• 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 1/20 - 1/23 Winter Storm

I'm less concerned about this system because rather than just having a ULL we need to time with the northern stream, the wave pulls in cold air when it cuts off from the 50/50 low, so there would likely be less of a warm nose. With that said, if we are going to get screwed, it would likely be because this thing cuts off from the northern stream way too early, and becomes an ULL, and we all get rain.
 
Ollie Williams said:
I'm less concerned about this system because rather than just having a ULL we need to time with the northern stream, the wave pulls in cold air when it cuts off from the 50/50 low, so there would likely be less of a warm nose. With that said, if we are going to get screwed, it would likely be because this thing cuts off from the northern stream way too early, and becomes an ULL, and we all get rain.
Click to expand...
The crazy thing is we’ve seen various iterations of the same basic H5 evolution today that can still all produce huge snow totals. To me, this is a net positive and sort of like a deterministic ensemble. It’s pretty impressive to have this many model suites showing this similar of output at this range.
 
Hypsometric said:
The crazy thing is we’ve seen various iterations of the same basic H5 evolution today that can still all produce huge snow totals. To me, this is a net positive and sort of like a deterministic ensemble. It’s pretty impressive to have this many model suites showing this similar of output at this range.
Click to expand...
I can't recall a time where we saw this vigorous a system modeled with this track/evolution and these widespread snowfall amounts that ever worked out. It almost always runs inland by D0. Maybe the December 2000 storm is an exception...only it went the other way, which was because of a missed phase. The fact that the GFS went from nada to it's current solution is a red flag.

The patten is supportive of wintry weather, however, and I'm glad we have something to track. What I'd like to see is the models lose it to the east for a few days and then inevitably come back.
 
Rain Cold said:
I can't recall a time where we saw this vigorous a system modeled with this track/evolution and these widespread snowfall amounts that ever worked out. It almost always runs inland by D0. Maybe the December 2000 storm is an exception...only it went the other way, which was because of a missed phase. The fact that the GFS went from nada to it's current solution is a red flag.

The patten is supportive of wintry weather, however, and I'm glad we have something to track. What I'd like to see is the models lose it to the east for a few days and then inevitably come back.
Click to expand...
Or just suppress it like crazy southward
 
Rain Cold said:
I can't recall a time where we saw this vigorous a system modeled with this track/evolution and these widespread snowfall amounts that ever worked out. It almost always runs inland by D0. Maybe the December 2000 storm is an exception...only it went the other way, which was because of a missed phase. The fact that the GFS went from nada to it's current solution is a red flag.

The patten is supportive of wintry weather, however, and I'm glad we have something to track. What I'd like to see is the models lose it to the east for a few days and then inevitably come back.
Click to expand...
To be fair, North Carolina doesn't have a large enough sample size of modeled storms like this to judge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top