Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,585
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    23Yankee
    Newest Member
    23Yankee
    Joined

Perhaps a Coastal Storm on March 2nd for SNE????


USCAPEWEATHERAF
 Share

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, USCAPEWEATHERAF said:

I'm siding with the 18z GFS given current trends in satellite imager, short range HRRR, 3km NAM models and their intensities.  Winds could become a bigger issue according to the 3KM NAM.  Blizzard conditions are a possibility along with thundersnows across the Cape.  We enter the Warm conveyor belt and the ccb develops overhead along with potential comma head dynamics towards 6-12z tomorrow.  Snow duration is expected to be around 18-20 hours, along with the potential for the H7-H92 lows to close off just southeast of CHH tomorrow midday.  Along with the likelihood for intense cyclogenesis as thunderstorms erupt off the Delaware coastline.  Also with the intensity of the lift and convection associated with the primary low over NE Tennessee currently and with the primary shortwave negative tilt along with intense frontogenesis likely and vertical velocties will lead to intense lift(omega) in the DGZ (Dendritic Growth Zone).  Also the duration of the speed of the storm looks to slow down according to the HRRR guidance.  Ocean enhancement along with potential coastal front development will likely lead to higher snowfall totals of near a foot and a half over Plymouth and Bristol counties in MA, with Provincetown, MA likely far enough north to miss out on mixing and where potential banding could be maximized.

March 2nd 2019 Nor'easter Snow Map final issuabce.gif

Why so conservative? Where's the 60"+?

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kitzbuhel Craver said:

Am I missing something? This was alwayfor the southern/eastern sufferers. Still looks good

Cut back a lot across the board. They still do good but I think all the 10 pluses are not likely. All 18z guidance cut back. Maybe comes back last second or ratios are better.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, The 4 Seasons said:

He still could walk away with not much very easily.

I'm putting out a map soon for this one, it's not gonna be pretty. Working on Sunday night first call map as well.

No way he can walks away unscathed. euro mid levels were great in SEMA. Let’s not overreact to shit models shitting themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way to tell if the mesos are handling this "shift" "cut-back" whatever you want to call it is to see how the convection is behaving and compare that to the mesos. I don't really think they'll handling the convection well. Looking at mesoanalysis and models it's tough to see convection fire off (at least a great deal of it) well east off the coast. This could be a case where mesos screw themselves. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

The only way to tell if the mesos are handling this "shift" "cut-back" whatever you want to call it is to see how the convection is behaving and compare that to the mesos. I don't really think they'll handling the convection well. Looking at mesoanalysis and models it's tough to see convection fire off (at least a great deal of it) well east off the coast. This could be a case where mesos screw themselves. 

mm... k, buuut...

there's some large more super-synoptic scaled arguments I've had all along in mind, that sort of keep/kept me from being too bullish.  I could see it going either way - still within margins of error to go only 50 % of consensus totals, and due to the endemic uncertainty with an inherent "needle threader" system and exact course and banding, having weird strike back gashing from HFD- to BED I could see that too...

Barring the lesser likely, though, this "should be" a narrow impactor, hauling ass like bats leavin' hell.   Translation timing alone playing a limiting factor as well...  Compressed, high velocity patterns limit impacts to narrow regions...  doing so with middling over all mechanical strength has left me scratching heads to find where 6-8 " come from but again,.. margin for error is bit higher.  The MESOs could erroneous for convective handling... yup, but ... maybe they should've been to high in the first place.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...