Monitoring a potential important TV to East Coastal storm: Jan 17

[40/70 Benchmark]

The mid levels are a HUGE red flag in this.....its a limiting factor that is next to impossible to overcome if you are looking for excessive snowfall amounts.

1) They are flying west, so you not only have warm air advection, which is the primary mechanism for precipitation for us...but you also have a dry slot that will shut off precip shortly after change over well inland.

2) The mid level mechanics/dynamics will be in decay on approach, which would still be a limiting factor even if it were tracking farther east. 

This will be a nice, lateral thump of WAA driven snowfall for a several hours, and that is it....you warm and dry out in the mid levels and its done.

[40/70 Benchmark]

2 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

I could see a rather substantial coastal front with this and a subsequent band of extremely heavy snow. Something maybe upwards of 12-18''. Missed your first call so not sure what your thoughts on on this. 

12-18" where??

 

[weatherwiz]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

12-18" where??

In the vicinity of where the coastal front sets up. While I am a bit skeptical on this I think there is room to get some rather impressive ratios where lift can be maximized and that will go along way. There's also going to be a tremendous amount of moisture thrown into the initial cold airmass. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

5 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

In the vicinity of where the coastal front sets up. While I am a bit skeptical on this I think there is room to get some rather impressive ratios where lift can be maximized and that will go along way. There's also going to be a tremendous amount of moisture thrown into the initial cold airmass. 

No one is getting 12-18" in SNE...only spot to approach a foot will be the higher terrain of Berkshires. You would need some extraordinary WAA dynamics for that..this isn't 3/4/1993. Plus, don't forget....the high is hauling ass to the east...its not remaining NW of Caribou like 12/16/2007, so that will limit the front ender, too.

Could be some slight enhancement near the CF during the WAA burst, but I can explore that more for Sunday's map.

[Typhoon Tip]

9 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

The mid levels are a HUGE red flag in this.....its a limiting factor that is next to impossible to overcome if you are looking for excessive snowfall amounts.

1) They are flying west, so you not only have warm air advection, which is the primary mechanism for precipitation for us...but you also have a dry slot that will shut off precip shortly after change over well inland.

2) The mid level mechanics/dynamics will be in decay on approach, which would still be a limiting factor even if it were tracking farther east. 

This will be a nice, lateral thump of WAA driven snowfall for a several hours, and that is it....you warm and dry out in the mid levels and its done.

Depends which model one considers the most … 

Someone needs to ping George. This becoming a very serious situation with this latest 

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

Just getting caught up. Read the last 5 pages lol, thankfully, after a gummy.
 

But seriously, I am still having a hard time understanding how this turns the corner down south that sharply off a positive trough. I remember the rule, in general, that troughs need to turn neutral while crossing the Miss river for an I95 snower in the northeast. What gives?

DISCLAIMER: This is for educational purposes only and not a wishcast. 

[weatherwiz]

3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

No one is getting 12-18" in SNE...only spot to approach a foot will be the higher terrain of Berkshires. You would need some extraordinary mechanics for that..this isn't 3/4/1993. Plus, don't forget....the high is hauling ass to the east...its not remaining NW of Caribou like 12/16/2007, so that will limit the front ender, too.

Could be some slight enhancement near the CF during the WAA burst, but I can explore that more for Sunday's map.

Well that's the thing...I think there is. I know some aren't in favor of looking into specifics this far out but at least on the GFS there are several bufkit soundings showing 50-60+ units of omega into the DGZ. If that were to verify we'd be talking 3-5'' per hour snowfall rates. There are certainly some flags at stake but there are also some pretty impressive signals indicating such potential. I actually think the high sliding and hauling ass to the east may actually help here b/c given the initial airmass we would be super dry aloft...so it hauling reduces the potential for dry air to contend with. 

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

3 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Depends which model one considers the most … 

Someone needs to ping George. This becoming a very serious situation with this latest 

@George001watching reruns of his best performances?

[Henry's Weather]

If we could just move that closed contour over a select couple of bereaved Taunton dwellers, we'd be in the clear. It's so close to being so much better

[ROOSTA]

IDK. IMHO thinking is it's way to early to be putting numbers out. Present models (well, GFS anyway) has a more N to S orientation to snow amounts with the Metro Boston area briefly starting as snow and end up with zip to 1" of slop. Double barrelled L's that never consolidate. At the height of the tempest the surface is flooded with warmth out to roughly the Berks. Throwing in the obligatory ----ATT      

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, weatherwiz said:

Well that's the thing...I think there is. I know some aren't in favor of looking into specifics this far out but at least on the GFS there are several bufkit soundings showing 50-60+ units of omega into the DGZ. If that were to verify we'd be talking 3-5'' per hour snowfall rates. There are certainly some flags at stake but there are also some pretty impressive signals indicating such potential. I actually think the high sliding and hauling ass to the east may actually help here b/c given the initial airmass we would be super dry aloft...so it hauling reduces the potential for dry air to contend with. 

Fair point, but I feel like at this point where are getting into the type of considerations better suited for short lead times....I think the initial course of least regret considering the mid levels it to begin conservative, and if it looks extraordinary enough at the 11th hour, fine..

[PhineasC]

The NAVGEM has the textbook weenie track for interior New England it looks like. Too bad it's a terrible model.

[40/70 Benchmark]

The only system that I can recall producing widespread amounts in excess of one foot when the primary vehicle for the production of precipitation is WAA with decaying mid levels flying west is 3-14-93...Will can correct me if I am wrong on that.

[dendrite]

9 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

Just getting caught up. Read the last 5 pages lol, thankfully, after a gummy.
 

But seriously, I am still having a hard time understanding how this turns the corner down south that sharply off a positive trough. I remember the rule, in general, that troughs need to turn neutral while crossing the Miss river for an I95 snower in the northeast. What gives?

DISCLAIMER: This is for educational purposes only and not a wishcast. 

See that northern stream s/w just north of MT in that image? That sucker is going to dive in and slingshot the whole southern UL system northward.

[weatherwiz]

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Fair point, but I feel like at this point where are getting into the type of considerations better suited for short lead times....I think the initial course of least regret considering the mid levels it to begin conservative, and if it looks extraordinary enough at the 11th hour, fine..

You're absolutely right here. Totally agree with this. I certainly wouldn't communicate this publicly. Just something to throw out for discussion here. 

[Henry's Weather]

9 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

Just getting caught up. Read the last 5 pages lol, thankfully, after a gummy.
 

But seriously, I am still having a hard time understanding how this turns the corner down south that sharply off a positive trough. I remember the rule, in general, that troughs need to turn neutral while crossing the Miss river for an I95 snower in the northeast. What gives?

DISCLAIMER: This is for educational purposes only and not a wishcast. 

This is pretty unscientific but I see the diving northern energy as something plunging beneath the surface of some body of water (jet), displacing "water" upstream ahead of it. Ay yi yi

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

The only system that I can recall producing widespread amounts in excess of one foot when the primary vehicle for the production of precipitation is WAA is 3-14-93...Will can correct me if I am wrong on that.

Mar17 was pretty damn good but I don’t recall how widespread 12-16” amounts where. 

[Typhoon Tip]

8 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

The NAVGEM has the textbook weenie track for interior New England it looks like. Too bad it's a terrible model.

Too bad George001 wasn’t a type-A personality with an adversarial narcissistic sensitivity disorder … then reading that.  

- popcorn and coke awesome

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

2 minutes ago, dendrite said:

See that northern stream s/w just north of MT in that image? That sucker is going to dive in and slingshot the whole southern UL system northward.

Yea I know, it just seems so far away but it rushes in to tickle it. I guess n stream fast flow allows it to catch it early enough?

[40/70 Benchmark]

2 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

You're absolutely right here. Totally agree with this. I certainly wouldn't communicate this publicly. Just something to throw out for discussion here. 

This is why I give myself two kicks at the can before go-time....obviously, pro forecasts are even more fluid.

[Hoth]

If the high were staying put in Canada, I'd be a lot more bullish, but the fooker is diving off the coast. I find it hard to believe the coastal front thing Wiz is picturing can work out with that look, but we'll see. He was all over last week's event.

[PhineasC]

Just now, Typhoon Tip said:

Too bad George001 wasn’t a type-A personality with an adversarial narcissistic sensitivity disorder … You against him would popcorn and coke awesome

The NAVGEM has its place with sea state forecasts and determining if a typhoon will sink your battleship. It sucks when land is involved.

The US Army officially uses the UKMET to forecast so they can't point fingers. LOL

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, Hoth said:

If the high were staying put in Canada, I'd be a lot more bullish, but the fooker is diving off the coast. I find it hard to believe the coastal front thing Wiz is picturing can work out with that look, but we'll see. He was all over last week's event.

Exactly. Right now, to me that is the main difference between this event and high-end WAA producers like 12-16-2007, which approached 1' over a large area.

[Ginx snewx]

16 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

Well that's the thing...I think there is. I know some aren't in favor of looking into specifics this far out but at least on the GFS there are several bufkit soundings showing 50-60+ units of omega into the DGZ. If that were to verify we'd be talking 3-5'' per hour snowfall rates. There are certainly some flags at stake but there are also some pretty impressive signals indicating such potential. I actually think the high sliding and hauling ass to the east may actually help here b/c given the initial airmass we would be super dry aloft...so it hauling reduces the potential for dry air to contend with. 

Exactly what can still happen. I mean 4 days out...

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, Ginx snewx said:

Exactly what can still happen. I mean 4 days out...

Absolutely fair point....but a question for this weekend, not tonight haha

[weatherwiz]

2 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

This is why I give myself two kicks at the can before go-time....obviously, pro forecasts are even more fluid.

Your thoughts and thinking are certainly incredibly reasonable here which is always par of the course with you. It's always best to go conservative and you can always adjust towards a more aggressive scenario. 

1 minute ago, Hoth said:

If the high were staying put in Canada, I'd be a lot more bullish, but the fooker is diving off the coast. I find it hard to believe the coastal front thing Wiz is picturing can work out with that look, but we'll see. He was all over last week's event.

I believe if the high was staying pit we would be getting dry air entrainment and that would significantly hurt things. This setup...this is extremely unique. There are certainly several red flags towards higher-end snow, but there are also numerous signals for some significant snow. As Ray stated, this will likely come down to mesoscale time but given the degree of dynamics at play and the airmass ahead of the storm..,I think the ceiling is high. But that comes with caution b/c there will likely be an extreme gradient between coastal/inland. 

[78Blizzard]

16 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

The NAVGEM has the textbook weenie track for interior New England it looks like. Too bad it's a terrible model.

At least it went east, not west. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

23 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

Well that's the thing...I think there is. I know some aren't in favor of looking into specifics this far out but at least on the GFS there are several bufkit soundings showing 50-60+ units of omega into the DGZ. If that were to verify we'd be talking 3-5'' per hour snowfall rates. There are certainly some flags at stake but there are also some pretty impressive signals indicating such potential. I actually think the high sliding and hauling ass to the east may actually help here b/c given the initial airmass we would be super dry aloft...so it hauling reduces the potential for dry air to contend with. 

One more note...this was not an issue in 12-16-07....the high was anchored NNW of Caribou, and it hit with an absolute wall of snow. I think that enhances frontogenesis, especially in the low levels just to the polar side of the coastal front. Now, this antecedent airmass may be a bit more impressive, but usually dry air is fairly easily overcome in intense WAA. Its seems inconsistent to to harp on how proficient the lift looks with the WAA, and then cite the high retreating as  a positive to help overcome dry air. Not sure I buy that, and view the retreating high as a negative. if the WAA is that impressive, then...dry air? Really?

[WinterWolf]

11 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

Yea I know, it just seems so far away but it rushes in to tickle it. I guess n stream fast flow allows it to catch it early enough?

I think this doesn’t phase as proficiently as forecasted too….many times it never does/is less proficient than forecast. Let’s see how that shapes up the next couple days? 

[WinterWolf]

3 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

Your thoughts and thinking are certainly incredibly reasonable here which is always par of the course with you. It's always best to go conservative and you can always adjust towards a more aggressive scenario. 

I believe if the high was staying pit we would be getting dry air entrainment and that would significantly hurt things. This setup...this is extremely unique. There are certainly several red flags towards higher-end snow, but there are also numerous signals for some significant snow. As Ray stated, this will likely come down to mesoscale time but given the degree of dynamics at play and the airmass ahead of the storm..,I think the ceiling is high. But that comes with caution b/c there will likely be an extreme gradient between coastal/inland. 

Very very interesting, and intriguing Wiz…I like the analysis you brought up. It’ll be very interesting how this all comes together.