December 2022

[Nibor]

3 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

Don't get your hopes up. I'm quietly looking at it and that's it. I fully expect failure 

[winterwx21]

The funny thing is that even though the CMC hits us with the potential wednesday event next week, it warms us up enough that it's mostly sleet and you have to go way NW to see snow accumulations. Obviously at this range a model showing a detail like that doesn't matter very much, but it wouldn't be a surprise if something like that happened since we've really been getting screwed in this December pattern. 

[SnoSki14]

3 minutes ago, winterwx21 said:

The funny thing is that even though the CMC hits us with the potential wednesday event next week, it warms us up enough that it's mostly sleet and you have to go way NW to see snow accumulations. Obviously at this range a model showing a detail like that doesn't matter very much, but it wouldn't be a surprise if something like that happened since we've really been getting screwed in this December pattern. 

Expectations are very low but if the PNA doesn't break down then chances for something go up. 

[Winterweatherlover]

4 minutes ago, winterwx21 said:

The funny thing is that even though the CMC hits us with the potential wednesday event next week, it warms us up enough that it's mostly sleet and you have to go way NW to see snow accumulations. Obviously at this range a model showing a detail like that doesn't matter very much, but it wouldn't be a surprise if something like that happened since we've really been getting screwed in this December pattern. 

I’d take a sleet storm it’s better than rain. 

[Nibor]

4 minutes ago, winterwx21 said:

Obviously at this range a model showing a detail like that doesn't matter very much

5 minutes ago, winterwx21 said:

but it wouldn't be a surprise if something like that happened since we've really been getting screwed in this December pattern. 

[Winterweatherlover]

The CMC has actually been creeping SE with backend snow on Friday. It’s kind of getting close for the northern and western parts of the subforum. We’ll see. 

[winterwx21]

11 minutes ago, Nibor said:

Somehow you didn't understand my point? By next wednesday we're starting to warm up, so there would be the threat of it not being a snow event if we get hit. The threat, not that I'm saying that would definitely be the case. At this early point there's no way to know details. 

Right now my guess is we won't get hit by anything as most model runs have been showing, but a long way to go. At least it's a little something to watch even though it's a longshot. 

[Winterweatherlover]

2 minutes ago, winterwx21 said:

Somehow you didn't understand my point? By next wednesday we're starting to warm up, so there would be the threat of it not being a snow event if we get hit. The threat, not that I'm saying that would definitely be the case. At this early point there's no way to know details. 

Right now my guess is we won't get hit by anything as most model runs have been showing, but a long way to go. At least it's a little something to watch even though it's a longshot. 

I don’t think what most models are showing 7-8 days out means anything. A hit is equally likely to no hit at this point imo. 
 

In terms of precip type very much undetermined but agree with you I don’t think we can just assume it’d be snow. 

[winterwx21]

2 minutes ago, Winterweatherlover said:

I don’t think what most models are showing 7-8 days out means anything. A hit is equally likely to no hit at this point imo. 
 

In terms of precip type very much undetermined but agree with you I don’t think we can just assume it’d be snow. 

I think brooklynwx did a good job explaining why it's a low chance. But, a low chance is better than nothing to watch at all. After that we go into a warmer pattern, so it could be our last chance for quite awhile. 

[wdrag]

D3 (Thu night) thunderstorm potential up here in the strong WAA pattern. Marginal risk is further south in e VA/NC.

[LoboLeader1]

High temp of 38F yesterday, overnight low of 30. NWS has temps near 58 on Friday, before temps go crashing in the afternoon.

[donsutherland1]

Morning thoughts…

Today will be partly to mostly sunny and cool.  High temperatures will reach mainly the upper 30s in most of the region. Likely high temperatures around the region include:

New York City (Central Park): 38°

Newark: 40°

Philadelphia: 39°

The dry weather will continue through tomorrow.

Normals:

New York City: 30-Year: 43.0°; 15-Year: 43.8°

Newark: 30-Year: 43.5°; 15-Year: 44.5°

Philadelphia: 30-Year: 44.8°; 15-Year: 45.8°

[North and West]

I agree with this quibble. I’ve sometimes mentioned sample size limitations and probably, but should do so more often. I note some cases/examples, e.g., 1958-58 in my commentary for purposes of illustration, but avoid references to analogs, as such references would go beyond the strength of relationships. Even an outcome that is 50% above climatology can still be a fairly low probability outcome. 10”+ snowstorms are uncommon events by any measure.
Skill clearly dissipates as timeframes grow. Coefficients of determination also leave large parts of explanation beyond limited numbers of variables, especially as one considers the synoptic scale. Further complicating things is the reality of a dynamic climate that is altering existing relationships among variables.
In the extended range, to use an analogy, one is always peering into the fog or mist of uncertainty. That’s why I embrace probabilistic language such as “likely,” and like CPC’s approach.
Finally, models and ensembles have come far—and they consistently outperform the human level of skill—but they still have real limits. Machine learning/AI holds additional promise. How to convey the inherent uncertainty and limitations is a continuing question. I don’t have definitive answers to this question. Critiques are both welcome and helpful.

Always nice writeups!


.

[wdrag]

So we are aware of wind, coastal flood threats with this storm in and near NYC and the 26th-28th period of snow or sleet potential that is seemingly coming back on board after a few days hiatus. 

The Thu-Fri storm may add some wintry interest: both front 9AM-3PM Thursday and back end 11A-5P Friday for Sussex County NJ to west of Hartford CT and of course the Poconos. T-1" snow-sleet front end, but back end looks much more potent to me, especially plunging temps and what appears to be a short burst of intense snowfall coating roads (0.2-1.5").

and NYC: I could see spotty slippery conditions developing sometime late in the afternoon with a short burst of snow (less than 1/2").  

Modeling will help in the future confidence of any of this occurring. Will check back tonight or tomorrow. 

[Rjay]

[CIK62]

The next 8 days are averaging     31degs.(25/38) or -3.

Month to date is    40.6[Normal].          Should be     37.8[-0.9] by the 28th.

Reached 37 here yesterday.

Today:     36-39, wind nw., p. sunny, 30 tomorrow AM.

The maximum wind gusts here:      Wind picks up late Thursday and quiets down Saturday night.     About 2" of rain during this period.     T should drop quickly from 57 to 16 in a matter of hours(Friday afternoon-evening)

33*(64%RH) here at 6am(since midnight actually).        33* at 9pm.       35* at 11am.     36* at Noon.      Reached 39* at 3pm.      38* at 5pm.       33* at 9pm.

[jm1220]

19 minutes ago, Rjay said:

Yikes. That would make sense with the strong onshore flow though. And it’s a new moon. 

[hudsonvalley21]

1 hour ago, wdrag said:

So we are aware of wind, coastal flood threats with this storm in and near NYC and the 26th-28th period of snow or sleet potential that is seemingly coming back on board after a few days hiatus. 

The Thu-Fri storm may add some wintry interest: both front 9AM-3PM Thursday and back end 11A-5P Friday for Sussex County NJ to west of Hartford CT and of course the Poconos. T-1" snow-sleet front end, but back end looks much more potent to me, especially plunging temps and what appears to be a short burst of intense snowfall coating roads (0.2-1.5").

and NYC: I could see spotty slippery conditions developing sometime late in the afternoon with a short burst of snow (less than 1/2").  

Modeling will help in the future confidence of any of this occurring. Will check back tonight or tomorrow. 

Thanks for the heads up Walt.  Friday evening could be a travel nightmare with that quick 0.2-1.5” and a flash freeze with untreated roads along with the gusty winds.  Bridges and overpasses could be the real trouble spots. 

[Rjay]

7 minutes ago, jm1220 said:

Yikes. That would make sense with the strong onshore flow though. And it’s a new moon. 

Worst since 10/27/18 and only a foot or so lower than Irene.   The top of the ensemble spread goes to where Irene was.  

2018

 

Irene

[EastonSN+]

Just now, EastonSN+ said:

Too far off the coast but 500 mile shifts are nothing these days.

 

[wdrag]

EC doesn't have it (the Friday snow burst) yet, not clearly, but I trust the GFS.  I think it's onto it. IF the GFS is wrong about the 975 redeveloping low in the Catskills Friday, then the snow burst is unlikely and a little less wind.  I think the GFS is correct but maybe a couple MB too low.  Meanwhile it seems the EC op is mostly onto the Great Lakes upper Ohio Valley blizzard. 

 

However, note the EC is getting colder and colder in the POCS newd Thursday. Check out the 06z/20.

[Tatamy]

22 minutes ago, wdrag said:

EC doesn't have it (the Friday snow burst) yet, not clearly, but I trust the GFS.  I think it's onto it. IF the GFS is wrong about the 975 redeveloping low in the Catskills Friday, then the snow burst is unlikely and a little less wind.  I think the GFS is correct but maybe a couple MB too low.  Meanwhile it seems the EC op is mostly onto the Great Lakes upper Ohio Valley blizzard. 

 

However, note the EC is getting colder and colder in the POCS newd Thursday. Check out the 06z/20.

This burst of snow for Friday has been showing up for days now in the GEFS and continues to do so.

[Dark Star]

8 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

I agree with this quibble. I’ve sometimes mentioned sample size limitations and probably, but should do so more often. I note some cases/examples, e.g., 1958-58 in my commentary for purposes of illustration, but avoid references to analogs, as such references would go beyond the strength of relationships. Even an outcome that is 50% above climatology can still be a fairly low probability outcome. 10”+ snowstorms are uncommon events by any measure.

Skill clearly dissipates as timeframes grow. Coefficients of determination also leave large parts of explanation beyond limited numbers of variables, especially as one considers the synoptic scale. Further complicating things is the reality of a dynamic climate that is altering existing relationships among variables.

In the extended range, to use an analogy, one is always peering into the fog or mist of uncertainty. That’s why I embrace probabilistic language such as “likely,” and like CPC’s approach.

Finally, models and ensembles have come far—and they consistently outperform the human level of skill—but they still have real limits. Machine learning/AI holds additional promise. How to convey the inherent uncertainty and limitations is a continuing question. I don’t have definitive answers to this question. Critiques are both welcome and helpful.

You are like having our own "personal" meteorologist (I must add that Forky is pretty darn accurate as well).

[LibertyBell]

13 hours ago, eduggs said:

I like cold weather for its capacity to facilitate snowstorms. Since this cold likely won't be associated with snow locally, it's the worst kind of cold.

True, however this is also the best time of the year to see the night sky because of how clear and clean it is you can see really deeply.  I could even see the waning crescent up until 8:20 am, it's slender and curved like a backwards "C" in the southeast to southern sky and pretty high up.  The sun is getting higher so it'll disappear into the sky pretty soon.

 

[bluewave]

The late December warmer correction is another example of the week 2 products running too cold recently. 
 

New 240

 

Old 360

 

[Allsnow]

Just now, bluewave said:

The late December warmer correction is another example of the week 2 products running too cold recently. 
 

New 240

 

Old 360

 

Going to torch! Do you think this is a 19-20 repeat? 

[wdrag]

Not sure if anyone considered this...   When surface pressure is below 1000MB at any location here, you can pretty much be assured that the sfc wind will gust at whatever the lowest model level wind is.  I'll be looking at the the BL wind on the NAM FOUS61 tomorrow for a minimum gust at whatever it says.  That is without turbulent-turnover transfer from above.  

 

So, if you have access to 1000mb winds today,  I think you'll have an idea at minimum gusts Friday. After that. it's a matter of turbulent transfer whether it is from the low level lapse rate, or showery precip, or eddies of excessive wind aloft.  I am looking for pockets damaging wind as early as 12z Friday, up to within 1 hour post CFP Fri afternoon. I am also favoring the stronger GFS on this.  That could be my downfall. Glad I'm not flying Thu-Fri.

Gone for the day. 

 

[Brian5671]

9 hours ago, eduggs said:

The Canadian has the day 8 threat.

8 short days away....this current upcoming storm looked good at day 8 too...

[LibertyBell]

7 minutes ago, wdrag said:

Not sure if anyone considered this...   When surface pressure is below 1000MB at any location here, you can pretty much be assured that the sfc wind will gust at whatever the lowest model level wind is.  I'll be looking at the the BL wind on the NAM FOUS61 tomorrow for a minimum gust at whatever it says.  That is without turbulent-turnover transfer from above.  

 

So, if you have access to 1000mb winds today,  I think you'll have an idea at minimum gusts Friday. After that. it's a matter of turbulent transfer whether it is from the low level lapse rate, or showery precip, or eddies of excessive wind aloft.  I am looking for pockets damaging wind as early as 12z Friday, up to within 1 hour post CFP Fri afternoon. I am also favoring the stronger GFS on this.  That could be my downfall. Glad I'm not flying Thu-Fri.

Gone for the day. 

 

I have a strong feeling the airports will be closed for a time.  Safety first....

 

[LibertyBell]

9 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

I agree with this quibble. I’ve sometimes mentioned sample size limitations and probably, but should do so more often. I note some cases/examples, e.g., 1958-58 in my commentary for purposes of illustration, but avoid references to analogs, as such references would go beyond the strength of relationships. Even an outcome that is 50% above climatology can still be a fairly low probability outcome. 10”+ snowstorms are uncommon events by any measure.

Skill clearly dissipates as timeframes grow. Coefficients of determination also leave large parts of explanation beyond limited numbers of variables, especially as one considers the synoptic scale. Further complicating things is the reality of a dynamic climate that is altering existing relationships among variables.

In the extended range, to use an analogy, one is always peering into the fog or mist of uncertainty. That’s why I embrace probabilistic language such as “likely,” and like CPC’s approach.

Finally, models and ensembles have come far—and they consistently outperform the human level of skill—but they still have real limits. Machine learning/AI holds additional promise. How to convey the inherent uncertainty and limitations is a continuing question. I don’t have definitive answers to this question. Critiques are both welcome and helpful.

Quantum computing will hold the real keys (to many problems), it's just frustrating that quantum computers are taking so long to develop.  Quantum computers basically imitate natural processes on a much smaller scale which is why I'm so enthusiastic about them.