As WAR expands, do our snow chances increase? First wave may produce a middling event-solid advisory and possible low end warning for MLK Weekend

[Damage In Tolland]

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Nope.

Yes 

[Snowcrazed71]

12 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Man people love that crack Kuchie.

Not everyone in here likes Kuchie.... Let's be clear ( however, I do like the kind that gives us more snow ). ;-)

[kdxken]

9 minutes ago, Sey-Mour Snow said:

I see some outlets already with snow maps out. 

I think they forgot Monday was a holiday.

[dendrite]

3 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Moved to Weha seeking and thinking it was a snowy climate .. not realizing he moved to Death Valley, CT 

“I thought CT was snowy like Tahoe”

[DavisStraight]

14 minutes ago, Bryan63 said:

I am just an observer here for the most part, but it seems like you just will it to snow. This isn't the first system this winter you've stuck with that has reeled others back in on 

He has the power.

[Damage In Tolland]

Just now, dendrite said:

“I thought CT was snowy like Tahoe”

He literally thought that lol. And chose Weha 

[TauntonBlizzard2013]

6 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Nope.

I’d be surprised if anyone saw 6”

[UnitedWx]

8 minutes ago, weathafella said:

At 11:15?  We’re not talking 2AM….

Here, yes! I get up at 5 A.M.

[The 4 Seasons]

6 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Truth 

 

8 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Give me 10:1. At least it’s near climo and I can easily interpret the QPF so I can put my own mental adjustment to the total knowing where the snow will be sloppy and where the most persistent banding will be. There’s nothing scientific about kuchie.

Exactly my thoughts. Kuchera is awful and really should never be used. Sometimes it'll align with what i'm thinking or what the forecast might be but at that point it might just be confirmation bias saying the Kuchera was good this time or its good for "x" event. 

[CoastalWx]

4 minutes ago, dendrite said:

“I thought CT was snowy like Tahoe”

Dewars ftl.

[Prismshine Productions]

I’d be surprised if anyone saw 6”

1-4 loli 5

Sent from my SM-S146VL using Tapatalk

[40/70 Benchmark]

16 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Yes 

Okay, enjoy.

[weatherwiz]

BDL. 

I hope this verifies.

And I don't mind looking at what ratios look like this far out so don't weenie me

[tavwtby]

The way it appears is 2-4/3-6 wherever that fronto band sets up could rip for a bit with 6+ lollies...just spit balling maybe from HPN up to PIT gets in on a good banding...with that cold crashing into the precip shield should be interesting to see. Let's see what the NAM spits out tomorrow, or if others align with the Canadian...doesn't that model have a NW bias, or am I thinking of the GFS SE bias?

[DJln491]

18 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Moved to Weha seeking and thinking it was a snowy climate .. not realizing he moved to Death Valley, CT 

 some quick googling would reveal our elevation is like 6 inches.   you hope to see white stuff falling, but then you watch it melt. 

[dendrite]

Just now, DJln491 said:

 some quick googling would reveal our elevation is like 6 inches.   you hope to see white stuff falling, but then you watch it melt. 

Grand Marnier + snow climo and real estate isn’t easy

[PowderBeard]

1 hour ago, The 4 Seasons said:

18Z GEM? We pullin' out models from the woodwork with this one

I don't get excited until the HRDPS and German/Swiss models start getting posted, then you know it's go time. 

[FXWX]

55 minutes ago, qg_omega said:

Walt Drag frequently mentions he doesn’t consider winter storms unless the GGEM shows it.  It’s one of his benchmark models and the RGEM is the best Meso model we have so I don’t understand this post at all.  GFS is the worst model we have and it’s not close.

I know Walt well, he's a good friend, great forecaster and a mentor; we often chat prior to noteworthy events. And while we all have different takes on various models; and I favor ones that have a long solid track (not perfect) record, and its known biases can be adjusted and applied to its current depictions.  Even the lowly NAM is quite useful if you know how to read and adjust its tea leaves...  Forecasters should use the models and techniques that they are most comfortable with;  I have not been a big fan of the GGEM over the decades.   I have found the Reggie good with significant ice accumulation events.  The good thing about this science there is room for a variety of forecasting techniques depending on one's experiences.  I have made a wonderful living doing this successfully for 40+ years, so what I use and prefer works for me; likely not for others.  There are no perfect models, and they all fail miserably from time to time.  The key to being successful is to know the strengths and weaknesses of the modeling, and more importantly don't take your eyes off of the meteorology; modelology (made up word) should not completely over-rule the actual meteorology of a particular event setup.  As many of the mets on here have said over the years, you have to be able to say, does a particular model's output make sense with what we know about how the atmosphere usually behaves in a given setup.  If not run away from it... My apologies if i sound snarky, but just not a big Reggie or GGEM fan, but if they works for others that's wonderful.

[weatherwiz]

2 minutes ago, FXWX said:

I know Walt well, he's a good friend, great forecaster and a mentor; we often chat prior to noteworthy events. And while we all have different takes on various models; and I favor ones that have a long solid track (not perfect) record, and its known biases can be adjusted and applied to its current depictions.  Even the lowly NAM is quite useful if you know how to read and adjust its tea leaves...  Forecasters should use the models and techniques that they are most comfortable with;  I have not been a big fan of the GGEM over the decades.   I have found the Reggie good with significant ice accumulation events.  The good thing about this science there is room for a variety of forecasting techniques depending on one's experiences.  I have made a wonderful living doing this successfully for 40+ years, so what I use and prefer works for me; likely not for others.  There are no perfect models, and they all fail miserably from time to time.  The key to being successful is to know the strengths and weaknesses of the modeling, and more importantly don't take your eyes off of the meteorology; modelology (made up word) should not completely over-rule the actual meteorology of a particular event setup.  As many of the mets on here have said over the years, you have to be able to say, does a particular model's output make sense with what we know about how the atmosphere usually behaves in a given setup.  If not run away from it... My apologies if i sound snarky, but just not a big Reggie or GGEM fan, but if they works for others that's wonderful.

Excellent post!

[George001]

37 minutes ago, TauntonBlizzard2013 said:

I’d be surprised if anyone saw 6”

I’d be surprised if I see less than 6. 10:1 snow maps tend to be underdone in these setups. 

[Damage In Tolland]

41 minutes ago, DavisStraight said:

He has the power.

It’s gettin , it’s gettin  it’s gettin kinda hectic..

 

[mitchnick]

Euro AI looks wetter. Can't answer about temps. Start with this 6 hour panel.

https://charts.ecmwf.int/products/aifs_medium-mslp-rain?base_time=202501161800&interval=6&projection=opencharts_north_america&valid_time=202501191200

[FXWX]

20 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

Excellent post!

Wiz... I actually see a lot of that in your forecasting... might be a good thing; might be a bad thing; lol    

[MegaMike]

30 minutes ago, The 4 Seasons said:

 

Exactly my thoughts. Kuchera is awful and really should never be used. Sometimes it'll align with what i'm thinking or what the forecast might be but at that point it might just be confirmation bias saying the Kuchera was good this time or its good for "x" event. 

I agree with you both.

To evaluate snowfall, you really need to evaluate SWE, as well. For that matter, you'd need to evaluate forcing fields too (ensure SWE was predicted accurately for the right reasons). If SWE was under predicted, but a snowfall algorithm performed well, that algorithm isn't showing accuracy... It's showing a bias.  Unfortunately, snowfall evaluations are tricky because of gauge losses wrt observations. Not everyone measures the same either... Can of warms, snowfall is.

A met mentioned this earlier too, but the more dynamic an algorithm is, the more likely errors exacerbate. The Cobb algorithm is logically ideal for snowfall prediction, but compounding error throughout all vertical layers of atmosphere likely inhibits its accuracy. 

Snowfall prediction sucks which is probably why there are only a handful of publications. Otherwise, these vague algorithms wouldn't be widely used by public vendors.... It's the bottom of a very small barrel.

 

[weatherwiz]

2 minutes ago, FXWX said:

Wiz... I actually see a lot of that in your forecasting... might be a good thing; might be a bad thing; lol    

It can def be a bad thing  

I can have a terrible tendency of trying to over complicate or get “too cute”. This is exactly why I never get too far with seasonal forecasting, I try to get too peculiar with ENSO breakdowns and I get myself all a mess haha. 

[Prismshine Productions]

[mention=1782]ineedsnow[/mention @mitchnick ] can confirm via looping, 18z Skynet is wetter

Sent from my SM-S146VL using Tapatalk

[ORH_wxman]

Probably a good time to remind everyone:

 

[FXWX]

15 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

It can def be a bad thing  

I can have a terrible tendency of trying to over complicate or get “too cute”. This is exactly why I never get too far with seasonal forecasting, I try to get too peculiar with ENSO breakdowns and I get myself all a mess haha. 

I hear ya... general trends are all I deal with; there are no (zero) experts when it comes to the long-range stuff...   

[FXWX]

Just now, ORH_wxman said:

Probably a good time to remind everyone:

 

Yes, yes, and yes.  

[HoarfrostHubb]