40/70 Benchmark

I had 16.5 and a settled depth of 14". That Lowell report of 24" was BS IMO.

Well, I would have to look back, but I'm pretty sure that March 2018 was just as impressive, only it was more sustained because I rotted in the deformation banding. Like I said...March 2018 and April 1997 are the only two that can top that for strength and duration of rates. Monday night does get bonus points for naked twister, though...I live for the rt 128 coastal front jobs. That one was right in my wheel house and I had feeling it would be several days out, when I saw Jan 2003 pop up on the analogs...similar gradient.

I don't blame you. I don't understand why some get so annoyed by bitterness and whining (not that your sentiment constitutes either). Its never bothered me in the least. Those guys along the coast had every right to be miserable Monday night. I would have been the same way. I'd be so pissed.

Yea, that was certainly a great event, but not one of my tops. It was close to March 2018, but a notch below that.

What did you measure in this past event?

Still close enough to watch on the EPS and GEFS....GEPS are awful.

Only about 3-4" of slush here on Chelsea...

Man, I hope the 10th through the 15th fails....I'll be away, and that would sting lol

Funniest part is that if you got your vaunted solution as illustrated above, it would place a deform band over the "rich "...

I had 6"...coldest temp -1.5

Go ICON

It's all good. Forecast could have been better, and I appreciate your feedback.

Agree.

Probably about the same as me....I was better east, and they were better west.

Yea, respectfully disagree. I think B- covers it...I think you are a bit biased bc the forecast busted in your back yard, which sucks...I get it. But for the region as a whole, it was decent....flawed, and thus not great, but decent.

Feb 1-2 High Impact Winter Storm: Verification Here is the Final Call for yesterday's winter storm: And what verified for the sake of comparison: While this was a good forecast overall, there were three rather glaring issues that distinguished this particular efforts from some of the best forecasts. 1) The residual forcing from the parent system that infiltrated western New England was a bit stronger than indicated on the Final Call. A range of 8-16" would have been a more accurate representation. 2) The area of subsidence in the CT river valley was overstated. A general 8-12 swath would have sufficed, as opposed to the 4-8" and 6-10" ranges employed. This is likely related to the forcing from the original parent low remaining somewhat stronger across western New England, as alluded to in forecast critique #1. This likely negated some of the subsidence and down sloping that otherwise plagues the CT river valley in deep layer easterly flow events. 3) The snowfall gradient near the eastern Mass coast was about as sharp as has ever been witnessed, thus this was obvious underemphasized in the forecast. The thermal layer in the lower half of the atmosphere near the immediate north shore, and over much of southeastern Mass, the cape and islands was not able to overcome the marine influence as much as anticipated. Other slight critiques interior northeast Mass, where a couple of 20" reports from West Newbury and Wilmington slightly exceeded the 12-18" forecast range. Additionally, the 12-18" range over southwestern CT should have been extended slightly further to the northeast, given the stronger forcing with the parent low. Final Grade: B-

Dom is like the nw tip..

+16.5" 39" on the season.

They did decently in Dec, though.

39" now for the season...need 11-20" more to nail the seasonal call.

I seldom see IP from cf bc its BL warmth.

How did NYC, BWI and DC do?

I would have lost it if I lived there....12/17 and last night.

I think your latitude makes it tough bc you need the mid level warmth for that, which often gets washed out s of you in SWFE and such.

Gotcha. I ended up shoveling the second half of night, so wasn't glued to comp. Makes sense why KASH got porked, as they missed best firehose and CF