Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,589
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Jan 31 - Feb 2 Storm


stormtracker
 Share

Recommended Posts

FWIW I just watched Bernie Rayno’s update. He wasn’t bullish—definitely cautious as he kept focusing on the upper level still being a rather large question mark to steer the coastal pivot etc...I don’t believe we have seen any models that lack that formation up to this point correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hurricanegiants said:

FWIW I just watched Bernie Rayno’s update. He wasn’t bullish—definitely cautious as he kept focusing on the upper level still being a rather large question mark to steer the coastal pivot etc...I don’t believe we have seen any models that lack that formation up to this point correct?

Yeah pretty much every model forms a coastal but there is obviously still a big question mark as to where it delivers the biggest impacts.  If I was a forecaster I'd be focused on telling the public that some accumulating snow is likely Sunday and Sunday night and the impacts of the coastal on Monday are yet to be determined.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said:

Yeah pretty much every model forms a coastal but there is obviously still a big question mark as to where it delivers the biggest impacts.  If I was a forecaster I'd be focused on telling the public that some accumulating snow is likely Sunday and Sunday night and the impacts of the coastal on Monday are yet to be determined.

I agree.  Just give folks a generalization right now and work on the details as we get even closer.  Bernie has been burned a couple times already this year, so that may also play into his current forecast. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, losetoa6 said:

February 9-10, 2010 Miller B HECS had the primary into Ohio fwiw then a tucked coastal off Delaware 

PhotoPictureResizer_210128_093245450_crop_1200x1936.jpg

PhotoPictureResizer_210128_093601378_crop_1152x1862.jpg

Ah so that one tucked off of Delaware? That would explain the period freezing rain mixed in that the 19 year-old me was shamefully whining about...lol (even after all that we still got 19 inches in the city!)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

Not for all of us it wouldnt. That storm kind of sucked out here. 

It’s tough as someone in our subforum has to lose in order for the majority to win and maximize the potential. Whether it’s you out in Winchester or those SE of DC, someone has to lose as a standard due to climo, location, and storm track.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@H2O You brought up very legit points last night.  Before things get crazy let me explain why suppression is my bigger concern in this situation.  Partly its about hedging bets.  Given the confluence to our north, the high, and the cold as the wave approaches...I see virtually no way we get totally blanked with a cutter scenario.  At the least we would get a nice WAA thump snow to dry slot.  Maybe that isn't the 1-2 feet some are acting like we NEED for this not to bust...but I have 2 kids that are literally asking EVERYDAY when is it going to snow and to them there is almost no difference between 4" and 12".  Frankly...20" is probably TOO much for them lol.  I will still take it...they can wait for it to melt some!  So my first consideration is "how do we avoid the total fail" where my ground ends up bare or with some pathetic amount that precludes sledding, snow fort building and the such.  And IMO that is suppressed.  Rooting against suppressed may mute the chances of the 2 foot solution some...but the math in my head I separate the boom (12"+) and the bust (less then 4") scenarios.  Rooting for a more squashed wave might increase the boom but it increases the bust with this.  So I would take a 50/10 (boom% v bust%)  type split over a 70/40 type split.   Also...frankly just looking at the h5 flow over the top of us and to the NE, I think the degree to which this can go north is muted.  The flow is relaxing yes but its still pretty compressed to our northeast as the system enters the midwest.  The further south guidance just "feels" more realistic.  I can be wrong.  I've been wrong.  Just my gut.  Lastly...the biggest risk, as I told Ji like 3 days ago...is a split.  A suppression with the WAA wave then a slow primary that meanders northwest of us causing a late secondary that misses us northeast.  But that is still "suppression" imo because the WAA wave is our bread and butter less likely to fail option.  The CCB of a developing secondary coastal is ALWAYS a risky proposition and better to be taken as bonus not relied on.  All that said...obviously I am human and biased and the fact I live on the northern tip of our geographic region needs to be taken into consideration.  But even for places like Baltimore and Frederick and Winchester...I think my thoughts are valid.  If I lived south of DC I would probably have a totally different preference for how I want this to evolve.  

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

Anyone have a sec for a newie question?  Lots of comments about the initial thump, and it being cold powder, and referring to it as WAA. Which I understand is warm air advection. How does WARM air advection translate to cold powder?  Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SpeedyWX said:

Anyone have a sec for a newie question?  Lots of comments about the initial thump, and it being cold powder, and referring to it as WAA. Which I understand is warm air advection. How does WARM air advection translate to cold powder?  Thanks.

Warm air rises, cold air sinks.  When the warm air rises, it condenses into precipitation and since it’s moving into a cold air mass, the precip falls as snow.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

@H2O You brought up very legit points last night.  Before things get crazy let me explain why suppression is my bigger concern in this situation.  Partly its about hedging bets.  Given the confluence to our north, the high, and the cold as the wave approaches...I see virtually no way we get totally blanked with a cutter scenario.  At the least we would get a nice WAA thump snow to dry slot.  Maybe that isn't the 1-2 feet some are acting like we NEED for this not to bust...but I have 2 kids that are literally asking EVERYDAY when is it going to snow and to them there is almost no difference between 4" and 12".  Frankly...20" is probably TOO much for them lol.  I will still take it...they can wait for it to melt some!  So my first consideration is "how do we avoid the total fail" where my ground ends up bare or with some pathetic amount that precludes sledding, snow fort building and the such.  And IMO that is suppressed.  Rooting against suppressed may mute the chances of the 2 foot solution some...but the math in my head I separate the boom (12"+) and the bust (less then 4") scenarios.  Rooting for a more squashed wave might increase the boom but it increases the bust with this.  So I would take a 50/10 (boom% v bust%)  type split over a 70/40 type split.   Also...frankly just looking at the h5 flow over the top of us and to the NE, I think the degree to which this can go north is muted.  The flow is relaxing yes but its still pretty compressed to our northeast as the system enters the midwest.  The further south guidance just "feels" more realistic.  I can be wrong.  I've been wrong.  Just my gut.  Lastly...the biggest risk, as I told Ji like 3 days ago...is a split.  A suppression with the WAA wave then a slow primary that meanders northwest of us causing a late secondary that misses us northeast.  But that is still "suppression" imo because the WAA wave is our bread and butter less likely to fail option.  The CCB of a developing secondary coastal is ALWAYS a risky proposition and better to be taken as bonus not relied on.  All that said...obviously I am human and biased and the fact I live on the northern tip of our geographic region needs to be taken into consideration.  But even for places like Baltimore and Frederick and Winchester...I think my thoughts are valid.  If I lived south of DC I would probably have a totally different preference for how I want this to evolve.  

Completely understandable.  Also understand why @clskinsfan doesn't like a 2009-10 analog.

That said, those of us out near Dulles strongly favor the suppressed solution :). It's been five years since the last "big one" here -- and the setup is very similar to some of our historic storms.  There is always some risk, but we are about 72 hours out and still have a coastal on the table -- it's been a while since we were this close.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ICON makes the jump to the secondary off the delmarva.  Yes the process "begins" down in NC but its really just in its infancy stage and the coastal front baroclinic zone starts to amplify...it doesn't really take over as the primary circulation until at our latitude.  That is no good.  We need the Euro solution of a clean transfer to the outer banks.  That simple.  ICON solution would still be a nice front end WAA snow though.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SpeedyWX said:

Anyone have a sec for a newie question?  Lots of comments about the initial thump, and it being cold powder, and referring to it as WAA. Which I understand is warm air advection. How does WARM air advection translate to cold powder?  Thanks.

WAA is a translation to greater moisture feed. When you have warmer, less dense air riding into colder airmasses, you get a period of ascent that generates precip once it enters the colder thermal profile. Snowfall is physical mechanism generated by cooled water and enhanced through ascent (lifting mechanisms). WAA over a cold environment will lead to enhanced areas of lift within the boundary layer responsible for a majority of crystal growth in snow. You might have seen the term "Frontogenesis or Frontogen" mentioned in the forum at times. Those are favored areas of lift within certain boundary layers in the atmosphere. WAA regimes are typically located within the 850mb to 600mb layer aloft, which is favored with moisture transport. The better the lift between certain temperature profiles tends to generate better snow crystal structure (Dendrites) that accumulate more efficiently and are lighter in nature due to less water vapor condensing to make the snowflake. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I have 2 kids that are literally asking EVERYDAY when is it going to snow and to them there is almost no difference between 4" and 12".  

This hit home for me. I have a 3yo and 5yo and neither has really ever been able to go out and play in a good snow. If Sunday plays out like the models have been suggesting with all day snowfall, everything sticking due to prime climo, no sun angle worries, low temps... and it puts down 4-5" for my kids and I to go play in, I'm happy even if the coastal misses us. I hope the coastal CCB crushes us on Monday, of course, but I don't need it to be happy with this storm. My bar is low given the lack of snow lately so I've been putting it at a little under the ENS mean outputs, so a 4-6" storm is fine with me. As you and others have said... anyone upset over 4-6" from a Miller B in Nina doesn't know or is willfully ignoring our climo.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

ICON makes the jump to the secondary off the delmarva.  Yes the process "begins" down in NC but its really just in its infancy stage and the coastal front baroclinic zone starts to amplify...it doesn't really take over as the primary circulation until at our latitude.  That is no good.  We need the Euro solution of a clean transfer to the outer banks.  That simple.  ICON solution would still be a nice front end WAA snow though.  

I do hope we can end this model stalemate today...one way or the other. What are the other late transfer models doing to make the primary go awry? Having it be too strong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

The 12k NAM on the last frame the surface low in NC is already developing a closed circulation.  The next step we would want to see is the 850 low start to jump and reorganize along with the secondary. 

It's one of those times where I hope the NAM is on to the right idea for y'alls sake!

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

RGEM is even further south of the NAM but it is a little slower getting the secondary...but you can see it's going to jump to NC but it has not started to develop a closed circulation YET.  But given the look at 84 the RGEM looks like it will go more the euro/nam route also.  

I was not looking at the last frame of the RGEM, hadn't updated DOH...now that I see it the RGEM is VERY similar to the NAM and Euro.  Secondary is taking over near Greenville NC on the last frame and has begun to develop a closed circulation.  That really is the key...the "worse" globals like the ICON and GFS that mostly miss us with the coastal ccb do so because they linger the primary longer and don't really begin the process of amplifying the secondary until it is off the VA capes.  We need that process to start in NC.  

  • Like 10
  • Weenie 3
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...