Jan Medium/Long Range Disco: Winter is coming

[Weather Will]

WB 18Z GEFS probs and mean.

[Rhino16]

1 minute ago, Weather Will said:

WB 18Z GEFS probs and mean.

What about the 1” odds, if they exist? The 3” is too low for down here in Richmond…

[clskinsfan]

30-40% probability of a foot? Sign me up baby. 

[Weather Will]

Just now, Rhino16 said:

What about the 1” odds, if they exist? The 3” is too low for down here in Richmond…

 

[Rhino16]

6 minutes ago, Weather Will said:

 

Thank you! I’ll take some mood flakes I guess before it gets washed away. Even if it stings.

[Kevin Reilly]

32 minutes ago, Terpeast said:

We've been looking at how this is trending, too. It has trended colder with a stronger high up north. I've been harping on this for 2 days now.

This idea is something new that has been missing going on 3 years now.  Welcome Back!!

[pazzo83]

1 hour ago, clskinsfan said:

That follow up Midwest Blizzard is something else. 972?

Blizzard of 78 vibes

[Terpeast]

4 minutes ago, Kevin Reilly said:

This idea is something new that has been missing going on 3 years now.  Welcome Back!!

Still 5 days out. Let’s hope this holds serve at least. 

[MillvilleWx]

NBM continues to be impressive at leads with the mean QPF and snowfall forecast. Odds are increasing of 1-1.5” QPF during the time frame of the storm, so you can deduce some average ratios of 7-8:1 to as high as 12-14:1 during the storm height within any banding. A pretty good indication of 6-10+” is on the table if all things break correctly. 
 

In-situ cold will be great leading in with drier dew points. That should aid in wet bulbing on the initial surge of low-mid level moisture that’s accustomed to these events. Good trends overall. 

[RDM]

3 minutes ago, pazzo83 said:

Blizzard of 78 vibes

If you are referring to the blizzard of 78 that hit the midwest, respectfully disagree.  Lived through the blizzard of 78 as a teenager and this is not even close.  The LP in 78 was one of the top 5 ever recorded - with sustained winds of 50+ for over 24 hours and gusts to 70+.  This isn't on the same planet.  

[RDM]

Just now, RDM said:

If you are referring to the blizzard of 78 that hit the midwest, respectfully disagree.  Lived through the blizzard of 78 as a teenager and this is not even close.  The LP in 78 was one of the top 5 ever recorded - with sustained winds of 50+ for over 24 hours and gusts to 70+.  This isn't on the same planet.  

Should have added the caveat the LP was one of the top 5 recorded in N America - extratropical.  

[Kevin Reilly]

5 minutes ago, MillvilleWx said:

NBM continues to be impressive at leads with the mean QPF and snowfall forecast. Odds are increasing of 1-1.5” QPF during the time frame of the storm, so you can deduce some average ratios of 7-8:1 to as high as 12-14:1 during the storm height within any banding. A pretty good indication of 6-10+” is on the table if all things break correctly. 
 

In-situ cold will be great leading in with drier dew points. That should aid in wet bulbing on the initial surge of low-mid level moisture that’s accustomed to these events. Good trends overall. 

Without a doubt look at the water vapor map.... check out Mexico the Southern Jet is ready!!

 

Pennsylvania Water Vapor Satellite Weather Map | AccuWeather

[psuhoffman]

1 hour ago, Bob Chill said:

We'll run circles defining the hybrids. We've done it many times lol.

 

Any storm that jumps is called a Miller b because it looks like one but me and you dont see it that way. Barolclinic transfers from a low approaching from the deep south is not a Miller b in my book. They usually have big juicy WAA in front. A defining difference from a NS Miller B that never gets going until it's gaining latitude. Just my take and separates the 2 in my brain with how I view the possibilities.

We had this discussion many times over the years.  I hate when it becomes an argument over definitions.  I could care less what we call them.  The problem is for the "purists" that define any transfer as a miller b, we then HAVE to differentiate between northern stream dominant SW's that transfer and STJ dominant transfer storms.  The best definition system I've seen classifies the later as "hybrid" systems.  And by that definition system our best storms are almost all hybrids.   

Pure miller a storms usually are trucking and moving too fast to dump prolific totals.  The transfer process actually slows down the system some, plus often when a primary west of the apps transfers its because its blocked to some extent.  We also run the risk of being too far west for a pure miller a.  They sometimes end of coastal scrapers for our area and nail NYC, especially in a Nina!  A primary into the TN valley pretty much guarantees we don't miss out on the party, so long as it transfers in time for us to stay cold enough.  Additionally getting the wave to amplify to our SW opens the door to prolific WAA snows before the storm even gets going.  Our really big storms are when we get a foot of snow from overrunning before the coastal even gets going.  

Miller a/b hybrids are actually our best storms.  But the people that classify everything as A/B scare the crap out of some when they classify them as miller b and they suddenly think of every NS jump storm that screwed us over and hit New England.  

I know you know this, we've had this conversation before...but thought it was time to bring it up again for all the new members since the last time we got to actually go over this...since its been so freaking long since we actually got to discuss a legit snow threat in this kind of detail.  

[wtkidz]

1 hour ago, Deck Pic said:

I hope the hell not.  You should be fine unless this thing passes over Fredericksburg

Need to keep east and south. 

[pazzo83]

6 minutes ago, RDM said:

If you are referring to the blizzard of 78 that hit the midwest, respectfully disagree.  Lived through the blizzard of 78 as a teenager and this is not even close.  The LP in 78 was one of the top 5 ever recorded - with sustained winds of 50+ for over 24 hours and gusts to 70+.  This isn't on the same planet.  

a 970mb massive low tracking in the same location would be in the same ballpark (I think the lowest pressures in '78 were in the mid 950s).  Could trend stronger, but it's obviously a ways out.

[WEATHER53]

1 hour ago, Deck Pic said:

Can't wait for Saturday afternoon's 43/34 as I await precip onset.

I’m gonna say at 4pm Saturday  presuming onset has not occurred it will be 42/22 at DCA . 

[Weather Mike]

Just now, WEATHER53 said:

I’m gonna say at 4pm Saturday  presuming onset has not occurred it will be 42/22 at DCA . 

I may have to go to the Baltimore game Saturday or Washington game Sunday if this continues to look good and based on the timing 

[Weather Will]

Any comment on the 18Z GEFS colder for the storm after the weekend? (WB)

[Jebman]

8 minutes ago, Kevin Reilly said:

Without a doubt look at the water vapor map.... check out Mexico the Southern Jet is ready!!

 

Pennsylvania Water Vapor Satellite Weather Map | AccuWeather

I want that jet over Texas so bad, that I would give away everything for twenty severe atmospheric rivers over south central Texas, then run thru the Buda streets stark frackin' NAKED!

We're DESPERATE for rain down here! This is becoming a multi year drought.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

44 minutes ago, jayyy said:

@Stormchaserchuck1 ^ see above.

A few days ago there wasn't a primary low in Kentucky. You guys can say it's trending better but PSU actually posted something good about where the thermal boundary is. I think in future trend, the cold air may get cutoff. It would be different if there was a low pressure in the N. Pacific ocean, and for snowstorms in the Mid Atlantic, that is a major piece. I've seen this pattern set up a lot over the last few Winters, and we are still far ways out (5-6 days), and they almost always trend warmer to verification. Over the PNA/GOA region, especially lately, you need a Low , not a High. It has downstream effects not completely estimated in the model at this range (5-6 days) from what I've seen. 

[RDM]

7 minutes ago, pazzo83 said:

a 970mb massive low tracking in the same location would be in the same ballpark (I think the lowest pressures in '78 were in the mid 950s).  Could trend stronger, but it's obviously a ways out.

Lowest measured in 78 was 955.5 - measured after it crossed into Canada.  Was 956 in MI and slightly higher in Ohio/Indiana (its track was nearly due North).  It was a surreal experience I'll never forget.  If we get something like that here in the DELMARVA in today's environment, the results would be devastating.  People back in the 70's were more independent and able to cope.  

[clskinsfan]

8 minutes ago, Weather Will said:

Any comment on the 18Z GEFS colder for the storm after the weekend? (WB)

Yeah. IF Its another good track. I think PSU was eyeballing that one earlier in the thread.

[dallen7908]

Percent of EPS members giving DCA >+ 1", 3", 6", and 12" of snow for upcoming period over the last 6 00 and 12 UTC runs (00 UTC on the 30th to 12 UTC on the 1st)

 

1" [16, 12, 36, 36, 72, 76] 

3" [06, 06, 22, 24, 50, 46] 

6" [02, 06, 10, 12, 30,30] 

12"[00, 02, 00, 04, 10,10] 

[pazzo83]

1 minute ago, RDM said:

Lowest measured in 78 was 955.5 - measured after it crossed into Canada.  Was 956 in MI and slightly higher in Ohio/Indiana (its track was nearly due North).  It was a surreal experience I'll never forget.  If we get something like that here in the DELMARVA in today's environment, the results would be devastating.  People back in the 70's were more independent and able to cope.  

yeah my parents still talk about that storm (they were in Ohio)

[psuhoffman]

2 hours ago, WEATHER53 said:

In a similar vein, I concluded and stated at  Christmas that if the pattern was not changed by 1/10 then it would not change, I have to give kudos to those who said “Nino…be patient” You were correct . I also contend that a delay pattern was underway that needed to cease. I too knew it was a nino and that’s why I was 50/50 on how much trouble we were in. Again though, kudos to the who persistently offered “ nino..be patient “

I want to ask if others are having this ? It’s been so long time since having a reasonably good potential for a big event to follow well in advance that I Have LOST my conscious contact with”  I have a weather event to follow”  Any body else? I’ve been like dinner snd  then maybe go watch Washington  Texas after wife time,

Nothing in the noggin about weather until …Oops…Snow Event To Follow!!

Anybody else?

 

In fairness you're right that in MOST winters if we don't have some snow in and around the DC area by New Years its a really really bad sign.  But the one exception is nino's.  1966, 1978, 1987, 2005, 2007, 2015, 2016.  They all started as absolute torch god awful seasons then flipped late.  Some just become ok, some went on to become awesome, but there is a definite pattern.   Even years like 1983 and 1995 that never truly flipped there was at least one big snowstorm in February.  Most neutral and nina winters show their dominant long wave patterns by New Years and it is what it is.  But Nino's often flip.  I remember having this same discussion I think with @mitchnick back in 2015 when things were going pretty awful in January and saying its a modoki nino...I wouldn't call TOD yet, in any other season I would but don't give up on a nino early.  

I also wonder what impact the warming December will have on being able to identify the flavor of a winter early.  December has warmed the most of the "snow" months for us over the last 30 years.  This year for example...we had two waves I can think of that took a perfect track for our area to get some snow but the boundary was just 5 degrees too warm.  Maybe if those two produce a few inches of snow in the cities it changes the whole discussion and perception of how this year started!  Maybe it's becoming harder to predict the winter by the early results because of this.  

[Buddy1987]

16 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

We had this discussion many times over the years.  I hate when it becomes an argument over definitions.  I could care less what we call them.  The problem is for the "purists" that define any transfer as a miller b, we then HAVE to differentiate between northern stream dominant SW's that transfer and STJ dominant transfer storms.  The best definition system I've seen classifies the later as "hybrid" systems.  And by that definition system our best storms are almost all hybrids.   

Pure miller a storms usually are trucking and moving too fast to dump prolific totals.  The transfer process actually slows down the system some, plus often when a primary west of the apps transfers its because its blocked to some extent.  We also run the risk of being too far west for a pure miller a.  They sometimes end of coastal scrapers for our area and nail NYC, especially in a Nina!  A primary into the TN valley pretty much guarantees we don't miss out on the party, so long as it transfers in time for us to stay cold enough.  Additionally getting the wave to amplify to our SW opens the door to prolific WAA snows before the storm even gets going.  Our really big storms are when we get a foot of snow from overrunning before the coastal even gets going.  

Miller a/b hybrids are actually our best storms.  But the people that classify everything as A/B scare the crap out of some when they classify them as miller b and they suddenly think of every NS jump storm that screwed us over and hit New England.  

I know you know this, we've had this conversation before...but thought it was time to bring it up again for all the new members since the last time we got to actually go over this...since its been so freaking long since we actually got to discuss a legit snow threat in this kind of detail.  

I appreciate you taking time out to break down the main differences between both. 

[WinterWxLuvr]

3 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

Yeah. Its another good track. I think PSU was eyeballing that one earlier in the thread.

That’s the one the I think even if it cuts it runs into cad, mainly because of snow on the ground

[RDM]

2 minutes ago, pazzo83 said:

yeah my parents still talk about that storm (they were in Ohio)

There's a couple other members here who lived through it too.  One of them sent me info about a book on the Blizzard of 78.  It's a great read for anyone here from several perspectives.  The meteorological elements that formed the intensification so rapidly and the human element of the impact on society, and how people pulled together to help each other out.  Happy to provide the info on the book if there's interest.  

Mods - regrets if this is clogging things up. 

[clskinsfan]

1 minute ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

That’s the one the I think even if it cuts it runs into cad, mainly because of snow on the ground

I changed my post and added an IF to it. PSU put up a diagram earlier today with I think that vort as a target for another chance. 

[psuhoffman]

2 hours ago, DarkSharkWX said:

its not that great but pattern and storm evolution

so it says the top analog is feb 05-06 2010 bc of indicies values and similarity in storm

What made me identify Feb 2010 the other day was a few similarities in the type of storm evolution.  The 50/50, western energy, and the trough associated with our storm being anchored pretty far west but a compressed flow between the western energy and the 50/50 causing the STJ energy to partially interact and sling shot up the east side of the trough before hitting the wall and turning east.  This setup is similar in all those ways.  

Feb 2010 had a more ideal block, better time of year in terms of snow climo, and the storm stalled when it hit that wall for about 12 hours which accounted for the prolific totals in N VA and MD.  The thing cranked the deform all night when it stalled.  This system probably doesn't have that potential because of the less ideal block it probably wont hit the same wall and just stall like that.  It's also still not quite as cold overall leading it, it could trend that way its a lot closer than it was a couple days ago...but that worries me some still.  I would still like to see a little more wiggle room right now in that regard.