Feb 28th-March 1st long duration Miller B threat

[CoastalWx]

EPS looks good to me.

[Winter Wizard]

6 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Coastal.is developing at 989 off Delaware, late? That's classic here

Primary is still nuking over Lake Ontario at that point. 

[Ginx snewx]

Just now, Winter Wizard said:

Primary is still nuking over Lake Ontario at that point. 

Primary is filling at that point rises from 974 to 984 handoff in progress.

[weatherwiz]

1 minute ago, Ginx snewx said:

Just busting but dig a little deeper and tell me the synoptic setup doesn't produce plow able from CT to NH

I'm not totally dismissing that, but we've seen how terrible the models performances have been this winter and the past 2-3 winters. I get the "taken at face value" concept, but what does that really do? 

The way I see this, looking at the synoptic setup is, we are going to have to rely heavily on the WAA induced precipitation for some widespread heavy snow. This is something that certainly isn't impossible, but we have seen countless times, where even ensembles are in strong agreement, only for things to "crap" the bed as we get closer...it's a theme that has been repeated countless times these past few years. 

How I am envisioning this playing out, based on the synoptics is, if this look were to remain constant through the weekend we would see a trend towards a weaker event and not a stronger one. My reasoning for that is within my earlier post. The flow is very fast and we've seen many times this winters that shortwaves open up, become flat, and occlude as they accelerate northeast through the Plains into the upper-Midwest/Ohio Valley region. The result is a rapidly occluding parent low. 

It's just so difficult to take anything at face value now because the models have struggled mightily, even with the synoptic evolution and even within the short term.  

 

[forkyfork]

3 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

I'm not totally dismissing that, but we've seen how terrible the models performances have been this winter and the past 2-3 winters. I get the "taken at face value" concept, but what does that really do? 

The way I see this, looking at the synoptic setup is, we are going to have to rely heavily on the WAA induced precipitation for some widespread heavy snow. This is something that certainly isn't impossible, but we have seen countless times, where even ensembles are in strong agreement, only for things to "crap" the bed as we get closer...it's a theme that has been repeated countless times these past few years. 

How I am envisioning this playing out, based on the synoptics is, if this look were to remain constant through the weekend we would see a trend towards a weaker event and not a stronger one. My reasoning for that is within my earlier post. The flow is very fast and we've seen many times this winters that shortwaves open up, become flat, and occlude as they accelerate northeast through the Plains into the upper-Midwest/Ohio Valley region. The result is a rapidly occluding parent low. 

It's just so difficult to take anything at face value now because the models have struggled mightily, even with the synoptic evolution and even within the short term.  

 

that just happened with this storm in minneapolis 

[Ginx snewx]

4 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

I'm not totally dismissing that, but we've seen how terrible the models performances have been this winter and the past 2-3 winters. I get the "taken at face value" concept, but what does that really do? 

The way I see this, looking at the synoptic setup is, we are going to have to rely heavily on the WAA induced precipitation for some widespread heavy snow. This is something that certainly isn't impossible, but we have seen countless times, where even ensembles are in strong agreement, only for things to "crap" the bed as we get closer...it's a theme that has been repeated countless times these past few years. 

How I am envisioning this playing out, based on the synoptics is, if this look were to remain constant through the weekend we would see a trend towards a weaker event and not a stronger one. My reasoning for that is within my earlier post. The flow is very fast and we've seen many times this winters that shortwaves open up, become flat, and occlude as they accelerate northeast through the Plains into the upper-Midwest/Ohio Valley region. The result is a rapidly occluding parent low. 

It's just so difficult to take anything at face value now because the models have struggled mightily, even with the synoptic evolution and even within the short term.  

 

We want a rapidly occluding dying primary that's how this works. As far as people calling the backside an ivt . I see the forcing and energy from the primary rushing east not an INVT. Could it all go to shit? Sure but let's not get in the game of predicting what a model.will do. We have solid consensus today over 6 model suites. Hard to argue that all models are missing something. 

[WinterWolf]

7 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

I'm not totally dismissing that, but we've seen how terrible the models performances have been this winter and the past 2-3 winters. I get the "taken at face value" concept, but what does that really do? 

The way I see this, looking at the synoptic setup is, we are going to have to rely heavily on the WAA induced precipitation for some widespread heavy snow. This is something that certainly isn't impossible, but we have seen countless times, where even ensembles are in strong agreement, only for things to "crap" the bed as we get closer...it's a theme that has been repeated countless times these past few years. 

How I am envisioning this playing out, based on the synoptics is, if this look were to remain constant through the weekend we would see a trend towards a weaker event and not a stronger one. My reasoning for that is within my earlier post. The flow is very fast and we've seen many times this winters that shortwaves open up, become flat, and occlude as they accelerate northeast through the Plains into the upper-Midwest/Ohio Valley region. The result is a rapidly occluding parent low. 

It's just so difficult to take anything at face value now because the models have struggled mightily, even with the synoptic evolution and even within the short term.  

 

Not that I know much, but isn’t this already a lil bit different than any event this season for SNE?  I mean you keep saying that we’ve seen things go to shit like this before…when we’ve never had a threat of this magnitude, in this close,  at all this season here(SNE).  So it seems and feels different than anything else this season. 

[jaf]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like the Euro phases, but it's too far offshore

[Ginx snewx]

4 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

that just happened with this storm in minneapolis 

I don't think anyone here would complain 

[FrankiemacdNovascoti]

37 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

Yes

 

will it be a huge blizzard for sydney nova scotia?

[Ginx snewx]

2 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

Not that I know much, but isn’t this already a lil bit different than any event this season for SNE?  I mean you keep saying that we’ve seen things go to shit like this before…when we’ve never had a threat of this magnitude, in this close,  at all this season here(SNE).  So it seems and feels different than anything else this season. 

And have not seen across the board consensus.  Hell it could crash out but living for today. Don't worry be happy

[40/70 Benchmark]

30 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Kuchera is better in marginal events like last night. It almost always weenies out too much in colder events. 

I think its decent in the deformation area.

[40/70 Benchmark]

37 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Yeah it’s definitely possible some places score huge totals in this but it requires many things to go right. So obviously one shouldn’t *expect* it. 
 

All model guidance has the initial thump…that’s gonna produce low end warning totals on its own most likely. 5-8/6-10 type stuff. Now if we’re trying to go 12-18, that requires a bit of extra forcing from IVT or CCB…the two kind of smear together eventually in the euro but most guidance has at least a semblance of CCB snow…esp up in MA. So there’s a reason to think at least some areas are going to get double digits…where that is widespread or not remains to be seen but it’s certainly on the table. 

You know my thoughts on inverted troughs...inverted trough IN....Ray OUT....out on that modeled depiction, per se. Not necessarily big snows. Guidance will either correct towards a more tradition phase/larger storm, or less snow. But that inverted trough idea is crap.

[weatherwiz]

3 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

We want a rapidly occluding dying primary that's how this works. As far as people calling the backside an ivt . I see the forcing and energy from the primary rushing east not an INVT. Could it all go to shit? Sure but let's not get in the game of predicting what a model.will do. We have solid consensus today over 6 model suites. Hard to argue that all models are missing something. 

eh it's not a game of predicting what a model will do. Remember, models are essentially just tools, forecasting goes well beyond just taking model output verbatim, as you know. But even looking at the 12z GFS...it's a great piece of voriticty that ejects through the Ohio Valley and then just gets shredded and becomes a vorticy mess. Once the occlusion happens, the WAA turns to a halt, and sure while there is vorticity and forcing still traversing the region, to me, it just seems like we'd be dealing with a broken precipitation shield with crappy precipitation rates. 

1 minute ago, WinterWolf said:

Not that I know much, but isn’t this already a lil bit different than any event this season for SNE?  I mean you keep saying that we’ve seen things go to shit like this before…when we’ve never had a threat of this magnitude, in this close,  at all this season here.  So it’s seems and feels different than anything else this season. 

Just think about how many potential events have looked good over the past 2-3 winters and once we got inside the day 3-4 mark have just gone to crap. We would all be excited because of strong model agreement, whether it be OP and ensembles or good ensemble support, then we get to that D3-4 mark...one model comes in like crap, and we just b/c maybe it was the NAM or an "off-hour 18z GFS" and then all of a sudden, slowly there is that trend. This has happened way too many times to just be a coincidence over and over...there's obviously a reason for that (what that reason is makes for great debate). 

[Ginx snewx]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I think its decent in the deformation area.

Yep backside CCB it  can work but it's usually whack. Lol they should see Narcan...

[Ginx snewx]

3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

You know my thoughts on inverted troughs...inverted trough IN....Ray OUT....out on that modeled depiction, per se. Not necessarily big snows. Guidance will either correct towards a more tradition phase/larger storm, or less snow. But that inverted trough idea is crap.

Not an invt

[Ginx snewx]

1 minute ago, weatherwiz said:

eh it's not a game of predicting what a model will do. Remember, models are essentially just tools, forecasting goes well beyond just taking model output verbatim, as you know. But even looking at the 12z GFS...it's a great piece of voriticty that ejects through the Ohio Valley and then just gets shredded and becomes a vorticy mess. Once the occlusion happens, the WAA turns to a halt, and sure while there is vorticity and forcing still traversing the region, to me, it just seems like we'd be dealing with a broken precipitation shield with crappy precipitation rates. 

Just think about how many potential events have looked good over the past 2-3 winters and once we got inside the day 3-4 mark have just gone to crap. We would all be excited because of strong model agreement, whether it be OP and ensembles or good ensemble support, then we get to that D3-4 mark...one model comes in like crap, and we just b/c maybe it was the NAM or an "off-hour 18z GFS" and then all of a sudden, slowly there is that trend. This has happened way too many times to just be a coincidence over and over...there's obviously a reason for that (what that reason is makes for great debate). 

Name one modeled storm this winter that had the consensus of today. I DK man feels totally different and familiar 

[ORH_wxman]

5 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

You know my thoughts on inverted troughs...inverted trough IN....Ray OUT....out on that modeled depiction, per se. Not necessarily big snows. Guidance will either correct towards a more tradition phase/larger storm, or less snow. But that inverted trough idea is crap.

It’s not really a pure inverted trough. It’s basically that second trailing shortwave diving in and prolonging the CCB mid-level easterly flow but it sort of forms an IVT at the sfc during that phase which makes sense…it’s trying to “pull back” the sfc low because of the upper forcing from the trailing shortwave. 

[Ginx snewx]

Just now, ORH_wxman said:

It’s not really a pure inverted trough. It’s basically that second trailing shortwave diving in and prolonging the CCB mid-level easterly flow but it sort of forms an IVT at the sfc during that phase which makes sense…it’s trying to “pull back” the sfc low because of the upper forcing from the trailing shortwave. 

Exactly you would Think trained Mets would know.....

[forkyfork]

the rug pull is really gonna hurt isn't it

[Ginx snewx]

1 minute ago, forkyfork said:

the rug pull is really gonna hurt isn't it

Better to have a rug than a bare floor like you. You want to tell us about Minneapolis some more?

[weatherwiz]

2 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Name one modeled storm this winter that had the consensus of today. I DK man feels totally different and familiar 

We've had multiple. Perhaps the more noteworthy one was maybe a month or so ago. The agreement was through the roof. There was even one earlier in the winter. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

6 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Not an invt

 

3 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

It’s not really a pure inverted trough. It’s basically that second trailing shortwave diving in and prolonging the CCB mid-level easterly flow but it sort of forms an IVT at the sfc during that phase which makes sense…it’s trying to “pull back” the sfc low because of the upper forcing from the trailing shortwave. 

Okay then...I haven't looked. I'm just seeing the dreaded "Inv" acronym and dreading the prospect of us being "there"...lol

[forkyfork]

2 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Better to have a rug than a bare floor like you. You want to tell us about Minneapolis some more?

they were expecting 15-22 and the system kept deamplifying and they wound up with less

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, forkyfork said:

they were expecting 15-22 and the system kept deamplifying and they wound up with much less

That is on the table if the 50/50 is east/less pronounced. 

[CoastalWx]

3 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

they were expecting 15-22 and the system kept deamplifying and they wound up with less

I looked the other day at the euro and wondered where the hype was coming from. Didn't look like 2' to me.

[Ginx snewx]

3 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

they were expecting 15-22 and the system kept deamplifying and they wound up with less

We all saw that coming. Rip and read GFS got them all caught up. But 15 to 18 with mega drifts is pretty sweet

[Ginx snewx]

Just now, CoastalWx said:

I looked the other day at the euro and wondered where the hype was coming from. Didn't look like 2' to me.

GFS Rip and readers 

[ariof]

21 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

I don't think anyone here would complain 

ofc they spent most of the week selling it as a "historic" storm in the top 10 (to be fair, their top 10 is kind of weak sauce) and then it turns into a foot of snow. Only one poster who started this thread was doing that here. (And to be fair, the models were pushing 12-24 for a while, and it wound up at the lower end of that anyway.

[weatherwiz]

1 minute ago, CoastalWx said:

I looked the other day at the euro and wondered where the hype was coming from. Didn't look like 2' to me.

I may be wrong, but I think the 18-24'' was to account for both rounds as they were getting two rounds of heavy snow. One was Monday night into Tuesday and the second Tuesday night into this morning.