Snow 1/3-1/4? And continued very cold...

[RU848789]

Here's the NWS discussion about the watches, below. Also of interest to note that the Euro came significantly west from 12 hours ago, but the precip shield didn't come west, just like the GFS; both kind of show maybe an inch or so for I-95 and not much NW of there, but 2-3" towards the coast. Time will tell if that is going to be correct or not, but most of the pros believe that a storm of this size and strength with a track close to the benchmark even if a bit east of it, ought to be able to throw enough moisture back to the NW to make for a signifiant snowfall for I-95 and east, like most of the other models show (especially the meso models which are coming into their accurate range), which is why the NWS issued the watches and increased snowfall totals, as per the map below.

For the 1200-1230 PM update, we issued a Winter Storm Watch for
the New Jersey coastal counties/zones. While the impacts
including snow amounts will be highly dependent on the rapidly
intensifying offshore storm later Wednesday night and Thursday,
there are enough model signals for potentially significant snow
amounts and therefore a watch has been issued. Some model
guidance shows impressive frontogenetic forcing just off our
coast Thursday, and a dual or coupled jet structure is forecast
for a time. Strong winds may also come into play. A new storm
total snow map is being uploaded to the web at this time, and
the snow probability maps will also be updated. Made some
adjustments to the weather, PoP, QPF and snow grids. More later
this afternoon...

Was out all afternoon evening (went to see the Shape of Water - quirky, cool film - and then dinner with my wife and son), so haven't followed the 18Z models closely, other than to see the GFS moved a bit further west again with a bit more snow for us (2-4" across most of the Philly-NYC corridor), as did its ensemble mean (3-5" for I-95), while the NAM got less snowy - it's now more like 3-5" with 6" or more near the coast.

Since a few models don't run at 6Z and 18Z, I prefer to really look at the 0Z and 12Z full suites, so am waiting for that. In the interim, which will be shortly as the 0Z NAM has started rolling out and is looking like less snow (blip or real?), here are the updated NWS snowfall maps. Unless some huge changes occur, I'd expect the NWS to post advisories (probably after the models come out tonight) for 2-4" of snow for the rest of NJ, except for Warren and Sussex, which are likely to get the least snow in NJ (maybe 1-2"), and for SE PA and for NYC metro, keeping the watches along the coast where they are.

 

[bac2therac]

lol....no soup for you on the 0zNAM...coast might get an inch or two...nothing for most of NJ

ya can't make it up.

I see all the posters on 33andrain are really trying hard to get it to snow...I think starting to lose some objectivity, everything with the run looking good until the point where it has to deliver and it gets shunted east...I think some acceptance has to start setting in. This is not a storm for inland spots. Coasts yeah can still be in the game but this storm besides that stupid run from 8 days ago was mainly model to get us on the fringes


Now the 3K hi resolution NAM running now looks to be a better hit especially for the jersey shore and south jersey

 

[bac2therac]

lol the NAM....the 12K is virtually nothing except an inch or so at the coast....the 3K is 6-10 for Somerset County to 12 inches plus Jersey Shore

how is this even possible

 

[bac2therac]

12K version of NAM

3K version of NAM

 

[bac2therac]

this really speaks to how crappy these models truly are

 

[T2Kplus10]

this really speaks to how crappy these models truly are

Amen!

 

[Scarlet_Monster]

12K version of NAM

3K version of NAM

All I can think of is this;

http://mrteverett.com/WFAN/MikeWHICHONE052110.mp3

 

[RU848789]

I rarely post model snowfall maps and for a good reason - looking at any one map is somewhat useless, as one model is rarely correct - it's better to look at them over time and vs. the whole suite to see where the similarities and differences are. A consensus blend is almost always better than any individual model, with notable exceptions, like Sandy and the Euro (or Harvey and the Euro) or Jan-15 and the GFS or Jan-16 and the NAM.

However, just to show how difficult the forecaster's job is, here's the regular NAM (12 km grid spacing) and the high resolution NAM (3 km grid spacing. They're the exact same model with regard to the physics, but the 3 km is just scaled down to allow for explicit convection calculations (rather than it being parameterized or approximated more coarsely), which means it should handle convective precip better. So look at the differences in the output from tonight's 0Z runs of each, below. Hard to believe they're almost the same model and this also likely points out what a convective challenge we have with the explosivity (high convection quotient) of this system. I can't guarantee you the 3 km, much snowier version is "correct" and the 12 km isn't, but that's the way to bet here.

 

[RUScrew85]

this really speaks to how crappy these models truly are

Is it really possible for the storm to move up the coast and snow just skip the state of NJ as in the first map? Seems like a very severe jump from a mathematical model. I smell somthin fishy.

 

[bac2therac]

from reading some posts on 33andrain, it would seem its likely the 3K (edit not 12K) is just going overboard in trying to handle the convection

for example....Isotherm responds here


2,244

• 474 posts

• Location: Colts Neck, NJ

• Report post

Posted 6 minutes ago
9 minutes ago, NJwxguy78 said:




Tom, as an example, are you saying this storm is possibly being modeled too far west due to that sensitivity?





Yes, the atypical nature of this bombogenesis is tampering w/ the synoptic environment within the model and essentially creating an error which snowballs as time advances.



Most of the time 3km will be superior. This is an atypical case.

 

[bac2therac]

Is it really possible for the storm to move up the coast and snow just skip the state of NJ as in the first map? Seems like a very severe jump from a mathematical model. I smell somthin fishy.

yes its because it just shunts everything east before it heads north, definitely could happen like that.....there is a kicker that wants to boot this thing

 

[bac2therac]

#s: I am shocked you are actually saying that the way to bet here is the 3K NAM, there is no one really saying that on the boards. stop being a weenie

 

[RUScrew85]

yes its because it just shunts everything east before it heads north, definitely could happen like that.....there is a kicker that wants to boot this thing

So that would be a Wiggle to the right, then?

 

[bac2therac]

yes we do not know if that solution is right, its the only one doing that....RGEM coming in a solid hit 4-6/4-8 kinda stuff

 

[bac2therac]

0z GFS is a 1-3/2-4/4-6 type event as you head from NW southeast to the jersey coast

 

[RU848789]

#s: I am shocked you are actually saying that the way to bet here is the 3K NAM, there is no one really saying that on the boards. stop being a weenie

Seriously? You couldn't even get the AFD right or your description of Isotherm's post (it's the 3 km he's questioning, not the 12 km) and you don't think I looked into this before posting what I did? Well, since you obviously didn't, here's what dsnow said, who's a way better synoptic met than Isotherm, who's not even a met (but is a great long range guy). Maybe stop trying to find "gotcha" moments or if you do, you're going to need to work a little harder.

"I think it could work both ways. We don't know yet. The lack of limit in calculating convection (the 3km NAM has no limit to its convection calculations) with a storm that's rapidly deepening near the Gulf Stream with a lot of latent heat release could mean the non-convection allowing models are missing many important features that the convection-allowing models can get correct. Convection-induced latent heat release --> height rises is a very real thing and we've seen it many times.

However, sometimes you also get the convection a bit too carried away in a singular location, and the model determines that convection with so much rising air as an actual true low pressure area instead of the area that may make more synoptic sense. Then again -- tucking in the surface low a bit may also be a correct response and in this setup could lead to enough of a westward nudge to make a difference for some areas."

https://www.33andrain.com/topic/801...del-thread-1218/?do=findComment&comment=47879

Even Isotherm acknowledged he might be wrong with this:

"Agree, one can argue either way, and typically I'd argue your first paragraph."

https://www.33andrain.com/topic/801...del-thread-1218/?do=findComment&comment=47883

And dualjet, another excellent met said this in response to Isotherm and there are further posts later in the thread corroborating what I said:

"So was March 14, 2017 an atypical case too? The boards threw out the meso models with that storm and they ended up being right."

https://www.33andrain.com/topic/801...del-thread-1218/?do=findComment&comment=47881

 

[Knight Shift]

@bac2therac , please try to speak in terms that most of us will understand. A lot of weenie babble in your posts. WTF is a disco?
What is 0Z?
What is 33andrain???

Geez. . . . .

 

[T2Kplus10]

Model fight!

:popcorn:

 

[bac2therac]

Seriously? You couldn't even get the AFD right or your description of Isotherm's post (it's the 3 km he's questioning, not the 12 km) and you don't think I looked into this before posting what I did. Well, since you obviously didn't, here's what dsnow said, who's a way better synoptic met than Isotherm, who's not even a met (but is a great long range guy). Maybe stop trying to find "gotcha" moments or if you do, you're going to need to work a little harder.

"I think it could work both ways. We don't know yet. The lack of limit in calculating convection (the 3km NAM has no limit to its convection calculations) with a storm that's rapidly deepening near the Gulf Stream with a lot of latent heat release could mean the non-convection allowing models are missing many important features that the convection-allowing models can get correct. Convection-induced latent heat release --> height rises is a very real thing and we've seen it many times.

However, sometimes you also get the convection a bit too carried away in a singular location, and the model determines that convection with so much rising air as an actual true low pressure area instead of the area that may make more synoptic sense. Then again -- tucking in the surface low a bit may also be a correct response and in this setup could lead to enough of a westward nudge to make a difference for some areas."

https://www.33andrain.com/topic/801...del-thread-1218/?do=findComment&comment=47879

Even Isotherm acknowledged he might be wrong with this:

"Agree, one can argue either way, and typically I'd argue your first paragraph."

https://www.33andrain.com/topic/801...del-thread-1218/?do=findComment&comment=47883

And dualjet, another excellent met said this in response to Isotherm and there are further posts later in the thread corroborating what I said:

"So was March 14, 2017 an atypical case too? The boards threw out the meso models with that storm and they ended up being right."

https://www.33andrain.com/topic/801...del-thread-1218/?do=findComment&comment=47881

my mistake there...I meant the 3K...he is talking about the 3K NAM as was copied..that was my mistake posting 12K instead of 3k...point remains they are skeptical of that 3K Nam while you were being a weenie, saying oooooh lets bet on it...thats what I am talking about. Models are all over the place and of course you automatically happen to run to the one model run that shows the most for the past few days,

in addition about the AFD from Mt Holly...do you ****ing realize that my post was at 4:10 PM taken from Mt Holly at 3:57PM, they didnt update what you posted until 5:21 PM which is over an hour after I posted so not sure what your point is

 

[bac2therac]

CMC verbatim was 2-4 north jersey 4-8 central nj down to se jersey were amounts could be 6-10

 

[bac2therac]

Great listen if you have the time...and truly want to become a weather nerd

https://www.nymetroweather.com/2018...s-intricacies-upcoming-powerful-winter-storm/

 

[RU848789]

Was out all afternoon evening (went to see the Shape of Water - quirky, cool film - and then dinner with my wife and son), so haven't followed the 18Z models closely, other than to see the GFS moved a bit further west again with a bit more snow for us (2-4" across most of the Philly-NYC corridor), as did its ensemble mean (3-5" for I-95), while the NAM got less snowy - it's now more like 3-5" with 6" or more near the coast.

Since a few models don't run at 6Z and 18Z, I prefer to really look at the 0Z and 12Z full suites, so am waiting for that. In the interim, which will be shortly as the 0Z NAM has started rolling out and is looking like less snow (blip or real?), here are the updated NWS snowfall maps. Unless some huge changes occur, I'd expect the NWS to post advisories (probably after the models come out tonight) for 2-4" of snow for the rest of NJ, except for Warren and Sussex, which are likely to get the least snow in NJ (maybe 1-2"), and for SE PA and for NYC metro, keeping the watches along the coast where they are.

Overall, so far, the 00Z model suite (00Z is Greenwich Mean Time or 7 pm EST and denotes the time the model initializes - it then takes 3-6 hours to get the model output) is moderately snowier than the 12Z model suite, which I think means we at least keep the current winter storm watches and perhaps with the 4 am package the NWS expands them one tier to the NW, i.e., to the rest of SW NJ and maybe Middlesex, but maybe not.

Same thing for the NWS-NYC, where I could see the watches being extended to all of NYC and SE CT and maybe Union up to Bergen in NE NJ, but maybe not yet, at least for NENJ. At the very least, I think we'll see advisories for 2-4" going up for SW NJ and the rest of CNJ/NNJ (except probably not Sussex/Warren) and for the Hudson Valley. Iffy on whether any PA counties will end up with advisories - maybe just Delaware, Philly, and lower Montco/Bucks.

Bottom line is that a moderate event (2-4/3-5" level) is looking pretty likely for the I-95 corridor with a bit more towards the Shore and a bit less N/W. However, it's also possible that I-95 only sees an inch or so of snow (a complete whiff is very unlikely now), while a 6-12" event is still possible and given how powerful this storm will be, even more is a non-zero possibility (but very very unlikely) if things break perfectly. Here's a quick rundown of the model suite.

00Z NAMs - did a whole post on this. Crazy discrepancy between the 12 km NAM (lower resolution) which gave essentially nothing west of the NJTPK and a few inches towards the Shore and in NYC, but had way more in far SNJ/DE and LI/CT, kind of skipping over NJ - just doesn't look right, especially since the 3 km NAM (high resolution, usually more accurate in highly convective situations like this) showed a major hit with no "holes" - showed 6-10" for Philly-NYC and up to 10-14" at the Shore/LI and maybe 3-6" NW of 95 - that is higher than the rest, so I'm skeptical of that much.

00Z GFS Global - moved further west again and had the most snow it's had so far, with a general 2-3" for Philly-NYC corridor, 3-5" towards the coast and 1-2" a bit NW of 95.

00Z Canadian Global (GGEM) - had a general 6-10" for all of SNJ/CNJ/Philly, but just 3-6" for NNJ/NYC/LI. Like the NAM 12km, the CMC has a weird snow hole where only 3-6" falls from NYC up to NE CT, which is just nuts, as there ought to be more snow as one goes NE in general, as those areas are closer to the storm's center and the storm is getting stronger the further NE it goes.

00Z Canadian Regional (RGEM, also called RDPS) - had a general 4-7" for Philly-NYC corridor and the coast with 2-4" NW of there.

UK - looks like the GFS from a setup perspective/track/precip, but snowfall maps aren't available yet.

Euro - similar to the UK....

 

[knightfan7]

All this weather gobbly gook is wayyyyy over my head.

I'll go with the NWS 2-6" and say thank you.

 

[RUhasarrived]

The storm has hit bigtime now.They're covering it on Zero Hedge.

 

[RU848789]

my mistake there...I meant the 3K...he is talking about the 3K NAM as was copied..that was my mistake posting 12K instead of 3k...point remains they are skeptical of that 3K Nam while you were being a weenie, saying oooooh lets bet on it...thats what I am talking about. Models are all over the place and of course you automatically happen to run to the one model run that shows the most for the past few days,

in addition about the AFD from Mt Holly...do you ****ing realize that my post was at 4:10 PM taken from Mt Holly at 3:57PM, they didnt update what you posted until 5:21 PM which is over an hour after I posted so not sure what your point is

Did you even read my response? Do you ever? I showed you two pro mets, who are way better mets than isotherm, who disagreed with him (and agreed with me) and you're calling me out? I've forgotten more about convective transport processes and numerical modeling than you'll ever know - you know they don't just give out PhD's in chem eng'g for giggles don't you? And I wasn't saying that's what's going to happen, I was just saying I thought the 3 km was more likely to be correct than the 12 km and was trying to mostly illustrate how whacky the models can be.

On the AFD, you posted old info from ~4 am as if it were new at 4:10 pm, 12 hours later. That part of the write-up didn't change all day - you need to look at what has changed and what hasn't before posting it. It's a simple thing to check, although I would also say they could do a better job of highlighting or time-stamping which parts they update between the major 4 am and 4 pm, twice daily AFDs. You're not alone in making that mistake - many on the weather boards do it, but it needs to be called out so people don't have old info and think it's new.

 

[rurichdog]

Wow. Pretty crazy. Feel bad for them, as that type of devastation, plus the extreme cold weather has got to be really bad.

Don't feel bad, there will be no "devastation". The good people of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland call this stuff "winter". It's fairly common & they're used to it. The media throws around terms likke "bomb cyclone" to drive hits. It just means the pressure will drop on avg 1mb per hour over 24 hours like a bomb went off, caving the floor in...thus everything drops. Cute.

 

[Knight Shift]

All this weather gobbly gook is wayyyyy over my head.

I'll go with the NWS 2-6" and say thank you.

Right?

Between bac and #'s, it's like listening to two professors debate particle physics.

Just tell us how many inches we will have!!! Isn't that all that matters to most folks, especially the MILFs at the Hillsborough deli?

 

[bac2therac]

Did you even read my response? Do you ever? I showed you two pro mets, who are way better mets than isotherm, who disagreed with him (and agreed with me) and you're calling me out? I've forgotten more about convective transport processes and numerical modeling than you'll ever know - you know they don't just give out PhD's in chem eng'g for giggles don't you? And I wasn't saying that's what's going to happen, I was just saying I thought the 3 km was more likely to be correct than the 12 km and was trying to mostly illustrate how whacky the models can be.

On the AFD, you posted old info from ~4 am as if it were new at 4:10 pm, 12 hours later. That part of the write-up didn't change all day - you need to look at what has changed and what hasn't before posting it. It's a simple thing to check, although I would also say they could do a better job of highlighting or time-stamping which parts they update between the major 4 am and 4 pm, twice daily AFDs. You're not alone in making that mistake - many on the weather boards do it, but it needs to be called out so people don't have old info and think it's new.

hello...it was about you SAYING that this 3K was a better bet...when you should know better. You have no clue at this point since that solution was the first of its kind of any model. There was skepticism in thoughts over there. I did not see one MET over there that rallied around this 3K or the 12k solution as something to hold. I did see a post from you saying how it brought tears to your eyes. Thats the whole point. The fact that the same model has such divergent solutions is troubling. I dont think any declarative statements are prudent on either of those two models given what they said. The mets acknowledged both sides could happen. They didnt not necessarily dismiss what Isotherm was saying, I didnt get that impression at all. I am not here to argue science with you obviously. I am here to argue statements like one should be bet on over the other, those kind of statements in such a volitale situation of model runs the past week...its what got you in trouble 8 days ago. Look its your style you have a bias but just admit that.

as for the AFD, I assumed there was update because it was timeframed 3:57PM so they updated something and usually that is the time we see an afternoon update. Never read the morning AFD so thought this one was the new one. Its not like it was that far anyhow from their snow maps..what one inch difference..whoopee. Not sure your point in playing a gotcha moment as you posted the update disco when it was put out, no real reason to put in a dig at me right? But I guess its tit for tat now

 

[Knight Shift]

Great listen if you have the time...and truly want to become a weather nerd

https://www.nymetroweather.com/2018...s-intricacies-upcoming-powerful-winter-storm/

Thanks for that. I guess I will resign myself to just looking for the inch totals and keeping it simple. I give you guys major props for digging in and understanding this stuff.

 

[knightfan7]

Right?

Between bac and #'s, it's like listening to two professors debate particle physics.

Just tell us how many inches we will have!!! Isn't that all that matters to most folks, especially the MILFs at the Hillsborough deli?

Hey, I know physics. I never miss an episode of "The Big Bang Theory":sunglasses:

 

[bac2therac]

Thanks for that. I guess I will resign myself to just looking for the inch totals and keeping it simple. I give you guys major props for digging in and understanding this stuff.

I am trying to learn

Interesting post from a guy who is a met called Enigma who seems to know his stuff on Americanwx......"Again, this is where pattern recognition and experience trump persistent model assessment. Respectfully, some of the younger, but knowledable mets/pros are having difficulty with this system due to access of too much data (yes, that's possible!) UkMet is very deliberate tonight and paints a very clear picture of where the CCB will set up. I like the Mount Holly accumulations for now."

 

[Knight Shift]

Hey, I know physics. I never miss an episode of "The Big Bang Theory":sunglasses:

Hear the MILFs at the Hillborough Deli like the Big Bang.

 

[knightfan7]

I am trying to learn

Interesting post from a guy who is a met called Enigma who seems to know his stuff on Americanwx......"Again, this is where pattern recognition and experience trump persistent model assessment. Respectfully, some of the younger, but knowledable mets/pros are having difficulty with this system due to access of too much data (yes, that's possible!) UkMet is very deliberate tonight and paints a very clear picture of where the CCB will set up. I like the Mount Holly accumulations for now."

You and I have had our issues but I try to give you credit when due. I enjoy these threads with you, #'s and sometimes others going Bac (lol) and forth. I really appreciate the info you guys provide even tho I don't understand A LOT.

 

[knightfan7]

Hear the MILFs at the Hillborough Deli like the Big Bang.

They're breaking out their Yoga Snow Pants as we speak.

 

[Knight Shift]

They're breaking out their Yoga Snow Pants as we speak.

will the Glimmer Glass Bridge hold over 6" of snow?

 

[Extra Point]

((Crickets))

Nobody has a sense of humor.

 

[NickRU714]

I'm in New Providence - west of NJT and literally 500 yards north of78.

Is it safe to say that even if I get no snow out here, my boss who lives on LI won't be in the office in NYC on Thursday?

Basically I'm working from home regardless on Thursday?

Any chance LI gets crushed and I can WFH Friday too?

 

[R1766U]

Did the weenies get NAM'D overnight or is the NAM picking up on something? What do you guys think?

My concern with this storm is that it seems it is getting slower---and resulting in a later start time. Many schools may decide not to cancel school and then things could get ugly if the higher totals do verify.

 

[WhiteBus]

Great listen if you have the time...and truly want to become a weather nerd

https://www.nymetroweather.com/2018...s-intricacies-upcoming-powerful-winter-storm/

I'll pass.
After a few years reading these threads I have no desire in being "one of those people".

 

[RU848789]

Well, the NWS went partway to what I thought they might, issuing advisories for the rest of SNJ and watches for all of NYC, but surprisingly, no advisories for Mercer/Middlesex or NE NJ (Union up to Bergen), even though the maps show 2-4" of snow.

And since these were issued, the 6Z NAM (both the 3 km and 12 km NAMs) came out showing 12-20" of snow from 95 eastward and 6-12" within 20-30 miles west of 95 and the hi-res HRDPS (kind of like the 3 km NAM, a high res model0 shows 6-12" from 95 east and 3-6" west of 95, but the 6Z GFS and RGEM only show maybe 2-4" for I-95 and a bit more for the coast. Very hard to make forecasts with model runs like that. Maybe the NAM is just a hiccup or maybe it's on to something. I have no clue. Anyway, here's the map of watches/advisories warnings and snowfall maps are below that. Gotta work today, so not many posts expected unless the 12Z runs look like the NAM.