• Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!

Wintry ❄The Christmas Miracle❄(12-24/12-25)

Jon said:
So by get the job done I’m still confused with what we’re taking about here. Flurries or are you saying epic convective snow bursts with decent to heavy rates? Sounds like you’re kinda bullish here. If you were to forecast the event, what’s the most likely outcome?
Click to expand...

What I’m actually saying is that your concerns about low level dry air on the HRRR are unfounded based on my last few responses to you. 60% RH in a convective environment is not that big of a deal esp when your dry layer is only just over a few thousand feet thick
 
Jon said:
So by get the job done I’m still confused with what we’re taking about here. Flurries or are you saying epic convective snow bursts with decent to heavy rates? Sounds like you’re kinda bullish here. If you were to forecast the event, what’s the most likely outcome?
Click to expand...
Most likely outcome, if/where it snows it’s probably not going to be just some flurries. Near Absolutely unstable soundings/steep low level lapse rates with saturated DGZ, that’s a highly convective environment. Thus, if it snows, it will come down pretty hard imo based on that and we will have mini snow squalls where precip is legitimately falling. The low levels become unsaturated with the heating of the day and without it we won’t be unstable enough to generate precip
 
Webberweather53 said:
Most likely outcome, if/where it snows it’s probably not going to be just some flurries. Near Absolutely unstable soundings/steep low level lapse rates with saturated DGZ, that’s a highly convective environment. Thus, if it snows, it will come down pretty hard imo based on that and we will have mini snow squalls where precip is legitimately falling. The low levels become unsaturated with the heating of the day and without it we won’t be unstable enough to generate precip
Click to expand...

Ok cool. Thanks! It makes sense given the Omega and saturation at DGZ and the connective nature.
 
Webberweather53 said:
What I’m actually saying is that your concerns about low level dry air on the HRRR are unfounded based on my last few responses to you. 60% RH in a convective environment is not that big of a deal esp when your dry layer is only just over a few thousand feet thick
Click to expand...

So no virga and instant snow bursts. We’ll see!
 
Jon said:
If there’s any virga whatsoever than my concern about a dry layer isn’t “unfounded”
Click to expand...
No need to get snarky and have an attitude here because I disagree with you. Your concern is based on the HRRR sounding you were gawking over last night and that dry layer wasn’t that strong or very deep at all, unless you can convince me that a 3-4K feet dry layer with 80% RH is substantial I don’t see your argument. Anyway carry on.
 
malak05 said:
What some models are showing for the backside snow as main line passes thru GA around 2-3 PM there is some moisture kick-in that fills in from SW/NE along back of line and it appears that would be what has potential to changeover in the afternoon hours.
Click to expand...

It looks like as the trough goes neutral, another small piece of energy gets injected into main energy of the upper level trough which allows some moisture to redevelop on the backside of the band. That being said, NWS just put out a tweet saying the line is moving 1-2 hours faster than their modeling so that may not bold well for any chance of snow on the backside of the band.
 
So what does this front moving faster than anticipated mean for the snow in Georgia and/or possibility of convective snow east of the mountains?
 
Webberweather53 said:
No need to get snarky and have an attitude here because I disagree with you. Your concern is based on the HRRR sounding you were gawking over last night and that dry layer wasn’t that strong or very deep at all, unless you can convince me that a 3-4K feet dry layer with 80% RH is substantial I don’t see your argument. Anyway carry on.
Click to expand...

I don’t recall saying substantial, maybe I did, but it’s there nonetheless. My point was to keep expectations low. You aren’t exactly the nicest with wording on here, (and maybe that’s 100% unintentional on your part and it’s how I take it), but thanks for your input. I do appreciate you answering my questions.
 
By 0z this evening, with corroborating radar and sounding data from the TN Valley directly underneath the upper level low, I think we'll have a really good gauge on which camp is going to win out tomorrow east of the mountains in the Carolinas. The drier/shallower mixed layer ARW, NSSL, & NAM cores vs the moist/deeper mixed layer HRRR.

The differences between the two models are already fairly noticeable even by hr 10.



1608824076772.png


1608824084087.png
 
Sleet City USA said:
So what does this front moving faster than anticipated mean for the snow in Georgia and/or possibility of convective snow east of the mountains?
Click to expand...

It really only affects GA and it's potential for backend snow on the main band coming through our area right now. Doesn't really affect the snow flurry/shower potential afterwards.
 
Jon said:
I don’t recall saying substantial, maybe I did, but it’s there nonetheless. My point was to keep expectations low. You aren’t exactly the nicest with wording on here, (and maybe that’s 100% unintentional on your part and it’s how I take it), but thanks for your input. I do appreciate you answering my questions.
Click to expand...

Well it was definitely substantial enough that you were legitimately concerned about it preventing snow in many locations and made a post about here and on twitter, so I'd definitely consider it a substantial/significant concern no?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top