ChangeofSeasonsWX

The top map is missing a few readings around the PVD area that are visible in the second map. I see a 37", a 31", and a 30.5" missing.

Wow, I just came across this article published by the Martha's Vineyard Times which states that they measured 38" in the parking lot of TCI Press printing company in my town. Extremely impressive to say the least. I wonder why that one never made it into the snow reports? https://www.mvtimes.com/2026/02/26/delivered-news-great-blizzard-26/

Well that's what I thought originally. People were saying that Northern Rhode Island and areas just southwest of Boston is where 1978 was king, but then that map that was just posted on here shows a >36 zone for 1978 but the 2026 map only has the 24-36 zone even though some areas got >36 in this one too.

Oh wow tunnels? I had no idea that it piled up that much. So I guess that 1978 still ranks as #1 around here then? I'm so confused because everyone is saying how this was more than 1978 but I guess not.

Yeah that's too bad that the data isn't available anymore. 1978 was definitely more widespread large totals over a much larger area. Personally, I still think that outside of northern RI, 2026 had bigger totals for SEMA/RI but maybe it's just a recency bias on my part. I didn't live through 1978 so I wouldn't know any better.

Oh wow do you have the link for that measurement by any chance? The map that I saw only had a 20" over Seekonk so that's surprising to me. But even with 27" in 1978, this one still had more. I measured 31" IMBY in a very flat spot on my sidewalk with no drifting so I'd say that it's pretty accurate.

Oh absolutely. SEMA in particular. I mean, technically I'm in SEMA but I'm right on the RI border so in general I have RI's climo more than SEMA which has more ocean influence and therefore more severe coastals than most of RI.

Agreed. Seekonk is more in line with RI climo than the rest of SEMA. You guys definitely do better in coastals than RI does. It's very rare to get an RI jack. Even in 2005, I remember that Seekonk only got like 15" officially. Not sure how accurate that was though since it felt like way more than that as a kid. 2026 was by far the biggest storm for Seekonk on record. Snow maps from 1978 have us with like 20" here.

Yeah overall, 2022 was the first time this area jacked since 2005, and before that 1996. So it really doesn't happen all that frequently like many people think. Going by PVD records, the top five are 2026, 1978, 1996, 2005, and 2022. Outside of those, we have done good in several like you said but nothing S tier like out west. Jan 2011, Feb 2013, Jan 2015, Feb 2017, and Jan 2018 all dropped over a foot here, but then between Jan 2022 and Jan 2026 we got barely anything at all. People say it's always SEMA but we've been screwed over for a long time too, and Rhode Island in particular! I remember for many years it seemed like every major storm had the entire state in a snow hole. 2022 and 2026 was their redemption I guess.

You misunderstood what I said. You should read my posts again. I said nothing about people trying to make the storm live up to the hype after the rug pull. Actually the opposite. I think that people are trying to "downgrade" the storm after the rug pull and convince themselves and other people that the totals down south were erroneous and inflated, because it makes them feel better like they didn't miss out on a generational event.

I think that a lot of people are still sore over the fact that they had the rug pulled on them at the last minute and they can't accept the outcome. I get it...it sucks and I would've been disappointed too if I missed out on a 1978 redux. But trying to invalidate the official measurements just to make yourself feel like you didn't miss out on it is not the solution either.

Keep in mind also that even the day after the storm we had a lot of direct sun and it was also very warm. It nearly cracked 40 degrees around here! So you have to take into account not only natural compaction but also the relatively warm temperatures and bright sunshine the next day. Is it possible that some people measured drifts and/or old snow? Of course. But I feel like the people who do the official measurements at TF Green know how to avoid those issues? Considering the fact that their measurements affect the official records you would think that they know what they're doing. For what's its worth, I measured a relatively flat area on my sidewalks with no drifts and no old snow and it was 31", and I wasn't even in the area of the absolute heaviest snow! That was from like Providence to the Fall River area. So I could see people getting around 36" since they were in that band of very heavy snow for longer than me.

I'm not saying that temps don't count, just that the stall of 78 was definitely a factor in the high totals. Due to this marginal airmass that we have, if this one had tracked 50-75 further northwest that probably would've brought the mixing line from Cape Cod up to my area which would've reduced totals somewhat. Temperatures were already marginal as it is in this area. If we had a colder airmass to work with like 78 had then yeah it would've been big. But even in that case, there is still no way to tell exactly where the heaviest banding would've set up. In 1978, the heaviest totals were actually a little north of this one, around N Rhode Island to the Boston Area, which makes sense given that 1978 tracked a bit northwest of this one. Most areas in SEMA "only" got like 16-20" based on historical maps. It was still PVD's biggest storm for many years though. There are just so many factors at play so it's hard to say what would've happened if this one was further northwest.

Well unless we had a colder antecedent airmass in place, I think that we would've mixed with sleet here if this past one came 50 miles northwest. With the current airmass I think it would've held down accumulations somewhat. It would've been similar to what 2015 was around here. The 30+ totals around ORH/BOS and then around 20" in this area further south. Still historic but not a benchmark kind of storm that it was. I think a lot of people are sore about this storm understandably, but unless you get a stall like 78 or another 97 with a much colder airmass in place, it's near impossible to get 30+ over the whole area.

Yeah but regardless of temperature, 1978 stalled which was the main reason why there were those high totals over a large area. If this one tracked further inland wouldn't it have been another Feb 2013 where CT gets those totals instead of SEMA/RI?

Don't worry you will get your benchmark storm someday.

Yeah I feel bad for areas north and west of us that got the rug pulled last minute. It really is a shame considering what the models were showing at first. This was a 1 in 200 year event for this area and I would've been extremely disappointed if I had the rug pulled on my area as well. The worst part about experiencing a storm like this is knowing that nothing else will ever top it. I got 31" IMBY which is the most I've ever seen and nothing else comes close. I mean, PVD broke its all-time record by 9.3" which is beyond insane. The odds of us seeing something like this again around here is like zero. ORH saw over 30" in 1992, 1997 and 2015. You guys have a better shot at seeing 30" again. Several meteorologists talked about how this storm hit the “Goldilocks situation" of just the right temperature for wet heavy snow and claim that if it tracked any farther inland that it would've lost a lot of its moisture and not dropped as much snow. I'm not sure how valid it is but this article was an interesting read: https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/blizzard-snow-storm-science/3905033/%3f You have to wonder if climate change keeps increasing the amount of moisture in these storms, maybe someday we will see more mega QPF bombs like this one. It just has to take the perfect track to crush everyone.

Yeah, but if it ended up going 50-100 miles northwest like you said, would PVD still have broken 1978's record? I'm imagining a situation like Feb 2013 where the firehose sets up over CT instead of SEMA/RI. Don't get me wrong, Feb 2013 was still great around here, but it wasn't historic like what CT saw. So I guess in a way this system was like a reverse of Feb 2013 where SEMA/RI got the goods instead. Even with April 1997, Worcester got insane amounts, and Boston to a lesser degree. PVD still got 18 inches but it doesn't hold a candle to what Worcester got. So if this system had come further northwest would it have been a 1978 redux for the whole area including PVD, or more like a Feb 2013/April 1997 situation where areas north and west get the goods and PVD gets like 12-18? This one didn't stall like 1978 did so I just don't see how it could've been an all-timer for the entire area, even if it came further north.

Are you in a sheltered area by any chance? You said 22-28 inches depending on drifting and accounting for compaction and being in a sheltered area could also affect this. I'm not sure how big N Prov is....maybe it was a very sharp cutoff? Even downtown PVD had some 36" readings which is even more than what I got.

Yeah it most likely compacted a bit like you said. Also, I got 31 inches here in North Seekonk, but still not as much as TF Green or areas like Fall River which supposedly got 40. I think that the absolute jackpot zones were just south of us, from like TF Green eastward to Fall River and maybe northeast to Taunton. Your 22 to 28 inches is still within the expected range though, especially the 28 inches. Drifting, compaction, and being on the north edge of that band of crazy rates were all factors I bet.

31" in Seekonk

I know that there are obviously exceptions like 2005 on Cape Cod and the PYM area, and 1978 in far N Rhode Island, but overall, is it safe to say that this was the biggest snowstorm on record for the RI/SEMA area? Pretty widespread totals over 30 inches and a few close to 40. I'm just outside of Providence and I can tell you that we definitely got more than we did in 1996 and 2005, and I'm assuming 1978 also.

28.6 I think? So it's going to be very close.

Nothing is stopping them. I believe it is a storm total record not just a 24 hour record. I'm just doubtful that it happens because they would have to get another foot of snow after 7am this morning. I suppose it's possible.

A part of me wants PVD to break 1978's record but despite the totals nearby I don't think it's very likely to happen. Maybe they will be 2nd.