JAN 12th-13th 2019 Snow threat

SoulSingMG wrote:GFY 12z EURO!!! I will not be roped back in!!!

Umm euro was a miss...

Light amount of qpf and even knock some off that due to dry arctic air. That was c-2” at best

aiannone wrote:

SoulSingMG wrote:GFY 12z EURO!!! I will not be roped back in!!!

Umm euro was a miss...

Light amount of qpf and even knock some off that due to dry arctic air. That was c-2” at best

Compared to its previous run? Well north.

SoulSingMG wrote:

aiannone wrote:

SoulSingMG wrote:GFY 12z EURO!!! I will not be roped back in!!!

Umm euro was a miss...

Light amount of qpf and even knock some off that due to dry arctic air. That was c-2” at best

Compared to its previous run? Well north.

Anyone have a snow map?

SoulSingMG wrote:

aiannone wrote:

SoulSingMG wrote:GFY 12z EURO!!! I will not be roped back in!!!

Umm euro was a miss...

Light amount of qpf and even knock some off that due to dry arctic air. That was c-2” at best

Compared to its previous run? Well north.

Well, decent jump north. But not really a well-organized storm though on the run. Disjointed & quick mover.

There is two components to the storm. The initial over running, which is whats going to bring some snow to the area, and the moisture associated with the main LP. This second part will likely be suppressed to our south. Im About 85% sold on that. HOWEVER; the over running event conts to get better and better. Alex while yes there will be virga there is an intense baroclinic zone setting up here out ahead of the main energy. The euro once again made another small step in allowing room for baroclinically enhance(air moving due to a temp gradient) vertical motion up the column from warm air to cold air ahead of the mains LP(counter clockwise movement of air). I bet the column saturates faster than one thinks given the set up. Jimmy LI is now in the 0.2 range of QPF. Euro has been the most consistent and conts to allow the boundary layer to move far enough N for this overrunning event to give the area some light high ratio snow. The snow map is 15:1

The N trough still steers the system south of us but not before some snow. Again IF the euro is correct. GFS typically sucks in this time frame.

EURO Not to bad at 15:1 ratios - 3-4" is a good idea for NYC Metro

Here’s the issue I have with these snow maps depicting widespread 3, 4, even up to 5” as far north as NYC for some modeling (including ratio maps), which is all largely modeled to come from the initial over-running wave: When you look at the overall setup, the best forcing is maximized well south of the Northern Mid-Atlantic; certainly south of the Mason-Dixon Line. As a result, we are relying on what is essentially a clipper-type of evolution for areas north of there, and the thermal profile is cold. Very cold. Yes, this will allow for high ratios, but because the lift will not be maximized in a sufficiently deep portion of the column, you will not likely achieve optimal dendritic growth. As a result, columns with some plates will likely be the primary crystal types, which do not accumulate nearly as quickly as dendrites do. Given the thermals, fast progression of this initial burst, and dry air likely leading to a little loss of sensible QPF, I think a general coating-2” with isolated 3” amounts (at most for areas north of the Mason-Dixon Line) is what should be expected at this juncture, barring any drastic improvements. Just my opinion, though. I’m just honestly not impressed with this setup at all, and feel I like I’ve seen this specific type of evolution underperform compared to snow maps. Still plenty of time for that to change, though!

rb924119 wrote:Here’s the issue I have with these snow maps depicting widespread 3, 4, even up to 5” as far north as NYC for some modeling (including ratio maps), which is all largely modeled to come from the initial over-running wave: When you look at the overall setup, the best forcing is maximized well south of the Northern Mid-Atlantic; certainly south of the Mason-Dixon Line. As a result, we are relying on what is essentially a clipper-type of evolution for areas north of there, and the thermal profile is cold. Very cold. Yes, this will allow for high ratios, but because the lift will not be maximized in a sufficiently deep portion of the column, you will not likely achieve optimal dendritic growth. As a result, columns with some plates will likely be the primary crystal types, which do not accumulate nearly as quickly as dendrites do. Given the thermals, fast progression of this initial burst, and dry air likely leading to a little loss of sensible QPF, I think a general coating-2” with isolated 3” amounts (at most for areas north of the Mason-Dixon Line) is what should be expected at this juncture, barring any drastic improvements. Just my opinion, though. I’m just honestly not impressed with this setup at all, and feel I like I’ve seen this specific type of evolution underperform compared to snow maps. Still plenty of time for that to change, though!

How do you feel about later in the month? 17th?

Grselig wrote:

rb924119 wrote:Here’s the issue I have with these snow maps depicting widespread 3, 4, even up to 5” as far north as NYC for some modeling (including ratio maps), which is all largely modeled to come from the initial over-running wave: When you look at the overall setup, the best forcing is maximized well south of the Northern Mid-Atlantic; certainly south of the Mason-Dixon Line. As a result, we are relying on what is essentially a clipper-type of evolution for areas north of there, and the thermal profile is cold. Very cold. Yes, this will allow for high ratios, but because the lift will not be maximized in a sufficiently deep portion of the column, you will not likely achieve optimal dendritic growth. As a result, columns with some plates will likely be the primary crystal types, which do not accumulate nearly as quickly as dendrites do. Given the thermals, fast progression of this initial burst, and dry air likely leading to a little loss of sensible QPF, I think a general coating-2” with isolated 3” amounts (at most for areas north of the Mason-Dixon Line) is what should be expected at this juncture, barring any drastic improvements. Just my opinion, though. I’m just honestly not impressed with this setup at all, and feel I like I’ve seen this specific type of evolution underperform compared to snow maps. Still plenty of time for that to change, though!

How do you feel about later in the month?  17th?

Go back through the last few pages of the Long Range Thread for my thoughts on the period from ~17th-20th/21st to put it succinctly: FIRED. UP.

The way this event is shaping up, the only hope may be for a classic Shore Special like we had Jan 7, '17. I recall the same issues playing out as far as track and forecast area. That ended up being a Mothra Shore Special, but the snowfield went further north and west than expected by 100 miles and NOBODY saw that coming up until the time it actually happened (I'll try to go back and read that thread and fact check myself later tonight). And the storm stuck around for just a tick longer than expected too. End result: about 33-50% more snow than most were expecting forum wide.

And since then there has been about 15 storms that stayed a glancing blow as predicted or worse.

1/15 chances, huh? yummy


Whatever. We have 0.00" inches so far this year in Toms River/Bayville.  And that's an exact total, not even rounding down. ha ha

You want to send me a crappy 2" of what's at least going to be cold fluffy snow? As an appy for the main course coming down the pike? Thank you sir, may I have another.

It's these storms that keep me going when we are too far S and E to cash in, which happens a lot more than the Shore Special.

I'd love to be 12-24 hours out looking at a forecast for an inch or 2...and also knowing that this one has potential for overachieving down here as well as n and w...

And if busts, so what? I'll do what I always do...ha ha...I'll lie down and bleed a while and then rise up and track again!!

Nam looking more amped and more consolidated at hour 54. Heights look better too

skinsfan1177 wrote:Nam looking more amped and more consolidated at hour 54. Heights look better too

agreed

sroc4 wrote:

skinsfan1177 wrote:Nam looking more amped and more consolidated at hour 54. Heights look better too

agreed

Confluence is strong though

18z NAM looks sexy

Unfirtunatley it will not get it down as much as nam showing a beast so is the confluence beating too. Ugh

Normally I see a map like this and change the banner of the forum to Godzilla. Unfortunately, the flow over New England is going to kill this threat from being a Godzilla. At this point I'm just looking for a couple of inches to cheer the mood up in this horrific winter to this point.



You can see the dry air (due to the fast flow over us) eating away at the precip on the 18z NAM. It is a very good looking storm at 500mb, but at the surface it is garbage.

syosnow94 wrote:Of course this storm looks like garbage. It’s the winter of 2018/19. EVERY SINGLE RAINSTORM has overachieved and nailed us. Why would this one do the same. We have cold air in place

Which is why I had 61 inches of rain for 2018!

The TPV lobe is just killing this storm right now. We want 5he cold and we get it but it is coming at a price. This WOULD be a Mecs snowstorm IF the TPV phased or if it moves outlet about 4 hours earlier giving the Southern Storm which has some juice to it a chance to raise the height's along the coast and come pole ward. Timing needs a tweaking but there is a chance we may see some type of coastal redevelopmentioned Sunday night into Monday looking at he GEFS dor this time frame.

If the SREFs are any indication, expect a disappointing NAM run lol

rb924119 wrote:
If the SREFs are any indication, expect a disappointing NAM run lol

Cool but how does it get more disappointing than it already is?

syosnow94 wrote:

rb924119 wrote:
If the SREFs are any indication, expect a disappointing NAM run lol

Cool but how does it get more disappointing than it already is?

Shows a cutter with our temps spiking into the 50s.......?

Jesus, it’s even flatter than 18z was lol that over-running has very little chance of doing anything here imo. We’re all gonna be sucking virga. Actually, at this rate, would not surprise me to see the sun lol

rb924119 wrote:
If the SREFs are any indication, expect a disappointing NAM run lol

That would be impossible since I haven't been expecting anything from this system from the beginning.

Unless there's some way we will be getting negative snowfall from this setup, which wouldn't surprise me this winter, this system is incapable of disappointing me.

CPcantmeasuresnow wrote:

rb924119 wrote:
If the SREFs are any indication, expect a disappointing NAM run lol

That would be impossible since I haven't been expecting anything from this system from the beginning.

Unless there's some way we will be getting negative snowfall from this setup, which wouldn't surprise me this winter, this system is incapable of disappointing me.

Unless, of course, it actually snowed a measuresble amount in Central Park but they recorded a trace lmfaoooo then you’d be disappointed even further that it would have somehow found a way to overachieve and not be recognized for it ahahahahaha

And theoretically, it would therefore snow a negative amount lmfaoooo