Slow Weekend

Things are looking real slow the next 3 days weatherwise.  Several weak systems move into our West Coast ridge and die a slow death.  Today’s system was amazingly well predicted by models.  Our RPM showed solid rain on the coast late this morning, then brief rain in the western valleys and no rain making it to the Cascades.  Radar loops this afternoon showed exactly that scenario occurring.  It knocked down the easterly pressure gradient from around 11millibars PDX-DLS to only 2 mb.  That gradient should recover to 6-8 mb. again tonight/tomorrow, so the wind will make a recovery, but only in the usual "Gorge-influenced" spots.
2 obvious changes in long-range maps tonight:

1.  Back to active westerly flow along with fast moving waves/troughs…good system comes through Wednesday.
2.  Chilly trough slides into Northwest (and out again quickly) Thursday.  850mb temps on all models briefly dip to -6 or -7.  Most likely a hilltop snow event with strong onshore flow, definitely not a widespread snow producer at sea level.
3.  Wait, I only said two but I thought of another.  Long range GFS in 12-16 day period has tried to send some sort of very cold air our way in the last 3 runs.  This is way out in la-la-land of course but bears watching.  I DID notice that 00z Canadian dumps the cold air out over the Pacific at 10 days instead of down towards us.

237 Responses to Slow Weekend

  1. Boring Larry says:

    Down here in the hole…i have to respond about animals…i know that here, in the hole, where it is semi sheltered, the only time the deer come down the hill and gather to bed down, and just hang about, is when there is impending change in the weather to the more extreme…ive seen them about 12 to 36 hours before any major shift in patterns, be it heat, cold, wind, snow or pineapple express…kinda sorta equal to the amount of time for squabbling seen on the blog prior to big changes…

  2. -100F says:

    I wholeheartedly concur with AtmosphericWrath’s post.
    No one here is engaging in any kind of a fight or quarrel, we are simply discussing. It is acceptable to have disagreements and arguments (as long as they are civil), this is what makes forums/blogs entertaining. If all of our views were consistent with one another, this place would become rather tedious. Also I am not stopping anyone from using long range models or anything of that sort, by saying that they are inaccurate, I am doing nothing but simply commenting and since I have not insulted the other poster in any manner, I see nothing wrong with my responses. If you find my posts annoying or disturbing then please take your own advice and ignore them.
    Thank you

  3. -100F says:

    “Derek’s recent post about the extended showing the “worst snow storm in history” was obviously just to draw attention to the models. Winterhawk, -100F, and Tyler, your “Can’t trust the lala land models” mantra is getting old. Take his comment for what it’s worth or ignore it. Don’t waste this reader’s time trying to discount what we all already know.”
    You are telling us to just ignore it if we don’t like it. If you are really that annoyed by reading the lala land comments, why don’t you just ignore our comments too? The truth is that events in lala land are exponentially less certain than events in the 80-150 hr range. I know for a fact that Derek knows this and I know he isn’t foolishly calling for a full blown blizzard. He is just speculating the possibilities, which is completely fine because that is what I am doing too. I am not trying to ridicule or put down anyone by saying events in the 200+ hour range are lala land, this is simply the truth.

  4. AtmosphericWrath -Southeast Portland- says:

    ? All I saw Derek do was speculate over the long range models.
    I haven’t seen anyone say this would be the worst snow storm in history.
    There’s absolutely nothing wrong with talking about long range models, and if anyone chooses to do so in great detail, or show any enthusiasm, that’s okay too.
    I mean, it’s a weather discussion, so why wouldn’t it be okay?
    Just my thoughts…..

  5. winterhawk says:

    Posting literal translations of unsupported runs beyond 180 hours creates confusion for people that don’t understand the inaccuracy of models at that range. I’m disappointed that you see it as fighting, but every time information like that is posted without some sort of disclaimer, it warrants mentioning.

  6. longtimereader says:

    I’ve been reading this blog for a over a year now and have never posted. However I am getting way tired of some of the arguments on here. Derek has made it abundantly clear in previous posts that he considers the extended gfs and other models lala land, but has also shown that he like to look at them for the trends.
    Derek’s recent post about the extended showing the “worst snow storm in history” was obviously just to draw attention to the models. Winterhawk, -100F, and Tyler, your “Can’t trust the lala land models” mantra is getting old. Take his comment for what it’s worth or ignore it. Don’t waste this reader’s time trying to discount what we all already know.
    I’m out!

  7. winterhawk says:

    Derek- I see the “feature” you are talking about, but for now it’s tough to tell whether it’s an actual disturbance or just a model blip. It would be different if we were talking about some sort of surface cyclone. I think you might be stretching a bit on trying to pin down details of such a feature. Whether it is of significance or not, this patter will inevitably come down to whether we see some sort of banding occur. Even then we’re looking at nothing but a flash-in-the-pan event.
    As for the 00z… If I had a dollar for every time the GFS showed the worst snow storm in years with days of snow, I’d have enough to put 9/10 a tank of fuel in my new pick-up. I noticed the propaganda for tonight was right at the 9-10 day mark. Classic GFS!

  8. -100F says:

    This thing is so far out that its not worth even naming dates. Maybe starting from 1/8 or 1/9, around there.

  9. Tyler in Vancouver says:

    If the GFS still shows that on the 8th or 9th, I MIGHT believe it. For now, it’s way too far out. One thing seems for sure though, after Tuesday/Wednesday of this week we enter a very prolong period of cool/wet weather with a greater potential for snow/arctic air as the flow is from the NW in general.

  10. Jory says:

    Say Derek, what are the dates for this blizzard?

  11. Tyler in Vancouver says:

    Josh, I bought the Inspeed, I like it even though I’ve only used it a few times. I’m not sure if it was waterproof or anything. I liked the kestrels for general measurements though. Only problem is the anemometer doesn’t handle winds of very high speeds for too long before the impeller blows out, however, with the temp and other features, I think they are a good bet.

  12. Derek-West Gresham- says:

    00z GFS gives us the worst snow storm in years in the extended. Days and days of heavy moisture and -10 to -12 850mb temps!!!!

%d bloggers like this: