January 6-7 Storm Discussion: we’re due?

[Wxtrix]

9 minutes ago, WEATHER53 said:

See that’s the evasive jibber jabber that helps models stay incompetent

You are un successfully trying to parse  that each 6 hour presentation is not indicative of upcoming weather but rather a “tool” Tool of what and for what? Why predicting forthcoming weather of course, see tool and Kaos  get thrown around during deflections 

models don’t predict. people do.

[psuhoffman]

23 minutes ago, WEATHER53 said:

See that’s the evasive jibber jabber that helps models stay incompetent

You are un successfully trying to parse  that each 6 hour presentation is not indicative of upcoming weather but rather a “tool” Tool of what and for what? Why predicting forthcoming weather of course, see tool and Kaos  get thrown around during deflections 

What are you talking about?  You use them to make your forecasts.  You were asking me what the MSLP and location was just the other night on the euro where it passed our latitude and talking about what we need that to be in order to get snow.  You're taking the model output, and adjusting with experience.  Using it as a tool.  You would have had no idea there was going to be a low anywhere near Ocean City on Saturday evening from that range without the models.  We can extrapolate for a day or two using current observations but beyond that we would have no idea what the features important to make a forecast would look like 4, 5 ,6 days from now!  You have to look at all the guidance, decide how its likely in error, apply your knowledge of what usually happens to adjust for that error and make your best educated guess.  How else do you propose you put out a forecast for something more than a couple days away?  

If they could make them better they would, its not some kind of conspiracy to hide the real weather from us.  It's just the limitations of our current scientific and mathmatecal ability.  

[psuhoffman]

5 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

Yeah quite possible. That said, if it’s borderline, still could work out. But the confluence and high shifting north don’t provide much confidence things can shift. Could also be a precip rate dependent deal. Heavier precip progs might be colder and vice versa. Things to watch. 

Euro and RGEM today kind of made me a little less optimistic.  I was thinking that but they both have 6 hour QPF bombs and are still really really warm.  

[WxUSAF]

4 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Euro and RGEM today kind of made me a little less optimistic.  I was thinking that but they both have 6 hour QPF bombs and are still really really warm.  

RGEM has that N-S oriented trough of warm air aloft like 12z euro.

[wxmeddler]

12 minutes ago, Chris78 said:

Obviously updated data helps accuracy. 

I didn't realize that over land vs over ocean makes that big of a difference with  technology these days...

It used to, it doesn't much anymore in the past 5 years or so. DMV Winds from GOES and NPP-Era sounders do most of the heavy lifting these days. Balloons are good for calibration and reality check.

[psuhoffman]

1 minute ago, WxUSAF said:

RGEM has that N-S oriented trough of warm air aloft like 12z euro.

Yea, but isn't that what partially is responsible for the very heavy precip under that trough?  The GFS hints at it too but its colder so its ok.  But if the Euro is right about the warmer thermals overall, not sure what the win path is there.  No trough, no heavier precip, trough, warmer.  What are we rooting for there?  I guess just the colder GFS thermals to be correct? 

[osfan24]

2 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Yea, but isn't that what partially is responsible for the very heavy precip under that trough?  The GFS hints at it too but its colder so its ok.  But if the Euro is right about the warmer thermals overall, not sure what the win path is there.  No trough, no heavier precip, trough, warmer.  What are we rooting for there?  I guess just the colder GFS thermals to be correct? 

Uh oh, could this one be going in the book?

[ravensrule]

2 minutes ago, osfan24 said:

Uh oh, could this one be going in the book?

Kocin’s book?. 

[osfan24]

GFS seems better?

[osfan24]

Just now, ravensrule said:

Kocin’s book?. 

LOL, uhhhhh no. The book about storms that should work but no longer do for reasons we cannot talk about.

[TSSN+]

3 minutes ago, osfan24 said:

GFS seems better?

Little colder for Nw crew 

[psuhoffman]

3 minutes ago, osfan24 said:

Uh oh, could this one be going in the book?

This one is more complicated IMO than some of the clearer examples of storms in the last 5 years or so that I am convinced we lost a 1-3 or 2-4" snow around DC due to warming temps.  Plus its not over yet, maybe things trend colder again, I was just pointing out that synoptically I don't see much other to root for than "just be colder".   Plus I am not in the mood to argue with the "don't talk about that" crew anymore.  

[WxUSAF]

1 minute ago, TSSN+ said:

Little colder for Nw crew 

Could about walk from places with <1” to 8”. Razor thin gradient.

[jayyy]

We are at nearly optimal range for a completely unrealistic NAM'ing tho

That’s what the 0z NAM at range is good for


.

[WxUSAF]

12 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Yea, but isn't that what partially is responsible for the very heavy precip under that trough?  The GFS hints at it too but its colder so its ok.  But if the Euro is right about the warmer thermals overall, not sure what the win path is there.  No trough, no heavier precip, trough, warmer.  What are we rooting for there?  I guess just the colder GFS thermals to be correct? 

I guess. I think by 0z or 12z tomorrow the synoptic details are down to noise level changes and it just comes down to a few degrees in the 800mb to surface column. 18z is very slightly colder than 12z at 0z Sunday. Sharper temp gradient too. Still thumpy to start in the 18-21z period Saturday. 

[WEATHER53]

So let’s get this thinking about models with some more responses.

It’s being  proposed to me that models are not a weather forecast. I disagree. They are a “tool” to help forecasters devise a forecast. I disagree.  Their  programming and programmers is Not that way and they are Not 4/5/6 different model types all strung together to assist in formulating a forecast each 6 hour period. They are in fact their own prediction of what the weather will be at, for example, 18z Saturday. It’s not a clue nor hint to be strung together with other models to develop a forecast: It Is A Forecast . 

[wxmeddler]

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

This one is more complicated IMO than some of the clearer examples of storms in the last 5 years or so that I am convinced we lost a 1-3 or 2-4" snow around DC due to warming temps.  Plus its not over yet, maybe things trend colder again, I was just pointing out that synoptically I don't see much other to root for than "just be colder".   Plus I am not in the mood to argue with the "don't talk about that" crew anymore.  

It's pretty clear from the depth of the warm layer that most if not all of the snow east of I-81 is going to be 8:1 slop. The depth also throws out any elevation advantages in the Piedmont out the window. Best we can hope for is rates and dynamic cooling overcome. 

[usedtobe]

27 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

Yeah quite possible. That said, if it’s borderline, still could work out. But the confluence and high shifting north don’t provide much confidence things can shift. Could also be a precip rate dependent deal. Heavier precip progs might be colder and vice versa. Things to watch. 

I think your last two sentences are correct.  We need the heavier precipitation and associated vertical motion to keep temps cold enough for snow.  Of course not for me. 

[psuhoffman]

3 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

Could about walk from places with <1” to 8”. Razor thin gradient.

IMO it probably will be a pretty tight gradient in this type of evolution, which the Euro/RGEM/GFS now all show.  The bulk of the precip falls in just a few hours in an incredibly intense bad.  Once the thermals go isothermal under that band its unlikely the rain/snow line moves much.  The temps surge north as that band arrives then the dynamic cooling stalls it and that is likely where the rain snow line sets up for the duration of that period.  So if you end up on the snow side you can quickly pile up 3-6" (I think the higher totals are unlikely) where as just on the other side...womp womp.  There isn't that much precip out ahead of it and none behind it where some frontrunning snow or band on the backside could cause some consolation snow for places on the rain side during that main show.  It's all or nothing really.  

[Solution Man]

2 minutes ago, WEATHER53 said:

So let’s get this thinking about models with some more responses.

It’s being  proposed to me that models are not a weather forecast. I disagree. They are a “tool” to help forecasters devise a forecast. I disagree.  Their  programming and programmers is Not that way and they are Not 4/5/6 different model types all strung together to assist in formulating a forecast each 6 hour period. They are in fact their own prediction of what the weather will be at, for example, 18z Saturday. It’s not a clue nor hint to be strung together with other models to develop a forecast: It Is A Forecast . 

This should go somewhere else. I want some damn snow

[midatlanticweather]

That is going to hurt.. Very tight gradient.. Agree totals are bonkers. 

[jayyy]

So let’s get this thinking about models with some more responses.
It’s being  proposed to me that models are not a weather forecast. I disagree. They are a “tool” to help forecasters devise a forecast. I disagree.  Their  programming and programmers is Not that way and they are Not 4/5/6 different model types all strung together to assist in formulating a forecast each 6 hour period. They are in fact their own prediction of what the weather will be at, for example, 18z Saturday. It’s not a clue nor hint to be strung together with other models to develop a forecast: It Is A Forecast . 

You are arguing semantics. Take this “discussion” elsewhere.

[WesternFringe]

19 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

Could about walk from places with <1” to 8”. Razor thin gradient.

Yes, and if that lines sets up close to our backyards, we all hope it’s to our SE and we don’t have to walk to see snow.

[Ji]

6 minutes ago, midatlanticweather said:

That is going to hurt.. Very tight gradient.. Agree totals are bonkers. 

congrats to you sir...western Loudoun

[psuhoffman]

for those that want to feel better, or worse, for a few hours 

[WesternFringe]

26 minutes ago, WEATHER53 said:

So let’s get this thinking about models with some more responses.

It’s being  proposed to me that models are not a weather forecast. I disagree. They are a “tool” to help forecasters devise a forecast. I disagree.  Their  programming and programmers is Not that way and they are Not 4/5/6 different model types all strung together to assist in formulating a forecast each 6 hour period. They are in fact their own prediction of what the weather will be at, for example, 18z Saturday. It’s not a clue nor hint to be strung together with other models to develop a forecast: It Is A Forecast . 

Would you just give all the different models’ forecasts as your prediction then?  Like if you were trying to make a forecast for 5 days out?  Would you just list every possibility all the dozens of models threw out?  
 

Or would you look at the guidance, use your knowledge of weather as a human, and know your climo well enough to use the models as tools to make your own forecast?

 

 

 

 

eta: sorry @jayyy , I wouldn’t have replied if I saw your suggestion first

[stormy]

18z GFS increases my Augusta snow from 5.4 to 9.1 inches

[Weather Will]

Looks great to me!  WB 18Z GFS

[Kay]

25 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

Could about walk from places with <1” to 8”. Razor thin gradient.

That does it, I'm chasing gradient.

[psuhoffman]

2 minutes ago, stormy said:

18z GFS increases my Augusta snow from 5.4 to 9.1 inches