Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,610
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

Mid January/Mid February Medium/Long Range Discussion


WinterWxLuvr
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

I think it's way too early to be living and dying by each snow map (quite frankly I think that's a futile exercise in a somewhat complicated setup like this that the models are just starting to pick up on!)

Ok. But the trend trend over the last 24 hrs was further east and that appears to have been stopped at 12z. The consensus at this point is an inland runner. The snowfall map is just a reflection of a consolidation around this possible outcome. Still time to shift but if you were looking for a positive trend, this wasn't it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MD Snow said:

Ok. But the trend trend over the last 24 hrs was further east and that appears to have been stopped at 12z. The consensus at this point is an inland runner. The snowfall map is just a reflection of a consolidation around this possible outcome. Still time to shift but if you were looking for a positive trend, this wasn't it. 

Who said we had to see a positive trend at 12z, though?....Could be the next, one...or the next. Some folks talk about "steps back" 5 days out like that's the end of it. Now, does that guarantee anything? Of course not...but I'm just saying...too early right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Maestrobjwa said:

Who said we had to see a positive trend at 12z, though?....Could be the next, one...or the next. Some folks talk about "steps back" 5 days out like that's the end of it. Now, does that guarantee anything? Of course not...but I'm just saying...too early right now.

I didn’t mean to imply that the GEFS was the end of it.  Just pointing out what it showed and that it was somewhat worse, not better, than the previous run.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ji said:

we need @psuhoffman to tell us how this can happen and why it wont....does anyone have any information about the FEb 88 storm...it was 53 degrees  before the storm and we got a foot of snow with temps in the 36-37 range

I assume you mean Feb 1987 because nothing happened in 1988 but 87 there was a foot of snow at IAD from a storm where it was 48 the day before and 46 the day after...the snow hit overnight mostly.  That storm featured great blocking with a 50/50 heading into the event...but a stale rotting airmass and it was late February...so boundary temps with sunshine were torching...but mid and upper level temps were in much better shape than this coming situation.  That was kind of the late February version of Feb 2010.  

There are some examples of "similar" patterns to this working, and most were mid winter. 

This is the composites of 16 warning level events at BWI with a hudson bay ridge. 

HudsonBayRidge.gif.347fb9d28cbd200b1a071a77c9e03786.gif

On the mean notice a 50/50 signature...that is the main thing we are lacking here.  But there were a few within that set that also lacked a 50/50 but when I looked at most of those examples the antecedent airmass wasn't as awful as the one we are working with now.  THe main problem is the ridging this week ends up centered a bit further southeast than where we need it.   But there are some examples of similar "setups" that managed to work to some degree and get some wet snow into the cities and a decent thump NW.  BUt for every one that works there were a lot more that didnt with this type of airmass.  

As you say its the most "interesting" look we have had so far...but that is a pretty low bar.  It's far from a great look...but its not impossible.  THe threat after has a better chance assuming guidance isn't completely wrong about how the pattern evolves.  The key is getting this system to knock down the heights to our northeast and create a slightly better situation wrt the antecedent airmass for the NEXT one. 

A best case scenario would be to get a perfect H5 track and luck our way to a wet snow thump event from the first system...then have it pull in enough "somewhat colder" air to set up the next one.  

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@psuhoffman Now I had never suggested 2016 was a fluke...the setup was perfect. Now, as far as 2006...I was going off of what you said about the pattern being awful most of the winter, and that particular week being "the one time it got right". So I guess my definition of "fluke" in that case is just that we were lucky enough to score in the one time the pattern got right (not about HOW it snowed then) Now I didn't know it was favorable from the end of Jan 2006 on either (I hadn't inferred that from your description of it).

Now about the "Hudson bay ridge" pattern you said we're in...now you said there weren't "many" HECS in our history with this pattern. Did it happen even once?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

Who said we had to see a positive trend at 12z, though?....Could be the next, one...or the next. Some folks talk about "steps back" 5 days out like that's the end of it. Now, does that guarantee anything? Of course not...but I'm just saying...too early right now.

Look at the setup in its entirety. It's an awful set of variables to produce here. Especially along the corridor. Models have never once had any consensus of a path to victory. We're getting exicited over long shot runs that are within the envelope of possibilities but the probability in general is really bad. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jaydreb said:

I didn’t mean to imply that the GEFS was the end of it.  Just pointing out what it showed and that it was somewhat worse, not better, than the previous run.  

I get ya...a tad overreactive on my part :)

 

1 minute ago, Bob Chill said:

Look at the setup in its entirety. It's an awful set of variables to produce here. Especially along the corridor. Models have never once had any consensus of a path to victory. We're getting exicited over long shot runs that are within the envelope of possibilities but the probability in general is really bad. 

I getcha...but I think I'm still intrigued because of even the slightest possibility of this awful set of variables producing something (I guess we could call it a bonafide fluke storm if that were the case, lol)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Maestrobjwa said:

@psuhoffman Now I had never suggested 2016 was a fluke...the setup was perfect. Now, as far as 2006...I was going off of what you said about the pattern being awful most of the winter, and that particular week being "the one time it got right". So I guess my definition of "fluke" in that case is just that we were lucky enough to score in the one time the pattern got right (not about HOW it snowed then) Now I didn't know it was favorable from the end of Jan 2006 on either (I hadn't inferred that from your description of it).

Now about the "Hudson bay ridge" pattern you said we're in...now you said there weren't "many" HECS in our history with this pattern. Did it happen even once?

2000 was a better example of a winter where the pattern was awful 90% of the time but we scored the one week it got right

As for an HECS...I think what you are really asking is were there ever any HECS level storms in a similar setup to this week...because the surface matters too...there were a couple pretty big snows (not HECS but MECS level) with a Hudson Ridge but they all featured a significantly colder airmass to work with and a monster 50/50.  Were there any 10"+ storms in the cities with this look and this type of airmass...no.  There were some decent events though, not a lot...but enough to say its not completely impossible...but there were no 12"+ storms in DC/Baltimore with this look.  That is asking a bit much given the situation.  If somehow we managed to get 3-6" of wet snow into the cities that should be considered a massive win in this situation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Rhino16 said:

Is most of the forum concentrated in Maryland / DC? I’m assuming so based on all of the excitement / frustration each time one of these storms appears on the models...

and parts of VA/WVA

It is the mid-atlantic subforum. were you expecting reactions from people from other places? 

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

10 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

Look at the setup in its entirety. It's an awful set of variables to produce here. Especially along the corridor. Models have never once had any consensus of a path to victory. We're getting exicited over long shot runs that are within the envelope of possibilities but the probability in general is really bad. 

People are seeing pretty snow maps and combining that with being snow-starved and just grasping at straws. Maybe it ends up breaking in our favor but the odds are highly stacked against it and I'm certainly not expecting anything around 95.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, osfan24 said:

People are seeing pretty snow maps and combining that with being snow-starved and just grasping at straws. Maybe it ends up breaking in our favor but the odds are highly stacked against it and I'm certainly not expecting anything around 95.

The odds are always against us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Wonderdog said:

The odds are always against us.

Think it just depends on the winter. We had a stretch there where we could hardly do any wrong some of those winters. The past four winters have been meager to say the least, and the only thing keeping that from being five is the hail mary 2016 blizzard.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, osfan24 said:

Think it just depends on the winter. We had a stretch there where we could hardly do any wrong some of those winters. The past four winters have been meager to say the least, and the only thing keeping that from being five is the hail mary 2016 blizzard.

Not sure where you are, but last winter was decent for a lot of us.  The two winters prior, however, were awful.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

We're getting exicited over long shot runs that are within the envelope of possibilities but the probability in general is really bad. 

 

Until we get a dramatic and very significant pattern re-shuffle  I see little to get enthused about, even if the models show some sort of hail Mary.  Seen that, done that.  Everyone who posts here wants snow but the indicies and background state are hostile, even more hostile for our area.   

No idea when that reshuffle occurs, might have to wait until late Feb or even early March. The NAM state sucks, NAO not cooperating, etc. Any MJO decent response gets washed out in time as it travels East.   

Even previous statistics showing the MJO successfully getting to phase 8 are busting. Everything getting washed out.  Very tired of seeing the MJO models because it does not really matter what they show, due to accuracy issues and response feedback.    

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jaydreb said:

Not sure where you are, but last winter was decent for a lot of us.  The two winters prior, however, were awful.  

Was last winter the one where there was a pretty good storm that hit DC? There was a storm one of the past two winters where DC got like 10 inches or something. My area got like 6ish I think but it snowed lightly all day and there were even breaks during the day where it stopped and there was even some melting. I was like the worst 6 inch snowstorm I've ever seen and I'm not sure I ever even saw 6 inches actually on the ground.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, frd said:

 

Until we get a dramatic and very significant pattern re-shuffle  I see little to get enthused about, even if the models show some sort of hail Mary.  Seen that, done that.  Everyone who posts here wants snow but the indicies and background state are hostile, even more hostile for our area.   

No idea when that reshuffle occurs, might have to wait until late Feb or even early March. The NAM state sucks, NAO not cooperating, etc. Any MJO decent response gets washed out in time as it travels East.   

Even previous statistics showing the MJO successfully getting to phase 8 are busting. Everything getting washed out.  Very tired of seeing the MJO models because it does not really matter what they show, due to accuracy issues and response feedback.    

When the background base state is unfavorable the mjo (even if it makes it into cold phases) tends to be ineffective. It’s more effective when it’s in coordination with the background state. If we get a flip it’s unlikely to be solely mjo driven. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, jaydreb said:

Not sure where you are, but last winter was decent for a lot of us.  The two winters prior, however, were awful.  

His area and most of the balt city area did not do all that well last year - we’ve kinda gotten the wrong end of a lot of systems since January 2016. Which might make sense from a payback view as we maxed out in that storm and it feels like payback has been underway for awhile.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, North Balti Zen said:

His area and most of the balt city area did not do all that well last year - we’ve kinda gotten the wrong end of a lot of systems since January 2016. Which might make sense from a payback view as we maxed out in that storm and it feels like payback has been underway for awhile.

Yeah in Baltimore City we still have not had a verified WSW event since the big blizzard (last January's storm was 4.8"...so still missed the 5-inch criteria by that much, lol)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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