Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,609
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

December 16/17 Winter Event


MN Transplant
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, clskinsfan said:

I am just stating what the model says. And even if DCA got 10 inches they would report 3 :)

I'm not taking modeled temps too seriously....the problem is the track and easterly winds during the day...once the low intensifies and gains latitude, I imagine even DC will get some of the goods....I'd probably put the o/u for DC proper at 3.5"

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Deck Pic said:

Step back from 18z for DC...950Mb to surface looks kind of gross...fortunately the mid and upper levels look pretty solid for DC considering...probably a warm nose sneaks in, but the big issue is down low.

Yeah the closest 925 gets is just SE of Andrews early Wednesday afternoon but as you said 950 and below is the ‘issue’.  I’d think rates would overcome but if its light precip, there’d be a lot of drip drip drip.  I do think once things ‘get going’, even DC crashes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why people liked that run. Maybe low position was better, but it wasn't noticeably colder and it drastically cut qpf everywhere. No bueno. Maybe just a blip.

It wasn’t warmer and it probably gives everyone (DC/west) warning-level snow? Wasn’t a step to forum-wide MECS but for those with tempered expectations I think seeing things not go sharply in the wrong direction was good.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, batmanbrad said:

Don't know if this was mentioned earlier (I couldn't find a reference), but earlier this evening, Capital Weather Gang did a Facebook Live presentation featuring Jason Samenow, Jeff Halverson, and AmWx's own Wes Junker (usedtobe)... check it out!  I wasn't sure if I could/should post a link to it, but if you do a search on FB for CWG, you should be able to find and view it.

Took a few Dr. Halverson classes at umbc for a geography degree maybe 15 years ago.  Assuming it’s the same person?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, NorthArlington101 said:


It wasn’t warmer and it probably gives everyone warning-level snow? Wasn’t a step to forum-wide MECS but for those with tempered expectations I think seeing things not go sharply in the wrong direction was good.

I get that, but with such huge totals being shown on many models not that far away and within striking distance, this scenario would be a bit disappointing. I guess it's all about expectations. Had this not been showing such big potential for days on end with big totals hanging around, 6-10 or whatever would sound amazing for December. But that run almost cut my recent GFS run totals in half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BTRWx's Thanks Giving said:

I can't believe how many of you said this was good. Depth

gfs_asnowd_neus_14.png

Doesn't this include things like compaction and melting? I think most of us understand (I hope) that in a storm like this 10" of snowfall will in no way mean 10" on the ground at the end. Even a short period of mixing would knock down all the front end snow to dense slush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get that, but with such huge totals being shown on many models not that far away and within striking distance, this scenario would be a bit disappointing. I guess it's all about expectations. Had this not been showing such big potential for days on end with big totals hanging around, 6-10 or whatever would sound amazing for December. But that run almost cut my recent GFS run totals in half.

Matter of perspective, I think. I’ve been operating under the assumption a full rug pull to 0” is possible. That said, I still believe this could be 1.5’ for me too. Anything better than the full rug pull satisfies me and I let the crazy runs give me some free dopamine.
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@osfan24 @Ji everytime in the last few years the GFS was significantly less qpf then the other globals it eventually caved. I’m way more worried about track then meso scale features that will determine 10 v 20”. Unless we see all guidance shift that way I’m just happy to have a solution that doesn’t go towards my fail scenario. And for me only getting 10” isn’t a fail. 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Winter Wizard said:

Quite a SE shift on the H7 track...this would make just about all of the forum, including those near I-95, very happy. 

gfs_z700_vort_neus_fh78_trend.gif

Haven't gotten a good look at the GFS yet since I am still getting ready to head out for work. The thermal profile on the GFS is always a miss with these events and likely not cold enough in the beginning stages of the storm. I think the surface and lowest reaches of the boundary layer trends colder if the HP over Quebec continues to signal 1037-1039 strength. The height pattern out over the eastern CONUS leading in isn't something extraordinary that would mute some of the surface cold. 

The 7H prog here is basically the only "concern" I see if this would deflect the strongest mid-level frontgen towards NJ/DE with TROWAL potential locked over the NE portion of the sub, at best. Would like to see that low set along the coast ala the Euro to get a deformation pivot over the CMD/SoPA. Overall, it wasn't bad really. Did tick back in the extremes some, but the synoptic details are still not squared and there's room for improvement. And as always, meso hasn't even been taken into account yet. I wouldn't sweat it if anyone is "worried", except Ji cuz then he would be out of character. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, caviman2201 said:

Doesn't this include things like compaction and melting? I think most of us understand (I hope) that in a storm like this 10" of snowfall will in no way mean 10" on the ground at the end. Even a short period of mixing would knock down all the front end snow to dense slush.

People should take both the positive snow depth maps and the 10:1 snow maps with a grain of salt — in marginal situations, 10:1 as gospel is setting yourself up for disappointment but sometimes the positive snow depth maps are underdone especially for things you cited above or UHI issues, etc.  It’d be better to look at the QPF and soundings vs a computer generated snowmap.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nj2va said:

People should take both the positive snow depth maps and the 10:1 snow maps with a grain of salt — in marginal situations, 10:1 as gospel is setting yourself up for disappointment but sometimes the positive snow depth maps are underdone especially for things you cited above or UHI issues, etc.  It’d be better to look at the QPF and soundings vs a computer generated snowmap.

Yea but... That's harder :D

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

10 minutes ago, birdsofprey02 said:

Took a few Dr. Halverson classes at umbc for a geography degree maybe 15 years ago.  Assuming it’s the same person?

It is. My son took a couple of his classes about 4-5 years ago and he was part of CWG at the time.

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...