EastonSN+

3 hours ago, snowman19 said:

So are we are going to see benchmark storms with 50 degrees and rain? 

Impossible! Benchmark storms are extinct!

10 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

The whole experience with 4/82 had to do with temperatures in the teens in April with blizzard conditions.

3/93 to me was just a 10-12 inch snowstorm with windy conditions that changed over.

 

For me 1993 had more to do with the effects down south and the Appalachians. Also the strength of the storm and the severe storm outbreak in Florida during the storm. 

I can see April 1982 happening with a late sswe and a cross polar flow. I don't think it will happen in my lifetime but of the four would pick this.

2 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

There are much rarer events we will never see again:

April 1982

December 1992

Octoblizzard 2011

 

This is actually an interesting debate on the rarity of each of the events. 

If I had a guess which one we would likely see sooner if at all would be April 1982. If I had a guess which one we would never see again in our lifetimes it would be 1993.

2 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

The funny thing with these megastorms is that by the end of the storm we were up near freezing (or upper 20s at least) so I was glad we started in the low teens.  January 1996 I think even mixed for a bit on the south shore, but it certainly did not affect snowfall totals at all (we were all over 20 inches and even 32 inches out by Bay Shore.)

 

Yeah even Baltimore mixed but had over 30 inches.

Philly did not mix at all and had 32.

Central Park did not mix either.

13 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

I think we are seeing more snow in January than we used to.  The 80s Januarys were colder, but aside from January 1987 we did not see any KU events in January.  And I don't believe there was a single January 20"+ HECS until January 1996 came along.  And now we've had multiple.  January 2011 (19 inches)-- I'm putting that in the list because it was so close to 20, and of course January 2016.

 

Yup. I honestly believe we can end up with higher average snowfall than the 30 year 70 through 99 period.

13 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

12/09 also had a track a little too far east (although we did well here on Long Island-- 15 inches even at JFK.)  I didn't know January 1996 had any virga though and I thought that the much colder temperatures resulted in a higher snow to liquid ratio (like PD2 and February 1983 and January 2016.)

 

Unfortunately lower temps do not always correlate to higher snowfall. You need lift as well.

In my home town we had 4 full hours of verga and still ended up with a foot, but could have been much more.

Maybe 96 is a bad example as instead of 12 degrees and snow you would have 15 degrees and snow today lol. 

7 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

That winter it helped because everything was so marginal.  That was one winter where almost every storm trended colder.  If you go just south of our area, Philly, they only had average snowfall.

 

Correct. We may lose snow in a similar setup today, however, all those storms like the blizzard of 96 where we had a lot of verga because it was 12° outside would likely be more snowfall today. This is the offset I was talking about. Heck even the blizzard of December 2009 had a lot of virga.

12 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

it would be absolutely hilarious if we had a winter like 2015-16 with 40 inches of snow (at JFK) with an average winter temperature of 40 degrees-- 6 degrees warmer than this winter!

 

Yeah this is precisely my thinking. Just like last year's storm that blew up and hit New Jersey with a ton of snow, the increased volatility will compensate for the increased temperatures. 

Something to keep in mind and it's important is although we have seen the temperatures rise we are still seeing snow in multiple snow events in the Middle Atlantic / Delmarva region. Even a fluke event on the Gulf Coast. 

Also we have seen snow in November in the past 7 years as well as a dusting in May. So while our snow events have decreased in frequency in the beginning and end of a season it is not impossible. 

You have to be careful of speculation that what has occurred in a very short window of time is the new Norm. 

We still have naos that do not link up with the southeast ridge. 

We have not seen persistent forcing in phases four five and six due to the warm Waters in Indonesia. 

We have not seen the end of below average temperature seasons as experienced this winter. 

Therefore you have to be careful in speculating that what we have seen with regards to the fast pac is now never going to change. So far I have not seen one thing that has become a new Norm that we were afraid of. We need more years of persistence to even entertain that thought. 

13 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

and then you have a year like 1993-94 where you have like 30 storms lol

We got snow even in non benchmark track storms back then.

I think we only had 2-3 benchmark tracks that entire winter but still had over 50 inches of snow.

It's easier to look at average snowfall, warmer climate means more moisture and volatility. The 90s was a perfect example of this. 2 above average snowfall winters and a higher decade average than the 70s or 80s. I mean the other years of the 90s outside of the below average 92/93 were absolutely putrid for snowfall and STILL highest snowfall decade.

Think about this year the cold did not help us much.

10 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

The 70s and 80s still had more snow than we are seeing now.  Also if you go strictly by 4 inch snowfalls, we got at least one of those every year.

I generally agree that we had less snow in those decades, but this decade has been even less snowy by a significant margin plus --much-- warmer.

All we need it approx 21 inches next year to be in perfect alignment with the 80s WRT snowfall. Just a little more to align with the 70s and 90s.

2 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

But even using their numbers it still means we should get a bench mark track about once a month.  The fast Pacific clearly has an influence.

And it isn't just us who haven't gotten much snow this year, snowfall has been historically low in Minneapolis, Chicago, Omaha, etc.

 

Yeah but you have to think that in great snow years you can get a benchmark track 2 to 3 times a month. Other years nothing.

1 minute ago, LibertyBell said:

But even using their numbers it still means we should get a bench mark track about once a month.  The fast Pacific clearly has an influence.

And it isn't just us who haven't gotten much snow this year, snowfall has been historically low in Minneapolis, Chicago, Omaha, etc.

 

I bet the fast pac had an influence in our bad snow years in the past.

3 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Even using his calculations (which can't be right), it still means 2-3 benchmark tracks every winter on average.

And 4-6 if we get storms more frequently than once a week.

 

I would suggest taking it up in the NE forum. However think about how much territory surrounds the benchmark track. 15% actually seems high.

5 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

No that can't be right, benchmark tracks are the classic *normal* track on most storm track maps.  Also, inside the benchmark tracks can also be heavy snowfall tracks (see Millennium storm).

Either way, in a colder climate, there are many other ways to get a good snowfall event here.

Statistically speaking we have averaged an 8 inch snowstorm every other winter (using all of NYC's climate history) and average 3 or 4  4 inch snowstorms per winter.

 

I can't disagree with them as they have been correct on almost everything so far. 

Thinking about it though it HAS to be correct. For 30 freaking years we had almost no snow lol. 2000 through 2018 we had a bonanza but that is half of the duldrum period. 

Also think about how much space there is outside of the benchmark track.

2 hours ago, MJO812 said:

 The little wave on Saturday ruins the big storm.

Also the NE forum had a great point, non-benchmark tracks are approx 85% of our normal storm track. So even taking the fast pac out it's hard to get a heavy snow event here.

1 hour ago, MJO812 said:

 The little wave on Saturday ruins the big storm.

Just have to wait until the fast pac slows down. Hopefully next year.

3 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

We had about a foot of snow here followed by sleet and then rain that packed it down to around 6 inches in March 1993 and then the cold snap that followed froze everything solid.  As far as snowstorms are concerned, February 1983 had more of an impact here (of course-- that was 2 feet of snow lol.)  December 1992 was one in which I thought my house was going to blow down because our fences came down on all sides and the wind was howling for the better part of a week and the entire shape of the coastline was changed.

 

Had 11.5 on the superstorm before the sleet and rain. 16 in February 1983

3 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

I'm going to tell you right now, that December 1992 was way more exciting than the so-called *superstorm* which was really more of an inland storm.  December 1992 changed the entire shape of the coastline and affected us for 3-5 days and caused far more damage than the so-called *superstorm* could ever even dream of causing.

I consider December 1992 the real superstorm of that season.

Up here the coastline was affected and at the end of the storm we ended up with 6 inches of heavy wet snow. Massive storm.

43 minutes ago, Sundog said:

 Wasn't 92-93 not that good for the coast before the Superstorm?

Correct only 12.6 inches of snow accumulated for Central Park before receiving 11.9 from the superstorm.

Even with the superstorm Central Park was below average for snowfall.

11 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

12.9 so actually a bit higher.

I have good memories of the 90s because of 93-94 and 95-96. 93-94 was the equal of 2 winters and 95-96 was the equal of 3 winters!

Thanks, so Central Park is 3.9 inches behind the 80s average. 20 inches next season would put Central Park in alignment with the 80s average.

I honestly thought my town was going to challenge 95/96 in 13/14. I was sitting at 58 inches and the models had a 16 inch event within 4 days and two more systems in line afterwards. Of course that's when DC stole the snow and we went cold and dry.

2 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

Yep so far averaging about 5-6 inches less snow than the 80s in a similar pattern.

December and January in the 80s were several degrees colder.

I THINK NYC is at 10.6 inches this year. If so, this decade (15.38) is 4.36 inches behind the 80s average (19.74). 

However this deficit can be erased with a 22.5 inch season next year. 

I still find it incredible that the 1990s had the highest average snowfall of the three low snowfall decades despite only having 2 above average snowfall seasons. Of course those two seasons were 75.6 and 53.4.

20 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

The best place to be for getting consistent snowfall is in the mountains.  It doesn't even really matter north or south as long as you are away from the ocean the chances of getting snow are better.

The Poconos had 36-48 inches of snow this winter which while below normal for them, in an absolute sense is a good amount of snow. 

Especially for early and late season.

11 hours ago, forkyfork said:

still deluding yourself huh

Your making this too easy lol.

10 hours ago, Volcanic Winter said:

I thought only coastal sections / parts of the Delmarva and VA exceeded climo? I linked a chart from Feb 20th that showed many areas of the MA were still below average, and from reading the MA forum - many weren’t all that thrilled with the snowfall this year. 

I mean for sure they appreciated the lasting snow in Jan, as did we - it certainly wasn’t a bad winter for most of them. But it seemed like the repeated snows were mostly odd coastal sections. I’d have to look again, but I certainly didn’t garner the impression it was some blockbuster winter for the broader MA. 

I believe Raleigh, SE Virginia through the Delmarva were the hardest hit this winter. 

16 this morning (cold).