ORH_wxman

Yeah it's too far for eastern MA relative to places in NH or even VT...you can drive an extra half hour and be at a much superior mountain to the western MA places. But those western MA mountains are nice in that they are rarely crowded and a lot of them keep the old school New England trail vibe too with the narrower trails. I love that about them.

Winthrop coop is where the measurements were taken from 2010-2018....but not anymore...it is defunct now. That's why we had the disaster "new location" last winter.

Btw Ray...sorry for the mild hijack of your thread. I haven't read your outlook yet but plan to after eating a couple bowls of chili and then sitting on the stall. They are always a good detailed read.

I only listed the past few years....but its the same going back much further....that 27.4 vs 43.3 is by far the biggest discrepancy....and it's not getting fixed either. That awful 27.4 value is going to stay there unless NWS BOX wants to try and jump through 10 million hoops to change it.

Last year's BOS total was unusable. There's really no other way to spin it. We're not just talking about the old weenie "But Logan isn't representative of the city!!"....I'm talking about versus normal Logan airport measurements..... last year's snow measurements were sometimes late, measured after events ended, and apparently out at the water treatment plant on deer island. The fact that Hingham on the water had 43.3" while BOS had 27" is enough evidence on how bad last year's total was. It was the first year of using the new observer and observation location.... Show me which year doesn't "look like the others": Year..............BOS.....Hingham 2014-2015....110.6....117.7 2015-2016....36.1......37.4 2016-2017....51.7......47.6 2017-2018....60.2......59.9 2018-2019....27.4......43.3

Back in 2015, I was skiing on my 3rd and final day of a 3 day trip to Killington and I had gone the entire trip without a spill...last run of the entire trip (after 4pm now as I caught last chair up K1) I am coming down the run-out Spillway below the Canyon chair in full tuck so I can make it past the superstar chair over to Idler because we were parked down in the snowshed lot...the fading light gives the snow that tinted blue look and makes any bumps hard to see....all of the sudden as I'm in full tuck at high speed on spillway run-out, I start hitting some small bumps and then a bigger one sends me about 6-12 inches in the air...not very high but I wasn't expecting it at all...I couldnt see the bumps in the fading light...so now I'm in trouble as I land trying to correct myself and my edge digs in and that's it...full-on cartwheel with both skis releasing and I slide forward on my stomach about another 30 yards on the flat run-out. My initial impact had been my hip and I swear it felt like someone hit it with a sledge hammer the next day and it lasted for a few days. Luckily it went away and it was nothing serious or long term, but holy crap. Reminded me how quickly things can go south when you're seemingly in total control. Just talking about that trip makes me want to get out there now...what a great trip that was with amazing snow and the entire mountain open.

I didn't get out last season. Was tough thinking about it. My oldest son will be turning 4 late this winter though so I'm gonna get him on skis for the first time later this season.

When I was up in Rangeley in the summer of 2015, all of the locals were terrified that the mountain was not going to open the next year. (They were right...4 years running) They kept saying how important it was to the local economy. Glad to see they will be back.

They're gonna be able to build a huge base the next two weeks. Should be some really cold nights where they can become very efficient versus the more marginal nights. Good news for the World Cup there. Hopefully no 12-18 hour tropical cutters 2nd half of month. That's really the only thing that can ruin it.

Yeah this is wipeout city. But luckily the pattern looks pretty good for snow making coming up. They'll be blowing a ton of snow in the next two weeks.

That makes sense. 22z would be 6pm and it was still light out so that matches my memory. Doesn't get dark until closer to 7 in late September. Looks like it started around 5:40pm.

I wanna say late afternoon?

There's plenty of peer review research to read that will argue humans aren't responsible for the increase in CO2, but in reading them, you'll note that they don't hold up under scrutiny as time passes and other papers rebut them and they aren't able to counter those rebuttals. So they are fewer and fewer these days. I would suggest reading literature across all spectrums and not try and muck up the thread by insisting you know more than these papers.

They didn't attempt to quantify the non-climate factors though which was a bit frustrating in reading the study. I just finished reading it and they sort of just decide that VPD fits well enough that it is dominant. That might be true but it would have been nice to try and isolate it from the non-climate factors which they admitted is something they weren't doing in the paper...so we could see numerically how dominant it actually is.

It's actually not clear at all for "the current event" given that the autumn attribution is extremely weak to non-existent. It seems the trends are stronger for summer. From the most recent paper you linked: This is the problem with some of the attribution studies that are in a shorter time span. Esp starting in the middle 20th century.

I actually remember the snow on 9/30/92. I was outside playing and it started as a shower and quickly went to graupel and then some legit flakes mixed in at peak intensity. It was pretty awesome.

Gonna get a lot more too coming up in multiple shots. Great early season pattern out there.

That epic band in that storm

That's because there were two snow events...an October rarity. 10/15-16 and 10/18. 2011 also had two events. A little teaser on 10/27/11 two days before the big one.

Nice Fozz. You did March skiing last year. Best open secret in New England is March skiing. You'll see crowds in mid December with people skiing down man made icy death ribbons...but then find no lines with 8-10 feet of base and all glades open in March. Sometimes people are funny like that. But taking advantage is great. It's prob why ginxy usually does his Sunday River trip 3rd week of March. Most years I try to get out in March too...though last year I was shut out. Wife was pregnant and with another 3 year old just didn't make it out. But he's gonna be 4 this March and he's going on skis this winter.

Are you a really good skier? MRG is pretty gnarly so if you like that stuff, prob worth the pass at the sub-30 price. It's a hike and a half from RI though. Prob 4 hours. Youll prob be going to Mt Snow a lot on the drifter pass. Not nearly as far.

I'm not going to go down the political rabbit hole of discussing capitalism vs socialism in this forum but the nuclear energy part is spot on. It is hard to take any person or any group seriously that say they believe climate change is a dire emergency and also will not consider nuclear power.

Most politicians aren't really that serious about climate change anyway. Even the ones who claim they are. There are some exceptions of course. But we see something like the Paris accord being touted by politicians as this crucial thing when in reality it is non-binding and even if it wasn't, the commitments through the end of the accord in 2030 would do very little to change the longer term outcome of climate change...especially if one believes that we are closer to the "worst case" scenarios of higher climate sensitivity. The difference is something like a couple tenths of a degree Celsius or even less. If you are generous and make a bunch of assumptions like everyone continues to ramp up their cuts beyond 2030 like I've seen done in some analysis, then you can maybe add several more tenths. But that's a big assumption. It comes across as something for politicians to pat eachother on that back about to make them feel as if they are tackling the problem when they really aren't. This probably isn't the thread for such discussion, but a far more efficient way to attack the issue would be to invest most of the money into R&D for green energy.

I should update this in that the NSIDC minimum extent dropped a bit further to 4.09 million sq km....still outside my range but a bit closer than the 4.23 initial value I posted above. Doesn't change the analysis above in any material way. The area minimum hasn't been matched again and will remain at 2.87....we're now over 300k sq km above the 9/4 area min so that won't be caught again. We'll see if 4.09 million sq km is the final minimum extent....still a chance it could fall back below that from the current 4.17 million sq km value, but it's getting very late now to significant drops.

Time to verify this prediction based on the data at the end of June. Assuming we have reached the minimums for both area and extent on 9/4 (looking more and more likely), then both of these fell outside my range, albeit not by much. The final minimum area was 2.87 million sq km and the final minimum extent was 4.23 million sq km. These are both NSIDC numbers. The predictions were looking excellent through mid-August until we had an unprecedented slowdown in late August that has leaked into early September. So I ended up making predictions that were slightly too low compared to reality. I was correct in identifying the very strong chance of a top 3 finish (and also being skeptical of challenging the top spot), but I really needed to bump my middle numbers in the range up about 100-200k. Overall, I think this was a decent prediction compared to what we see on the Arctic Sea Ice outlook that gets published by NSIDC....but I am still disappointed I could not get it within my range. It might be that 200k error bars are just too small to consistently hit on predictions when it comes to sea ice. Using 400k error bars would have this method hit every year I've done it with the exception of 2016. But I will probably try to continue to use 200k error bars....and maybe see where the method can be improved.