I was an advocate for this thing to be more amped, and now with the sleet line on my doorstep on the NAM I guess I got my wish?
Generally I was hoping for more amplitude in our iteration of the trough in the eastern 2/3s. Early runs had it, then lost it, as the Baja low stretched the energy into some ugly positively tilted fold and we lost some northern stream support. Good enough for some, but my chief concern was qpf, and when you have low qpf that's when you can light snow/34/no sticking conditions, which isn't a complete L but still very frustrating.
What i didn't see coming was both the Baja low deepening more and this dumb shortwave appendage rotating around it and going negative tilt over Mexico. Generally this doesn't happen. This is already a highly anomalous event. The Cali fires and the winds that fanned them are directly related to the unusual position of this wound up low and the associated impacts.
Anticipating this little move on Monday would be impossible
View attachment 161784
So we got our amplitude but not by my desired method, this little move is what causes the WAA surge and pumps up heights ahead of the system. Broadly, this storm will feature a lot of P-types for the south. I noticed a lot of ill-will towards people rooting for a more amped solution, which I get, I think if you're in Huntsville and tenuously on the right side of the snow line it may seem punitive if the eastern folks want to amp things up so they get there's. I thought generally a more amped solution would be a tide that lifted more ships, as evidenced by model runs earlier in the week, but because it happened at the Baja low we're at risk for less pleasant solutions. So it goes.