Stats, Interesting Theories on Next Week`s Storm

UPDATE 12 PM: We have some new videos up on the Breaking Weather News Page (PREMIUM | PRO), and it sounds like our meteorologists are favoring the low pressure going out over the water now, which could being moderate snow to the major cities, but not to the Ohio Valley. For some reason we seem to be having trouble posting our latest map in our Headlines; you can see it here on the Forums.

I implore you to remember my Rules For Comments previously published, or your Comments will not see the light of day, I just can't accept some of the nasty, inaccurate things that are showing up in the approval queue.

If you're going to post things that aren't true, I'm not going to accept them. I still have people accusing me of calling this storm a Superstorm today, for example, even though the word does not appear in this blog entry, even though the GFS is predicting a storm with the pressure of Cat 2 hurricane, and even though Joe Lundberg said this morning "there will be a powerful storm."

Remember, it's only the weather.

UPDATE: I just talked to Operations and we are crafting a new snowfall map to replace the one we put up yesterday morning. It will likely look closer to this map, and it will be out before noon. Stay tuned to our our Headlines (shown at right) and Breaking Weather News Page (PREMIUM | PRO), where we'll have more maps and videos today which explain our current thinking.

ORIGINAL POST: Here are some Saturday morning notes on next week's storm. We need to cut through the hype of the Forecast Models [JessePedia], the Media, my Blog Commenters, and the folks on the AccuWeather.com Forums. Some could be accused of "wishcasting" (hoping for snow in their area) and others for "bittercasting" (saying the storm is over when it's not). Here's the reality:

1. The storm had weakened on all models, but the GFS shows a Cat 2 Hurricane equivalent this morning.* 2. Henry believes the models are inaccurate because of the volcano and the eastward/weaker trend was false. 3. The current model consensus track takes it off the coast which could mean moderate snow for I-95. 4. The storm will probably still happen, but it could be too far east to get heavy snow, rain or winds on land.

*In regards to the weakening of the storm, here's what I said about the lowest Pressure from the models on Thursday:

DGEX: < 966 mb (Strong Cat 2 Hurricane Equivalent) GFS: < 968 mb (Cat 2 Hurricane) ECMWF: < 978 mb (Weak Cat 2 Hurricane) NOGAPS: < 982 mb (Cat 1 Hurricane) JMA: < 990 mb (Tropical Storm)

Here's an animation of the closest pass of the storm to Long Island, for the last 6 times the GFS has been run. Note that it moved the storm center out to sea and weakened it yesterday, but moved it back inland and strengthened it overnight.

This is what they are saying today:

DGEX: (Out of Range) GFS: < 976 mb NOGAPS: < 982 mb (NOTE: Is lower when in Canadian Maritimes) JMA: < 985 mb NMM (NEW!): < 994 mb (NOTE: May be lower further out) ECMWF: < 998mb (NOTE: May be lower inbetween hours)

The GFS is now the outlier on thinking the storm will be anything but a shadow of its former self. I am worried that the latest 12Z NMM (the preferred short-range model) shows a farily weak storm forming far offshore -- though admittedly it is at the end of its time frame. If we still want to see a strong storm near shore, then we'd better hope Henry is right and the models are nuts.

What does all this mean for the track of the snow? Until we know where the storm's going and the models are more consistent, we won't know that for sure.