February 7th Storm Threat Discussion/Obs

[psuhoffman]

HREF looks nice Imo 

[Baltimorewx]

Salisbury bullseye on the Canadian. Fairly sizeable shift east from 12z

[AmericanWxFreak]

Welp 

[Ji]

Why can't we ever get a storm where there isn't a model that raises serious doubts

[SnowDreamer]

3 minutes ago, AmericanWxFreak said:

Welp 

Looks quite similar to the HRDPS and RGEM, good agreement coming out of the northern neighbor suite tonight. 

[KAOS]

HERPADERP and RGEM.... not what I would hang my hat on.

[fourseasons]

34 minutes ago, Ravens94 said:

Lol RPM looks mega amped 

My first thought was don't wear a suit jacket that blends in with your snow forecast map.

[KAOS]

2 minutes ago, fourseasons said:

My first thought was don't wear a suit jacket that blends in with your snow forecast map.

[SnowDreamer]

2 minutes ago, losetoa6 said:

Ukie looks east of majority of guidance 

Classic

[caviman2201]

4 minutes ago, losetoa6 said:

Ukie looks east of majority of guidance 

Quickly becoming the minority here in the 11th hour. We seem to keep having storms trend worse in the homestretch.

[nj2va]

There’s too many models thesedays.  

[Wetbulbs88]

Just now, nj2va said:

There’s too many models thesedays.  

That’s because they all generally suck considering how advanced civilization is. 

[feloniousq]

6 minutes ago, Wetbulbs88 said:

That’s because they all generally suck considering how advanced civilization is. 

it makes CWG's "we have low to medium confidence that you will get 2-20 inches" forecasts look reasonable because that's literally what the range of guidance is outputting

[Wetbulbs88]

Just now, feloniousq said:

it makes CWG's "we have low to medium confidence that you will get 2-20 inches" forecasts look reasonable because that's literally what the range of guidance is outputting

Exactly. They’re just giving the truth. 

[high risk]

12 minutes ago, SnowDreamer said:

Classic

         That's an ugly map, but the QPF has 0.5" running right through DC, so I think it's just a little too warm in the low levels for more snow?

[Wetbulbs88]

Then again that’s what makes this game so fun. If it was so predictable it would be nice but these lead ups are half the fun. 

[caviman2201]

1 minute ago, Wetbulbs88 said:

Exactly. They’re just giving the truth. 

Except they're supposed to tell me something I don't know by looking at the spread on TT...

[capitalweather]

16 minutes ago, caviman2201 said:

Except they're supposed to tell me something I don't know by looking at the spread on TT...

Um-- we issued a map for 1-3" along with detailed discussion and fully explain why our forecast is what it is. and we give boom/bust scenarios because that's the responsible, scientific thing to do when you have an uncertain situation...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2021/02/05/washington-dc-snow-superbowl/

[Amped]

42 minutes ago, SnowDreamer said:

Classic

The ultimate middle finger.

[jewell2188]

8 minutes ago, capitalweather said:

Um-- we issued a map for 1-3" along with detailed discussion and fully explain why our forecast is what it is. and we give boom/bust scenarios because that's the responsible, scientific thing to do when you have an uncertain situation...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2021/02/05/washington-dc-snow-superbowl/

I honestly think 3-6 is a reasonable call. Hell 1-6 is reasonable. 6 or more is a plus. I think 4 region wide is the most likely. 

[Wetbulbs88]

32 minutes ago, caviman2201 said:

Except they're supposed to tell me something I don't know by looking at the spread on TT...

If you want them to lie to you then maybe. But if you actually keep track of their calls they’re a thousand times better than most. 

[nw baltimore wx]

2 hours ago, losetoa6 said:

I'll take a 40 mile nw bump to take that Baltimore Jack from @nw baltimore wx

Dude. You’ll be down in the area for work anyway, so root for it here so we can have a beer and you can lose at pool.

[WxMan1]

48 minutes ago, SnowDreamer said:

Classic

This is something to watch. There's definitely a March-ish look to this system. Some potential instability aloft, real good 850-700 FGEN as well. Translation: Good chance for banding. Usually the northern (heavier snow) axis is where there's better/deeper lift in the DGZ, while the southern axis aligns with some lower FGEN along with some better elevated instability potential. So what happens "in between", which would be the immediate DC metro as implied from the current UKMet and GFS? Just like any other weather scenario where there's weak symmetric stability or some (weak) instability: areas in between bands will see relative subsidence in layers (weaker UVVs overall), which kills the rates. When your boundary layer temps are marginal (33/31 at the surface for example), rates are EVERYTHING.  

[caviman2201]

4 minutes ago, Wetbulbs88 said:

If you want them to lie to you then maybe. But if you actually keep track of their calls they’re a thousand times better than most. 

We're 24h from onset. I want them as meteorologists to make a forecast of a range of snowfall without a bunch of caveats and let the chips fall where they may. I'm happy to read all the disco/explanation but make a call on a map. Sorry if that's asking too much.

With that I'm going to let it drop.

[Wetbulbs88]

Just now, caviman2201 said:

We're 24h from onset. I want them as meteorologists to make a forecast of a range of snowfall without a bunch of caveats and let the chips fall where they may. I'm happy to read all the disco/explanation but make a call on a map. Sorry if that's asking too much.

With that I'm going to let it drop.

The you’re looking for a lie. Otherwise you’re just lying to yourself. There’s really no other way to put it. If we had it your way everyone would just be wrong all the time. Weather is far more nuanced than that and therefore calls for a nuanced forecast. 

[yoda]

00z EURO is tasty at 36

[yoda]

4 minutes ago, Wetbulbs88 said:

The you’re looking for a lie. Otherwise you’re just lying to yourself. There’s really no other way to put it. If we had it your way everyone would just be wrong all the time. Weather is far more nuanced than that and therefore calls for a nuanced forecast. 

no... the idea is to make ONE call.

If you make 3, then you can be right all the time - that's the problem

 

CWG can say they were right if we get 4-6 because of their "boom"

CWG can say they were right if we get 2-4 because that was their "call"

CWG can say they were right if we get 1" because that was their "bust"

[Jebman]

Congrats to all in the Mid Atlantic on your latest Winter Storm Watch!!!!!!

You'll get good accumulating snows with this then a kick ass Arctic airmass!

This, is only the beginning...............................

 

[jaydreb]

Slight tick SE but pretty close to 18z.  
 

 

[capitalweather]

5 minutes ago, yoda said:

no... the idea is to make ONE call.

If you make 3, then you can be right all the time - that's the problem

 

CWG can say they were right if we get 4-6 because of their "boom"

CWG can say they were right if we get 2-4 because that was their "call"

CWG can say they were right if we get 1" because that was their "bust"

This is just nonsense. We grade ourselves and put most of our emphasis on our most likely call -- not the boom/bust which is the fine print. The boom and bust are just provided so people understand the full range of possibilities and how our forecast could go wrong. Go back and read any of the postmortems we've written over the last 5-10 years in which we've evaluated our snow forecasts after the fact. We hold ourselves accountable to our most likely call. Our approach has been praised by the top people in the profession.