January Medium/Long Range: A snowy January ahead?

[stormtracker]

1 minute ago, mitchnick said:

But I bet it's cold.

0 here Wed AM

[NorthArlington101]

1 minute ago, stormtracker said:

0 here Wed AM

urban cold island effect

[TSSN+]

Brutal 

[stormtracker]

Might have to go see my mom in SC.  To snow chase 

[psuhoffman]

10 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

But I bet it's cold.

It’s going to be cold no matter what. Whether we get snow depends on how the TPV behaves during its elongation and split and the amplitude of the waves out west. 

[adelphi_sky]

8 minutes ago, NorthArlington101 said:

urban cold island effect

If that -1 verifies, I'll definitely wake my son up and take a shot with him and the temp. He's stoked about next week's cold. He wants to do all kinds of experiments. 

[Amped]

Baja lows are the worst, you keep refreshing waiting for it to start moving northeast and it never does.

[dailylurker]

3 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

It’s going to be cold no matter what. Whether we get snow depends on how the TPV behaves during its elongation and split and the amplitude of the waves out west. 

What do you think about it looking like a quick shot? I see 40's dominating my LR forecast. 

[SomeguyfromTakomaPark]

9 minutes ago, TSSN+ said:

Brutal 

Still in the game.  Wouldn't take a lot to turn hours 144-198 into a long duration overrunning event.

[87storms]

It’s going to be cold no matter what. Whether we get snow depends on how the TPV behaves during its elongation and split and the amplitude of the waves out west. 

My coworker, who was an operational forecaster for several years (and still checks the models, though now in biz dev) insinuated similar. Polar vortex might push things south, but how south who knows. Interesting pattern regardless.

[Eskimo Joe]

Gimme dat cold.

[psuhoffman]

3 minutes ago, dailylurker said:

What do you think about it looking like a quick shot? I see 40's dominating my LR forecast. 

The TPV slides by pretty quick to our north and as of now it looks like the pattern relaxes some after without another immediate shot of arctic air.  But its a long ways out.  But more importatntly that is not my main concern.  I am hunting snow, could care less about getting frigid below 0 temps.  

[WEATHER53]

23 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

Ukie Tuesday night. This is the closest it gets.

So from 2’ to 0 in less than 24 hours. I would swear to God  but too much carnage would fall upon me. 

[WEATHER53]

24 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

Waiting to see if it has a later storm like the GFS

We have avoided the “delayed but…” pattern so far and hope this is not the beginning 

[psuhoffman]

2 minutes ago, WEATHER53 said:

So from 2’ to 0 in less than 24 hours. I would swear to God  but too much carnage would fall upon me. 

That was the GGEM that had the crazy 2 ft solutions, and its still the most amplified of the operationals at 12z but its more like 4-8" for the cities with more SE.  However, we are not supposed to use operational runs at this range.  The ensembles are meant for this, and the most common solution across the ensembles has been a miss to the southeast with that wave.  Doesn't mean it cant hit, its not so far off that there is no chance, but seeing one run of one model show some 2ft storm does not mean "THE MODELS ARE PREDICTING 2ft" when 90% of the guidance when taken holistically as a whole show nothing.  

[stormtracker]

3 minutes ago, WEATHER53 said:

We have avoided the “delayed but…” pattern so far and hope this is not the beginning 

My feeling is it’d be denied vs delayed but

[NorthArlington101]

That's a nutty 24hr mean for the deep south. Jeez

[psuhoffman]

1 minute ago, stormtracker said:

My feeling is it’d be denied vs delayed but

There are going to be multiple waves starting with Sunday.  Euro misses with 4 straight, 3 south and then one north.  Could we get that unlucky, sure, but I still feel optimistic something hits during this coming period...maybe not the first one but it would take some bad luck to miss every wave.  

[brooklynwx99]

Just now, NorthArlington101 said:

That's a nutty 24hr mean for the deep south. Jeez

be still, my beating heart

[WEATHER53]

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

That was the GGEM that had the crazy 2 ft solutions, and its still the most amplified of the operationals at 12z but its more like 4-8" for the cities with more SE.  However, we are not supposed to use operational runs at this range.  The ensembles are meant for this, and the most common solution across the ensembles has been a miss to the southeast with that wave.  Doesn't mean it cant hit, its not so far off that there is no chance, but seeing one run of one model show some 2ft storm does not mean "THE MODELS ARE PREDICTING 2ft" when 90% of the guidance when taken holistically as a whole show nothing.  

So you now agree with me that the models DO NOT predict  weather but rather provide samples of a wide variety of possible outcomes. Then change that every 6 hours. I would also say the rest of them did not show “nothing” 

[WEATHER53]

3 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

My feeling is it’d be denied vs delayed but

That’s why delayed but not denied is mostly incorrect.

At least it’s cold because when it isn’t it almost doesn’t matter where the low goes 

[Ralph Wiggum]

@mitchnickand his "too much cold suppression pattern" has been very quiet.....too quiet. And i don't like it.

[psuhoffman]

4 minutes ago, WEATHER53 said:

So you now agree with me that the models DO NOT predict  weather but rather provide samples of a wide variety of possible outcomes. Then change that every 6 hours. I would also say the rest of them did not show “nothing” 

They are tools.  And yes they are models showing possible outcomes, or permutations.  Since we are not able to predict with 100% accuracy and each of the models we have is flawed in some way, every one will show a slightly different outcome as you increase the time range of the prediction.  And that outcome will change every 6 hours as we get new information.  It's up to us to make this useful.  I find them useful.  IF we didn't have the model guidance we would have no idea there was the risk of a major winter event over the southeast next week!  Whether it comes further up the coast is less known, but we can say right now its not the most likely outcome but its possible.  That's better than nothing which is what we would know without the guidance. 

[NorthArlington101]

12z EPS mean for the Wednesday-Friday period. I'm fine with this tbh.

[psuhoffman]

@WEATHER53 You use the guidance correctly all the time.  You make posts where you see what the guidance shows and you say "this is not common, with the high there it will be colder" or "that SLP track would actually produce this".  That is the right way to use the guidance...not to just take what it says and issue a forecast...but to adjust the guidance based on experience and probabilities and in a way to "predict how the guidance is wrong" and adjust for it.  

And at long leads like for next weeks storm...the operational runs are not to be taken with much weight...its about taking the full run of guidance including ensembles and get an idea of what the most likely outcome is based on the consensus of all that guidance adjusted with your experience from historical examples.  

Your critique of how the guidance is used seems geared towards how the weenies online use it, but who cares what randos do for fun.  That isn't how profesionals do it.  I ignore the noise from facebook and twitter weenies and hype merchants.  

[WEATHER53]

4 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

They are tools.  And yes they are models showing possible outcomes, or permutations.  Since we are not able to predict with 100% accuracy and each of the models we have is flawed in some way, every one will show a slightly different outcome as you increase the time range of the prediction.  And that outcome will change every 6 hours as we get new information.  It's up to us to make this useful.  I find them useful.  IF we didn't have the model guidance we would have no idea there was the risk of a major winter event over the southeast next week!  Whether it comes further up the coast is less known, but we can say right now its not the most likely outcome but its possible.  That's better than nothing which is what we would know without the guidance. 

Ok so tools for making a prediction but not an actual prediction .  I think I finally get it .  

[psuhoffman]

3 minutes ago, NorthArlington101 said:

12z EPS mean for the Wednesday-Friday period. I'm fine with this tbh.

It's fine there for now... as I've said above, the most likely outcome at this range is still a miss south...but not by so much that we are out of the game.  This has more chance to trend north than the waves did with that block in the way.   

[NorthArlington101]

2 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

It's fine there for now... as I've said above, the most likely outcome at this range is still a miss south...but not by so much that we are out of the game.  This has more chance to trend north than the waves did with that block in the way.   

Regardless - I'm genuinely pretty stoked for the deep south people if this pans out. Cool to see historic cold and snowfall there... buys us some time on the doomsday clock, maybe. 

[WEATHER53]

Just now, psuhoffman said:

@WEATHER53 You use the guidance correctly all the time.  You make posts where you see what the guidance shows and you say "this is not common, with the high there it will be colder" or "that SLP track would actually produce this".  That is the right way to use the guidance...not to just take what it says and issue a forecast...but to adjust the guidance based on experience and probabilities and in a way to "predict how the guidance is wrong" and adjust for it.  

And at long leads like for next weeks storm...the operational runs are not to be taken with much weight...its about taking the full run of guidance including ensembles and get an idea of what the most likely outcome is based on the consensus of all that guidance adjusted with your experience from historical examples.  

Your critique of how the guidance is used seems geared towards how the weenies online use it, but who cares what randos do for fun.  That isn't how profesionals do it.  I ignore the noise from facebook and twitter weenies and hype merchants.  

I’m getting better understanding now.  I kept a 60 page diary of set ups and outcomes .  I use that. I don’t use models for predictions of low pressure systems in the winter.  If I see a 1030 high on southern  Hudson Bay predicted 5-7 days out I know from experience that will mostly come true because it mostly has.  Not the same at all for storms.  I think we are doing better now by explaining things back and forth and not arguing and we often conclude the same things between us but via different methods. 
Thanks 

[AlexD1990]

7 minutes ago, WEATHER53 said:

Ok so tools for making a prediction but not an actual prediction .  I think I finally get it .