Dark Star

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

I really wish we could get a Cat 1 every year around this time, is that asking too much?  I want to see a Cat 1 make landfall in our area (ACY to MTP) once every year, that's not too destructive and they are fun to track.

When will the waters warm enough to make that happen?

1 hour ago, gravitylover said:

@donsutherland1is that praying mantis in the picture native? I don't think I've ever seen one that big. I need one like that to take care of all the cabbage worms in my garden.

Just picked up one about that size in my driveway in NE Jersey a few days ago and put him in a shrub.  I rarely see them that big.

1 hour ago, jfklganyc said:

At this point watching these Temp/Dewpoint deviations is like watching a rain/snow line for a cutter. We know what is going to happen before it starts

It took a couple of decades to say this, but this is your new September weather: a slightly cooler August

We are no longer transitioning to a new climate…We are in a new climate in the NYC area

Hard to argue, but it's also hard to believe a global increase of 2 degrees since the 1880's can have such a profound effect.  I certainly am ignorant of the "accumulated heat" topic.  I guess that may explain why such a seemingly small increase would result in extreme warmer temperatures in our area?

1 hour ago, Brian5671 said:

cost prohibitive in areas where they are mostly above ground now....

True Dat, but there is $3.5T coming for "infrastructure"...In the long run, it could be cheaper to bury a lot of utilities instead of making repairs after every tropical storm or tornado...Of course then again, it would probably be done wrong, not burying utilities in such a way that lines can be slipped in or out for future improvements.

10 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

Yes that would be a horrible precedent especially when we're trying to get nations like Brazil to stop cutting down the Amazon but I was led to believe that tropical rain forests are more important than temperate rain forests are?  Preserving the Amazon always seems to take precedence over everything else.

The only short term modification we can do that I can think of is to simply restrict people from building in that area and forcing those who already have to move out.  It's too dangerous for people to live in those areas and puts firefighter lives at risk when they have to come rescue them.

Thinning out the forests does not mean eliminating them.  I have read from many sources that forest management is severely lacking.  Also need to keep power lines, windmills, etc. away from these areas.  All power lines should be underground.  It's also amazing how many arsonists there are...

1 hour ago, wdrag said:

did read this prior to post.

I still believe I'm correct we have report seek/population bias. # of LSR reports can include hail, ice, snowfall of 1"/hr or greater, storm totals.  Eastward trend of TOR environment is understood.  Also, having worked 1980s-90's, we just didn't have as much human kind dedication (EM's and spotter coordinators I think are now trained to do some of this for the NWS) to finding every little TOR, or  time to do the job correctly.  

I did read NSW article.  Good information.  

 

I think case in point is that the tornado damage occurred in Mullica Hill, in which appears to be a new development?  The many undeveloped areas in the most densely populated state are disappearing.  AS my brother in law says: K Hovnanian - Filling the spaces in between the spaces.   The forecast last Wednesday was correct.  However, the actual real time radar was showing the main area of precipitation missing the most populated areas to the north, the radar filled in the back trailing end just before it hit NE New Jersey.  I was dead wrong (this wasn't the first time)...

I deeply apologize for failing to see the impending disaster.  I am very humbled.  

Strange, while Garwood NJ (central Union County NJ) has been under some heavy radar, only receiving occasional heavy downpours, mostly light to moderate, with possible tapering off to lighter scattered precip within a half hour, based on the latest radar?

Heaviest rain so far at 7:45 PM.  I can tell since this is the first time it is spilling over my roof gutters.

Strange, while Garwood NJ (central Union County NJ) has been under some heavy radar, only receiving occasional heavy downpours, mostly light to moderate, with possible tapering off to lighter scattered precip within a half hour, based on the latest radar?

1 hour ago, NutleyBlizzard said:

Don’t. Ever. Say. That. Date. Again.

I hear thee.

47 minutes ago, bluewave said:

Actual busts are pretty rare in the age of better modeling. Models do a great job at identifying when heavy precipitation potential exists for the region. It’s just very difficult to pinpoint the exact locations for summer convection and winter snowstorm banding. Since I grew up in the 70s and 80s, one of my definitions off a bust is the models completely missing a storm. The most recent example of this was models  the day before the Jan 25, 2000 snowstorm forecasting no precipitation here. Another type of bust is getting the p-type wrong. Like the January 2008 event that would up mostly rain instead of snow. These two types of model busts were par for the course before the early 90s. While January 2015 was a big forecast amount miss, the blizzard just shifted to a further east part of the forum. NYC got lower amounts than forecast but still a significant snow. So all I really need to see from a model in the warm season is being correct with the the general heavy convection signal. I have learned to be patient on where the specific heaviest rainfall verifies. We often need to rely more on nowcast location of mesoscale features.

If a storm is predicted, and misses by 100 miles, its a bust.  In fact some forecasters are persistent with the previous 48 hours outputs, that they can't revise their forecasts.  Easy for me to say as an armchair forecaster.  March 05, 2001 was a major bust when almost every forecaster stuck with the forecast, even after the snow had moved north and east of Manhattan.  Alan Kasper was the first to pick this up.

12 hours ago, larrye said:

A question on Thunderstorms in the greater NYC metro.

I think I grasp the concept that T-Storms, when they approach the coast, often encounter marine air and lose their intensity. We also know that T-Storms normally lose their intensity later in the evening when daytime heating is lost. 

But this doesn't always hold true. Sometimes, T-Storms do not lose their intensity as they move from west to east closer to the Atlantic or Long Island Sound. And sometimes (albeit rarely), they do not lose their intensity diurnally. Can someone explain in both cases, why? What are the dynamics responsible for situations where T-Storms don't lose their intensity as they approach the coast or during the night?

Thanks in advance.

Imagine the ordinary ridge or trough passing through is like one big bicycle tire, with asymmetrical spokes.  Each spoke represents a “wrinkle” in the atmosphere or Positive Vorticity Advection (PVC).  The ridge or trough will rotate the various PVC areas through your area.

On a hot dry day, with no PVC, a thunderstorm can still form due to hot rising air, but will normally be localized and short lived.  On a hot humid day, a thunderstorm can form, but will still likely be localized and short lived.  When a “spoke” of PVC rotates through, this can spark several scattered thunderstorms, as it feeds more upper level dynamics.  Of course a larger area of PVC has the potential to set off widespread areas of thunderstorms.  And if the you get enough crossing/merging of different layers of various pressures, temperatures, etc. (in the atmosphere) you can get the severe types of supercells.  The more upper level support, the less likely the lack of sun or marine air will affect the thunderstorm development.

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

NYC Metro Is much wider than Central Park. Not sure why so many IMBY posts. This is how winter storm threads get derailed. Posters from the whole region should feel welcome to post here. This forum would be much too small if the focus was artificially narrowed to a very small geographic region.

 

I wouldn't put Ocean County, Pike,  Sussex, or Orange, Putnam, Ulster Dutchess, or Litchfield Counties in NYC metro area for forecasting purposes (especially in winter).  

21 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Practice for the winter

People already calling a storm a bust before it starts

Some models called for the bullseye of the precipitation to be over NYC metro area, others called for it to be north of the area.  Models that called for the heaviest totals north of the area look like may be correct, while the other models will not.  In the winter, us Snow Geese would call this a bust.

1 hour ago, CIK62 said:

About yesterday's lightning tragedy at  Seaside Heights, NJ:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9941703/Lightning-strike-Jersey-Shore-kills-lifeguard-injures-7.html?ito=push-notification&ci=Ss9M9o8DSk&si=32052645&xi=5a2c9b28-ef82-418e-b681-0ce62b30c195&ai=9941703

Aluminum chairs, don't know if wood would have made a difference???

Finally, a shower here in Garwood NJ - central Union County. Slight bit o thunder.  No rain all weekend.

1 hour ago, Stormlover74 said:

Not a drop so far, not expecting any

Central Union County in NJ hasn't received any rain either.  Radar looks strange, with rain cells moving west from the coast, and east along the western Jersey border.  

30 minutes ago, Cfa said:

Got an alert for the Storm Surge Warning but not the Hurricane Warning, I’m about as inland as can be for LI.

I was tracking winds during Sandy and they began falling as it approached.  However, that turn inland brought with it the storm surge, which unfortunately does not dissipate as rapidly as the winds do.  So it will depend on which side of the "remnants" of the storm that you are on

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

The Euro and UKMET are the wettest for our area with Fred. The other models are further west with the heavy rains. Will the Euro win again like it did with the storm a few weeks ago that the models missed? In any event, another big model disagreement within only 3-4 days.

Looks like it is being pulled west?

22 minutes ago, Rjay said:

Central Park and areas right on the south facing waters didn’t and that's it.   Saying NYC didn’t get a heatwave is ridiculous.

Of course, we go back to the Central Park monitoring station.  Seems the government never wants to listen...

13 minutes ago, Cfa said:

Earth is nowhere near overpopulated. The issue isn’t population, just take a look at which countries spew the most greenhouse gases per capita and why/how, and also which industries are primarily responsible. The bulk of greenhouse emissions in the US come from transportation.

Cities almost universally have much lower carbon footprints (per capita) than areas outside of cities.

So it's a people management issue.  However, you don't want the government deciding on how to do that...

43 minutes ago, binbisso said:

Yes.  Not just that but too many humans on the Earth not enough forest and trees too much concrete and asphalt and big cities, tall buildings which do not allow heat to escape 

I've been preaching since the 1970's that the population increase will eventually doom the planet.  It seems the Europeans are the only ones with zero to negative population growth (not accounting for immigration).

I am okay with no subforum for Union/Essex counties in NJ, even though I live in Union County.   I think this area is well represented under the NYC forum.  

11 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

We need to restrict people from moving into the urban wildlife interface.  We also have to curb animal farming and only allow sustainable farming and logging.  This is all in addition to weaning off of fossil fuels.

This sounds political to me.  

2 hours ago, forkyfork said:

people who enjoy cool air in summer are contemptible freaks 

Hey, I'm one of those freaks...