• 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 January 21-23 2025

Comparing this UK run at 72 to its other runs in past days its sorta more leaning toward thr 16 00z run as far as feature not quite there but moving toward that which was a good run similar to GFS and CMC
 
It’s getting spooky. Really getting the CMC look to it
If the CMC continues to stick to its guns, and this is an epic fail for it, it either needs to be totally revamped or totally retired! Because you could not trust it for anything at that point ?! doesn’t matter how far out, how close in, you just couldn’t trust it…so why would you keep putting the same product out there?
 
i don't think the southern wave is going to catch up in time, but should be a reassuring run
Tbh it may not show it at the surface but I’m starting to feel like we may not need the perfect H5 look. The CMC really does just enough early on to get the lift needed for overrunning and the Arctic airmass to pretty much do what they do. The same could be said here with this run even if we don’t necessarily get the surface reflection. Just a thought
 
Tbh it may not show it at the surface but I’m starting to feel like we may not need the perfect H5 look. The CMC really does just enough early on to get the lift needed for overrunning and the Arctic airmass to pretty much do what they do. The same could be said here with this run even if we don’t necessarily get the surface reflection. Just a thought
coming around to this, perfect h5 look would be a ton of fun though
 
Tbh it may not show it at the surface but I’m starting to feel like we may not need the perfect H5 look. The CMC really does just enough early on to get the lift needed for overrunning and the Arctic airmass to pretty much do what they do. The same could be said here with this run even if we don’t necessarily get the surface reflection. Just a thought
It was clearly headed for glory because it’s froze now. They had to stop it just like they stop the lottery sometimes when they need to “fix” it.
 
coming around to this, perfect h5 look would be a ton of fun though
The perfect H5 look gets you something the euro was spitting out a few days ago. And honestly you need it for these globals outside of the CMC to get the surface reflection to show it because they simply have a history of under performing with overrunning and WAA generated precip. But if we just get the lift and get the jet screaming SW to NE like every model has shown you’re pretty much set in getting a solid precip shield that should put down some solid totals and especially ratios. Over a larger area than being depicted.
 
Tbh it may not show it at the surface but I’m starting to feel like we may not need the perfect H5 look. The CMC really does just enough early on to get the lift needed for overrunning and the Arctic airmass to pretty much do what they do. The same could be said here with this run even if we don’t necessarily get the surface reflection. Just a thought
Yeah the CMC is not relying on some specific H5 look. It has shown about 5 different looks at H5 yet still resulted in similar snowfall output - I believe it is more about the intense Arctic air mass and surface level processes including isentropic upglide / frontogenesis forcing. I posted this earlier but had a mistake so I removed it. The CMC has been oscillating a lot at H5 but producing similar footprints of snow. Why? It has to be those surface features like I mentioned. That's the one thing it has remained (fairly) consistent with.
gem_z500_vort_us_fh102_trend.gif052d605a-abdd-4eba-953e-a769a54f9be9.gif
263c1411-47e0-480f-afac-38496797db0f.gif
 
Something I’ve noticed on even the models that don’t do much, it appears our N/S early on is improving run to run but roughly around hr 60-75 that’s where you start to lose it and the N/S races out in front. Idk if that’s correctable at this point but we’ve seen improvement early on with these runs with it’s placement vs prior runs so maybe that can trend better within the next 24-48 hours.
 
Yeah the CMC is not relying on some specific H5 look. It has shown about 5 different looks at H5 yet still resulted in similar snowfall output - I believe it is more about the intense Arctic air mass and surface level processes including isentropic upglide / frontogenesis forcing. I posted this earlier but had a mistake so I removed it. The CMC has been oscillating a lot at H5 but producing similar footprints of snow. Why? It has to be those surface features like I mentioned. That's the one thing it has remained (fairly) consistent with.
View attachment 164879View attachment 164880
View attachment 164882
IMG_0880.gif
For comparison’s sake, the gfs trend. It’s just not as cold. Gives me even more pause about the cmc given its cold notoriety
 
View attachment 164885
For comparison’s sake, the gfs trend. It’s just not as cold. Gives me even more pause about the cmc given its cold notoriety
See I see it opposite. This airmass is legit. If this was your typical marginal airmass, then yeah I could see your point but it’s not. Also the GFS is really bad with these types of overrunning FGEN driven setups. To me the only reason the CMC seems realistic is because we know how cold this airmass is likely to be.
 
View attachment 164885
For comparison’s sake, the gfs trend. It’s just not as cold. Gives me even more pause about the cmc given its cold notoriety
It's almost assuredly too cold, it always is. I'm just trying to figure out why it continues to output this snowfall footprint despite wildly varying H5 evolutions.

iGRXY presents the counterpoint above, however. We won't really know if it's valid until we get deeper into NAM and RGEM territory.
 
It's almost assuredly too cold, it always is. I'm just trying to figure out why it continues to output this snowfall footprint despite wildly varying H5 evolutions.
I wonder if it’s a combo of what you and Ross said tbh. Too cold inland produces more overrunning, right? Combine that with consistently stronger/consolidated trough you get a bang
 
I wonder if it’s a combo of what you and Ross said tbh. Too cold inland produces more overrunning, right? Combine that with consistently stronger/consolidated trough you get a bang
I think our points are related TBH. Stronger overrunning initially over TX may be leading to some of the downstream effects. It's definitely a combo of factors, it's not just one thing that's for sure. Will be interesting to see what the RGEM and NAM do with this.
 
Back
Top