January Long Range Disco Thread

[Cobalt]

Through 300 it's still a workable look to me . Barely any higher hieghts in the se . Cold air is on top or very close 
Might be a hair better then 0z actually past hour 300

Seems like a tiny bleed to the GEFS actually. Not as good of a look as we were seeing on the 12z EPS or 12z GEFS yesterday, but lower heights with the SER. 850s anomaly shows that cold air, and as PSU stated, that -NAO might be what it takes to combat the trough setting up in the west


.

[Buddy1987]

1 hour ago, BristowWx said:

Nope.  A CMC, Icon, GFSx2 is still not enough when Euro shows nothing.  And it shows not even a hint of anything.  

Idk man euro hasn’t been itself wrt mid to long range prospects thus far. I will take my chances on most of the globals at least showing something this far out. Just my opinion obviously but I have a really good feeling for this time period. 

[psuhoffman]

1 hour ago, Ji said:

when the euro is the only model that dosent show snow..it dosent snow. When its the only model to show snow, it dosent snow

You make it hard to miss you 

[BristowWx]

6 minutes ago, Buddy1987 said:

Idk man euro hasn’t been itself wrt mid to long range prospects thus far. I will take my chances on most of the globals at least showing something this far out. Just my opinion obviously but I have a really good feeling for this time period. 

I guess we will find out. 

[psuhoffman]

58 minutes ago, losetoa6 said:

Through 300 it's still a workable look to me . Barely any higher hieghts in the se . Cold air is on top or very close 

Might be a hair better then 0z actually past hour 300

There is good and bad compared to 0z. It has a bit too much SE ridge. Get a little less trough out west though and that becomes a good pattern with a very minor adjustment. It’s no good for the 19th threat though. Doesn’t dig the trough nearly enough. It’s all NS then because it doesn’t amplify it doesn’t really have the second threat either since everything pulls back without that first wave amplifying east. But even there a fairly minor adjustment makes it better. It doesn’t fully support the garbage op look. It’s kinda in between the GEFS CMC look and the euro op. 

[PivotPoint]

1 hour ago, psuhoffman said:

Btw after looking like a wreck the other day the GEPS has trended to the GEFS and has a very nice look days 7-16 

Days 7-16 you say?

What could go wrong 

[psuhoffman]

20 minutes ago, PivotPoint said:

Days 7-16 you say?

What could go wrong 

Imo the same thing that has been...we just don’t get lucky in a decent to good longwave pattern. This year the problem hadn’t been a failure of guidance to see the pattern. It’s been the failure of mostly a decent to at times good pattern to produce anything. Imo the pathetic lack of cold for the pattern is the culprit. Yea it’s snowed in TX and TN and NC but they were all isolated upper level dynamically driven events with a really narrow expanse. If you were to look at a snowfall mean map so far more places are struggling then doing well. There have been scattered local hits because the track of SWs has been pretty good (good longwave pattern) but without cold and a lack of good baroclinic boundary due to that systems are pathetic at the surface and lack a big expense of snow that makes it more likely for us to cash in. 

[Ralph Wiggum]

This will be the one time the entire winter thus far the EPS holds and the GEFS/GEPS cave. 

[cbmclean]

24 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

It’s been the failure of mostly a decent to at times good pattern to produce anything.

Kind of a rhetorical/philosophical question, but we're in between model runs so why not: can you really call it a decent/good pattern if there is not enough cold air to sustain widespread snow? The presence or absence of cold air isn't just a random factor, it's a facet of the overall NH pattern.  And I completely understand what you have posted several times about much of the MA historical snow coming in similar patterns in the past but clearly those patterns had cold enough air and this one has not, at least up to this point. So I think it is fair to call it a "bad" pattern.

[CAPE]

4 minutes ago, cbmclean said:

Kind of a rhetorical/philosophical question, but we're in between model runs so why not: can you really call it a decent/good pattern if there is not enough cold air to sustain widespread snow? The presence or absence of cold air isn't just a random factor, it's a facet of the overall NH pattern.  And I completely understand what you have posted several times about much of the MA historical snow coming in similar patterns in the past but clearly those patterns had cold enough air and this one has not, at least up to this point. So I think it is fair to call it a "bad" pattern.

I will keep it really simple. No matter how "pretty" things look at h5, with the reds and the blues in the places we like- if sufficient cold isn't available, and it doesn't snow, it effing sucks. That is the simple reality, regardless of what historical analogs may suggest.

[Rvarookie]

2 hours ago, Weather Will said:

To keep my expectations in check, I refuse to get head faked by the deterministic models outside 5 days anymore.   If their respective ensembles show some support, I keep an eye on it....

Yeh man just keep posting those maps and I’m sure they will lead us to the promise land 

[cbmclean]

11 minutes ago, CAPE said:

if sufficient cold isn't available

Fair enough.  So let's analyze why sufficient cold air has not been available.  First suspect is of course the NPAC vortex.  But as PSU has pointed out, that vortex has been present in past analogs that have been "cold enough".  What's different now?  Well the elephant in the room is the warmer base state of course, which can explain a lot.  But gosh darn it, its not like there hasn't been any cold anomalies in the NH.  It's just all been stuck in Eurasia.  So that is what I want to understand?  WHY has it been stuck in Eurasia?

[CAPE]

It is pretty crazy how difficult it is to get a random snow shower or a light mix event anymore. That sort of thing used to happen even in pretty crappy patterns. Literally nothing last winter, and nothing so far this winter to this point for a large part of this sub forum. The worm needs to turn lol.

[psuhoffman]

17 minutes ago, cbmclean said:

Kind of a rhetorical/philosophical question, but we're in between model runs so why not: can you really call it a decent/good pattern if there is not enough cold air to sustain widespread snow? The presence or absence of cold air isn't just a random factor, it's a facet of the overall NH pattern.  And I completely understand what you have posted several times about much of the MA historical snow coming in similar patterns in the past but clearly those patterns had cold enough air and this one has not, at least up to this point. So I think it is fair to call it a "bad" pattern.

This is subjective. You aren’t wrong. When I say pattern I’m referring more to the broader longwave pattern. And at several times so far this year the pattern analogs have spit out very nice dates of snowstorms.  But it failed to produce this time the same as those past similar patterns. I do think I underestimated the harm the enhanced pac jet would do. Maybe some was bad luck. You know who didn’t...isotherm. He nailed this. He predicted favorable indexes for Dec and January yet said we wouldn’t get much snow. He predicted the pacific jet would destructively interfere. Im going to be totally honest here I might have a blind spot there because frankly I want to be an optimist...and I fear the enhanced pac jet might be a more permanent problem if as I suspect it’s partly due to the warmer base state of the pac.  And if the effect of that pac jet is that some of our best snow patterns are no longer viable...and we need cross polar flow which is pretty rare to offset it...and that is pac jet feature is a new somewhat permanent feature...well you get where this is going and it’s somewhere I don’t want to go!

[CAPE]

Just now, cbmclean said:

Fair enough.  So let's analyze why sufficient cold air has not been available.  First suspect is of course the NPAC vortex.  But as PSU has pointed out, that vortex has been present in past analogs that have been "cold enough".  What's different now?  Well the elephant in the room is the warmer base state of course, which can explain a lot.  But gosh darn it, its not like there hasn't been any cold anomalies in the NH.  It's just all been stuck in Eurasia.  So that is what I want to understand?  WHY has it been stuck in Eurasia?

That is it, plus a strong Pac jet, at least to this point. Yes we want a trough out there, but not a massive vortex sitting in the GoA. That is one way to get Pac air loaded into our source region. Problem is the base state in a Nina is not like it is in a  Nino, so it is more difficult to keep a "moderate" vortex back towards the Aleutians. Upshot is we are always up against it on the PAC side in a Nina. Without maintaining a perfect balance, we end up being fire hosed either way. I think it is more hostile lately than in previous years. That is another topic for another thread.

[psuhoffman]

9 minutes ago, cbmclean said:

Fair enough.  So let's analyze why sufficient cold air has not been available.  First suspect is of course the NPAC vortex.  But as PSU has pointed out, that vortex has been present in past analogs that have been "cold enough".  What's different now?  Well the elephant in the room is the warmer base state of course, which can explain a lot.  But gosh darn it, its not like there hasn't been any cold anomalies in the NH.  It's just all been stuck in Eurasia.  So that is what I want to understand?  WHY has it been stuck in Eurasia?

Much larger landmass at higher latitude and they aren’t downwind of the largest heat source on the planet. It is MUCH easier for deep cold air masses to develop in Asia then North America. 

[cbmclean]

7 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I fear the enhanced pac jet might be a more permanent problem if as I suspect it’s partly due to the warmer base state of the pac.  And

 

6 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

They aren’t downwind of the largest heat source on the planet 

All right then I think that just about sums it up.  If these suspicions are correct, then we have tough times ahead of us as snow lovers in eastern NA.

[CAPE]

Incredible. Getting a model to show a few pixels of blue over us is more difficult than pushing out a hard turd when constipated.

[clskinsfan]

GFS is a whiff this run. I think I am going to take a break for a week or so. Pretty clear nothing is happening at all in the next 7 days. 

[Cobalt]

It is pretty crazy how difficult it is to get a random snow shower or a light mix event anymore. That sort of thing used to happen even in pretty crappy patterns. Literally nothing last winter, and nothing so far this winter to this point for a large part of this sub forum. The worm needs to turn lol.

I think this was mentioned either last winter or in 17-18 by PSU, but don’t bad/crappy winters group into 3 or 4 year stretches? I hope this is just a case where a bad stretch is enhanced by warming baseline temps, but that’s probably the optimist way of looking at it :/


.

[IronTy]

4 minutes ago, cbmclean said:

 

All right then I think that just about sums it up.  If these suspicions are correct, then we have tough times ahead of us as snow lovers in eastern NA.

This is where I'm at, and why I'm ready to embrace the humid subtropical climate zone.  

[BristowWx]

Gonna sleep on Ji’s couch.  This is way too hard.  

[Yeoman]

I've caught up on all my sleep and ready for the endless threat tracking to begin!

[WinterWxLuvr]

1 minute ago, Yeoman said:

I've caught up on all my sleep and ready for the endless threat tracking to begin!

Go back to sleep Rip

[cbmclean]

Well if snow is a unicorn now, we have two choices: we can pack it in or we can become unicorn hunters.  It seems likely that hunting for discrete threats is pointless until and unless the NA thermal profile changes.  What is the status of that?  TT is taking forever to finish loading the 18Z GEFS.  Is the Canadian torch still scheduled for demolition?  Has anyone seen on the the pay sites yet?

[Thanatos_I_Am]

4 minutes ago, Yeoman said:

I've caught up on all my sleep and ready for the endless threat tracking to begin!

Get excited, in 7 days we will be trying to will a storm 500 miles in our direction. 

[psuhoffman]

27 minutes ago, CAPE said:

That is it, plus a strong Pac jet, at least to this point. Yes we want a trough out there, but not a massive vortex sitting in the GoA. That is one way to get Pac air loaded into our source region. Problem is the base state in a Nina is not like it is in a  Nino, so it is more difficult to keep a "moderate" vortex back towards the Aleutians. Upshot is we are always up against it on the PAC side in a Nina. Without maintaining a perfect balance, we end up being fire hosed either way. I think it is more hostile lately than in previous years. That is another topic for another thread.

Agree with all this but I think the enhanced pac jet isn’t totally Nina related. Some of the better analogs I mentioned that also featured a similar N PAC pattern were Nina’s. They didn’t produce huge years but decent snowfall and that was always my high end goal. 

[PivotPoint]

1 hour ago, psuhoffman said:

Imo the same thing that has been...we just don’t get lucky in a decent to good longwave pattern. This year the problem hadn’t been a failure of guidance to see the pattern. It’s been the failure of mostly a decent to at times good pattern to produce anything. Imo the pathetic lack of cold for the pattern is the culprit. Yea it’s snowed in TX and TN and NC but they were all isolated upper level dynamically driven events with a really narrow expanse. If you were to look at a snowfall mean map so far more places are struggling then doing well. There have been scattered local hits because the track of SWs has been pretty good (good longwave pattern) but without cold and a lack of good baroclinic boundary due to that systems are pathetic at the surface and lack a big expense of snow that makes it more likely for us to cash in. 

Agreed..  and I’m not sure I gathered what you were saying earlier. You were saying that the upcoming h5 setup in the 7-10 day range is more indicative of how we fail then how we usually succeed? Because of the TPV being displaced this far south? I understand that we don’t want the TPV centered in the southern central CA but not sure what your explanation was for a ridge out west and lower heights in the southern tier being a fail setup. Seemed like the heights around the lakes were keeping our trough from turning negative and moving up the coast. What am I missing 

[Cobalt]

Well if snow is a unicorn now, we have two choices: we can pack it in or we can become unicorn hunters.  It seems likely that hunting for discrete threats is pointless until and unless the NA thermal profile changes.  What is the status of that?  TT is taking forever to finish loading the 18Z GEFS.  Is the Canadian torch still scheduled for demolition?  Has anyone seen on the the pay sites yet?

Here’s 12z for reference. Haven’t seen 18z yet, but this is a pretty cold airmass, albeit centered to the west of us. Not at torcherrific at least??


.

[cbmclean]

1 minute ago, Cobalt said:

Here’s 12z for reference. Haven’t seen 18z yet, but this is a pretty cold airmass, albeit centered to the west of us. Not at torcherrific at least??


.

Thanks.  This is a start at least.  Now we need a mechanism to get this moving east.