfan24 said:

This is my fear. This is going to end being pushed back a day or two later and the high will already be gone.

Can see hints of it on the current run. Temp issues for the coastal plain by the time the main show gets going. As usual, lots of moving parts and plenty to be resolved over the next several days. Overall setup looks to have some potential, so I wont worry about the details at range.

[Ji]

JI, only you would have a problem with this outcome. You are most definitely an enigma. 

Looks good now but were playing with fire. It may not give us this is future runs

[frd]

23 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

haven’t even looked yet but just from this I would expect the long range to look good. 

That does look good. With the typical lag effect later Feb could be looking good.  Would be awesome to be at Feb 10th to 15th and have big time negative SOI values and see on the medium range real threats and a - NAO. That would add confidence. Also allows for a period where the ocean and atmosphere couple.     

[showmethesnow]

Just now, Ji said:

1 hour ago, showmethesnow said:

JI, only you would have a problem with this outcome. You are most definitely an enigma. 

Looks good now but were playing with fire. It may not give us this is future runs

Yes, we could be playing with fire but on the flip side the evolution the fv3 throws up is the one for maxing out potential with this system IMO. Pretty much any evolution I can picture at this time has their scenarios to failure as well. So which would you rather roll the dice on? A scenario that delivers 3-6 and has a lower probability of failing? Or one that has 12+ inch potential with a somewhat higher risk of failing? I know which I prefer. And it is all pretty irrelevant at this stage in time anyway because the models are still trying to get a handle on the whole setup anyway.

[osfan24]

Just now, showmethesnow said:

Yes, we could be playing with fire but on the flip side the evolution the fv3 throws up is the one for maxing out potential with this system IMO. Pretty much any evolution I can picture at this time has their scenarios to failure as well. So which would you rather roll the dice on? A scenario that delivers 3-6 and has a lower probability of failing? Or one that has 12+ inch potential with a somewhat higher risk of failing? I know which I prefer. And it is all pretty irrelevant at this stage in time anyway because the models are still trying to get a handle on the whole setup anyway.

I'd much rather roll the dice. I want a big storm, and this evolution is how you can try to get there.

[BristowWx]

1 minute ago, osfan24 said:

I'd much rather roll the dice. I want a big storm, and this evolution is how you can try to get there.

Agree.  Feb is a known for the big storms.  be nice to get one more warning criteria snow.  I know March can be great but at that point winter is gasping for air. 

[jaydreb]

7 minutes ago, showmethesnow said:

Yes, we could be playing with fire but on the flip side the evolution the fv3 throws up is the one for maxing out potential with this system IMO. Pretty much any evolution I can picture at this time has their scenarios to failure as well. So which would you rather roll the dice on? A scenario that delivers 3-6 and has a lower probability of failing? Or one that has 12+ inch potential with a somewhat higher risk of failing? I know which I prefer. And it is all pretty irrelevant at this stage in time anyway because the models are still trying to get a handle on the whole setup anyway.

I take the easy 3-6 but I also live in the Beltway where fail scenarios are much more likely.  

[snowmagnet]

36 minutes ago, MillvilleWx said:

Even working in NWS, I don't get all the scoop on the model updates unless it gets passed to our SOO (Science Operations Officer), and emailed back to us. Nothing on the FV3 progression for several months. I'm sure NCEP knows the full scoop, but I haven't heard anything new in a while. 

I read somewhere that the FV3 was supposed to replace the GFS in January, but then it was delayed because of the shutdown.  I was curious about it too, so thanks for sharing the info you have. 

[midatlanticweather]

1 minute ago, snowmagnet said:

I read somewhere that the FV3 was supposed to replace the GFS in January, but then it was delayed because of the shutdown.  I was curious about it too, so thanks for sharing the info you have. 

There was a write up on it and they said it had some positives, but would be delayed due to noted biases like giving JI too much snow only to hear him complain about it taking it away! Actually, that was true of everyone! It is a weenie model and needs much work.  Someone has to have its performance stats.. but I think it is pretty crappy in long range predictions.. if it were good in the long range this would be the best winter ever!

 

[MD Snow]

The FV3 has been consistently showing a snowy look after Friday of this week. Don't know how you can call it a weenie model when it hasn't even happened yet? I mean the Euro has been showing a general 3-6" of snow for us for like 4 straight runs. And it's also had opportunity for more after that. Why don't we call the Euro a weenie model? Other model's have had similar looks. It's the same idea. Maybe we're headed into a snowy look next week. If so, I'd say the FV3 sniffed it out first. 

As for the coming storm, not quite sure what to believe. Some respected posters on here say that the ensembles have been useless all year and to just stick with the ops. If that's the case than I'd say things are looking pretty good. But if you do look at the MSLP placement on the GEFS for the upcoming threat next week you can see how lost it really is. Still 6-7 days out and I think we need to get it under 96hrs before we know the general way it will play out. 

[MD Snow]

30 minutes ago, midatlanticweather said:

There was a write up on it and they said it had some positives, but would be delayed due to noted biases like giving JI too much snow only to hear him complain about it taking it away! Actually, that was true of everyone! It is a weenie model and needs much work.  Someone has to have its performance stats.. but I think it is pretty crappy in long range predictions.. if it were good in the long range this would be the best winter ever!

 

Euro's verification scores are terrible for the east coast in the 6-10 day period. 

edit: think back on this winter. How many times has the euro given us a snowstorm in the 6-10 timeframe only to lose it? It's happened a lot. 

[Jandurin]

While the FV3 has thrown out some really really wrong looks, it does a pretty good job of being right when it's right. And I feel like short range it completely trounces its predecessor.

[frd]

Wow the weather this winter has been whacky 

 

But, seems to go back down to a degree. 

 

 

[Eskimo Joe]

10 minutes ago, frd said:

Wow the weather this winter has been whacky 

But, seems to go back down to a degree. 

When you see a rapid swing like that, it's usually influenced by a sizeable storm.  

[caviman2201]

I thought the FV3's verification scores were only bad because of the shutdown... It was jeopardizing national security and all that. 

 

Shouldn't those issues be fixed by now? 

[midatlanticweather]

31 minutes ago, MD Snow said:

Euro's verification scores are terrible for the east coast in the 6-10 day period. 

edit: think back on this winter. How many times has the euro given us a snowstorm in the 6-10 timeframe only to lose it? It's happened a lot. 

I was not speaking about the Euro.. it has had a craptastic year as well. Actually, most long ranges have been pretty sucky - except when they predict cutters with rain! LOL! As soon as the lock on that they seem to be right!  But ya, it has been a rough year!

Edit: Probably beat this dead horse to death BTW! Long ranges --> TAKE WITH CAUTION and low confidence.. snow is always hard, always take long range snow predictions with extreme low confidence and an attitude that MANY MANY THINGS can screw that up.. Take long range warmth and rain with somewhat higher confidence - usually easier to get right because it is easy to rain at this latitude!