Roger Smith

The Toronto file from the research is now also available on the same Netweather link (see above). This one resembles the NYC file but has additional features such as the tracking of record highs and lows from "starter" extremes in the period 1840-70, to the final values (which were usually later than that). Some days have had as many as a dozen records set from the starter record to the present time. Others did one change and that was it, a few managed to hold on to their original starter records (Aug 24, 1854 at 100 F for example). This is the second longest climate data base ever created (I believe) after the CET/EWP which go back into the 17th and 18th centuries. That is not to say that the Toronto data are the second oldest known, I have access to several data bases that are older but not continuous from then to now. Many of the daily temperature extremes at Toronto are in the same record spells that set NYC records. Sometimes they are one or two days earlier. Both locations had their highest temperature of record on July 9, 1936. In the case of Toronto that was one of three consecutive days but the mean daily temperature was higher on the 9th. Once again, I'd like to post these data bases here but they are too large to upload to American Weather Forum. My plan is to create a website with the data bases and other info so that eventually I won't be totally dependent on Net-weather for hosting them.

Winter Snowfall contest 2020-2021 -- Table of entries _ updated after some heavy snowfall at DEN and a few other small additions in March _ the table is now set by ranked total departures to date. The second value in brackets represents errors that can only increase (locations with more snow than forecast). The red highlighted numbers are best forecasts at this stage, and those underlined are settled as such because all forecasts have already been passed. BOS is tied for best forecasts on either side (37.0, actual 38.5, 40.0). (Mar 31 update _ Only DEN added any snow since last report, as shown. ) FORECASTER ______ DCA _ NYC _ BOS __ ORD _ DTW _ BUF ___ DEN _ SEA _ BTV ___ current total dep snowfall to Mar 31___5.4 __ 38.6 _ 38.5 ___48.8 _ 41.3 _ 72.1 __ 67.6 _ 12.9 _ 59.5 RJay ________________8.0 _ 20.0 _ 35.0 __ 40.0 _ 40.0 _ 75.0 __ 65.0 __ 4.0 _ 65.0 _____ 54.7 (43.7) __ consensus _______14.5 _ 28.2 _ 40.0 __ 40.0 _ 44.1 _ 87.0 __ 59.6 __ 5.1 _ 78.3 ______ 82.1 (35.0) wxallannj __________ 21.0 _ 29.0 _ 37.0 __ 43.0 _ 47.0 _ 70.0 __ 51.0 __ 5.2 _ 77.0 _____ 82.1 (43.3) hudsonvalley21 ____ 16.3 _ 30.4 _ 44.5 __ 39.7 _ 48.2 _ 87.9 __ 61.1 __ 6.8 _ 83.2 _____ 93.2 (29.9) wxdude64 _________ 13.2 _ 29.7 _ 45.9 __ 41.7 _ 44.2 _ 97.7 __ 73.2 __ 7.1 _ 84.1 _____ 95.7 (21.8) Don Sutherland1 ____ 6.0 _ 11.5 _ 28.0 __ 38.5 _ 44.0 _ 87.0 __ 57.5 __ 3.4 _ 72.9 _____ 99.1 (67.5) Tom _______________ 18.1 _ 29.8 _ 42.5 __ 43.3 _ 44.1 _102.5__ 59.6 __ 4.2 _ 78.3 _____ 99.7 (31.0) RodneyS ____________ 4.4 __ 8.5 _ 20.0 __ 31.6 _ 38.0 _ 78.9 __ 55.5 __ 5.1 _ 66.6 _____103.9 (90.0) Roger Smith _______ 14.5 _ 28.2 _ 60.5 __ 35.5 _ 39.9 _ 80.5 __ 55.5 _ 12.5 _ 90.5 ____ 108.1 (37.6) Scotty Lightning ____15.0 _ 25.0 _ 40.0 __ 50.0 _ 40.0 _125.0__ 75.0 __ 3.0 _ 90.0 ____ 127.9 (24.8) snowfall to Mar 28 ___5.4 __ 38.6 _ 38.5 ___48.8 _ 41.3 _ 72.1 __ 67.6 _ 12.9 _ 59.5 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Mar 17 _ RJay and wxallannj can only separate with snow at DCA (more than 8.0" or 2.6" more than now), BUF (up to 2.9" more can be an advantage to RJay, after that no differential), DET (up to 5.7" more can be an advantage for wxallannj) and DEN (up to 4.2" more can help RJay). Another 5.5" at BTV will be needed before wxallannj can gain an advantage there. Other locations are already out of play. Others have a mathematical route to a win in the contest too. It is quite likely that 4.2" more would fall at DEN so that would leave RJay 8.4" further ahead than now (19.0" advantage at present, would be 27.4"). Also, the 2.9" available to RJay at BUF seems likely, so that gives another 5.8" boost to the differential (33.2"). Wxallannj would need to find 16.6" of advantages at his prospects (DCA > 8.0, DTW 5.7 available, and any amounts greater than 5.5" at BTV. This probably means overall it's quite close at the top. Mar 29 _ As to the above, more than 4.2" has been added at DEN which does leave RJay further ahead. No other changes yet. Only wxdude64 and Scotty L have any further gains to make at DEN and twice the difference on those gains would not bring them within striking distance of the lead so they would need some other help to move up further. April snowfalls at BTV look to be their best hope. Mar 31 _ Another 1.5" added at DEN on 30th. NOTE: UPDATED FOR APRIL SNOWFALLS in APRIL CONTEST THREAD (Apr 23)

Re the NYC data base, once again thanks to Don Sutherland for providing the basic data (columns A to E are his original file except that I've added recent months from CF6 official data) and everything else is work I've done to support the research thread on Netweather. I plan to post all that on a stand-alone website just so it isn't at the mercy of another host, going forward. Unfortunately it is too big to upload to American Weather Forum. It is however downloadable from Netweather if you follow the link in the previous post. As stated above, this excel file will be posted every three months after each meteorological season comes to an end, so if you're interested in the file, you won't necessarily have to update it yourself. Note that site navigation on the excel file is provided in a block located in columns GD to GR and rows 1 to 21 (this location is repeated in the intro panel upper left corner). If you spot any errors (most likely to be color code omissions as the data base feeds directly into the tables) let me know and they will be fixed for the next edition. NEW YORK CITY (NYC) DATA BASE 1869 to end of FEB 2021 with record values and averages in tables ... ... available at this time only from Net-weather forum due to size issues, proceed to research thread as noted in previous post, link to the file is in the last post made by me in the thread on page 3. (it may not remain the last post until next upload)

Okay, then, here are the anomalies we have run up so far as the weather turns quite warm in many areas the past few days after a cold start to the month ... _________________________ DCA _ NYC _ BOS __ ORD _ ATL _ IAH ___ DEN _ PHX _ SEA 11th ____ (10d anom) ___ +0.8 _ --1.5 _ --1.8 __ +8.2 _ +1.4 _ --0.5 ___ +7.8 _ +3.4 __ 0.0 21st ____ (20d anom) ___ +2.5 _ --0.1 _ +0.6 __ +5.9 _ +3.7 _ +1.9 ___ +0.3 _ --0.8 _--0.5 29th ____ (28d anom) ___ +4.4 _ +3.2 _ +3.3 __ +6.4 _ +5.5 _ +1.8 ___ --0.7 _ --1.6 _--0.7 11th ____ (p20d anom) __--1.5 _ --2.5 _ --3.5 __ +2.0 _ --0.5 __ 0.0 ___ +2.0 _ +1.5 __ 0.0 11th ____ (p27d anom) __--1.0 _ --2.0 _ --3.0 __ +1.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 ___ +1.0 _ +1.0 __ 0.0 21st ____ (p31d anom) __ +2.0 _ +0.5 _ +1.0 __ +3.5 _ +2.5 _ +1.5 ___ 0.0 __ 0.0 _ --0.5 29th ____ (p31d anom) __ +4.5 _ +3.5 _ +3.5 __ +6.0 _ +6.0 _ +2.0 ___ --1.0 _ --1.5 _ --0.5 1st Apr __ (final anoms) _ +4.4 _ +3.3 _ +3.7 __ +6.3 _ +4.8 _ +1.7 ___ --1.0 _ --1.1 _ --0.9 11th _ Much colder again within a day or two, especially over New England but a fairly extensive spread of colder air through mid-month; the pattern from day 11 to 16 looks relatively close to average. The projections to end of the month are based on a generally near normal regime starting out with small positive anomalies and moving to somewhat larger negative anomalies before the month ends. I will wait a few days and adjust the provisionals around the 24th then post some estimated scoring for later corrections. Snowfall contest update will be posted in this thread around mid-month, not much has changed since Feb 28 update in the last thread. 21st _ After a few very warm days, colder weather did arrive but the overall change to anomalies was in some cases more upward than downward since the previous report. 29th _ It has stayed quite warm in the east; revised projections will make a reliable basis for provisional scoring (to follow). Snowfall contest updated, only DEN has seen snow since last update. 31st _ 1st Apr __ Final anomalies are now all posted and scoring will soon be complete.

I have been doing some extensive research on historical weather trends at NYC and Toronto which both have long periods of record, and any other data from New England that extends back further such as Caswell's Providence RI journal (1831 to 1860). In the course of that, I was alerted to the existence of a daily data base and the official monthly temperature website for NYC Central Park. At some point soon, I can share that data base as expanded to show daily records and other derived products. In the meantime, it was made official (on their website publication) that 2020 had the same average as 2012 (57.3 F) to tie for warmest year on record. Three other years were 0.1 cooler. As you are no doubt aware November 2020 did the heavy lifting by finishing first as well, December could have pushed the year over the top but the mid-month snowstorm probably cut into the mean just enough to prevent that. Will provide a link to my deluxe data file soon, just in final edit now. Thanks to Don Sutherland who helped me acquire the data and alerted me to the website in question. We recently found a typo in that and queried it (May 2005) resulting in an edit on their part, what was 59.8 now reads 58.9 which makes that month even colder in the bottom portions of the May rankings. I could use some advice with one issue. For Toronto's data, I assumed an urban heat island began around 1881 and increased by 0.1 C deg a decade to about 1980 and then stabilized at that figure as urban heat islands tend to grow only marginally for very large cities, and in this day and age some improvements to air quality and the midtown parkland setting there probably counter any further heat island growth. What would informed readers estimate to be the magnitude of the NYC heat island effect? I went with the same progression in my first draft, except that I assumed also that NYC having started to grow large before Toronto, already had 0.3 C heat island in 1869 when the weather station began recording, so that by applying the same corrections as Toronto, I am implying a heat island of 1.4 and saying that my adjusted figures are for comparison to a small heat island situation (0.3) rather than no heat island as the Toronto data come out. Or in other words, these adjusted figures would, if compared to each other, be like a comparison of rural Toronto to slightly urban New York City at each point. On my current schedule of adjustments, I think 1949 and also 1953 come out a bit ahead of 2012 and 2020 (which stay equal) since we only subtract 0.7 C or about 1.2 F from its mean annual temperature for comparison. 1990,91,98 and 2016 all come in just behind these tied for fifth warmest in the UHI-adjusted ranks. (any years tied after 1981 remain tied after adjustments). This is an issue I would like to address, has the heat island perhaps continued to increase slightly, or even decrease slightly since 1981? So am I in the ballpark of a good adjustment by saying 0.1 C for 1881-90, 0.2 for 1891-1900, 0.3 for 1901-1910, etc, ... 0.7 for 1941-50, 0.8 for 1951-60, 0.9 for 1961-70 and 1.0 for 1971-80, then finally 1.1 for all years 1981 onward? Is there any case to be made for any decrease? I have also considered a more fine tuned approach where I reduce dry months more than wet months (cloud cover differences). That may come in a stage two and it would need to be done for both locations. I assumed that 19th century heat islands were weak because of the lack of vehicles and home heating, but not zero because of albedo changes mainly. I have seen research into growth of heat islands and know how they diminish in their growth inverse-exponentially. Also for Toronto I had the benefit of some reasonably close rural stations with long periods of records to calibrate my estimates. For NYC the entire area is so urbanized that I find it difficult to estimate what the mean temperature would be at a Central Park like setting with no city around it (something that hasn't existed since about 1750 I suppose). Any thoughts on this welcome. The long term goal of this project is to provide a climate record similar to the CET (Central England Temperature) series in which they claim to have factored out the urban effect although the three locations they use are fairly rural anyway. Toronto at 1.1 C is fairly conservative, obviously it's more like 5-8 C deg on a clear, calm night especially in winter, but the adjustment needs to be scaled to all weather types and on a cloudy, windy day the urban heat island there is probably no bigger than 0.5 C, if that. This is where the study resides at present time, on the UK equivalent forum "Net-weather" https://www.netweather.tv/forum/topic/93113-toronto-180-a-north-american-data-base-of-180-years-now-includes-nyc-1869-2020/page/2/ You'll see tables comparing NYC and Toronto using the assumptions listed above, but these could always be changed in a later version.

Thanks to all who responded, I've heard back from most by private message plus the two responses above. So the plan will be to continue on with whatever normal value is announced for use, I do anticipate a change to 1991-2020 at some point later this year, until the NWS informs us that they are making the change, the 1981-2010 normals will be used (a) to set their end of month anomalies in reporting products such as CF6, and (b) by me when scoring the contest. The only problem may come in the month when a change occurs, if they make the change during the month and I've already taken in your forecasts on the assumption they would be relative to 1981-2010. If that happens, I will deal with it in consultation with you, some may feel that if they had known the end of month would be against 1991-2020 but they predicted vs 1981-2010, it would require an adjustment. That partly depends on what month and what the differentials are. And it may take some digging to find the old and the new normal values so we know what we are working with. So thanks for the input, I was already thinking we might need to address this some month around May or June, whenever they do bring these new normals into operation.

Just for general interest,, this is what I calculate to be the differential between 1981-2010 and 1991-2020 NYC averages. The numbers are to be read as (1991-2020) minus (1981-2010) for each month. This is not official and is based on their official website monthly values with my excel program doing the average in each case. JAN __ FEB __ MAR __ APR __ MAY __ JUN __ JUL __ AUG __ SEP __ OCT __ NOV __ DEC ____ YEAR 0.5 ___ 0.0 ___--0.2 ___ 0.1 ___ 0.3 ___ 0.1 ___ 0.5 ___ 0.3 ___ 0.7 ___ 0.5 ___ --0.2 ___ 1.0 _____ 0.3 March and November will drop slightly, the other ten months will go up by various amounts, December showing the largest increase, followed by September. These would be the new normals according to my way of calculating which is to take an average of all daily highs and lows, the normals may come from averages of monthly means and be very slightly different from these. I show these to two decimals partly to indicate where the official numbers are perhaps more likely to come out differently. 33.55 _ 35.73 _ 42.71 _ 53.52 _ 63.05 _ 71.92 _ 77.37 _ 75.98 _ 69.08 _ 57.81 _ 47.87 _ 38.91 ___ 55.62 The Jan number rounds down to 33.5 and the May number rounds upward to 63.1 (based on third decimals not shown here).

I hadn't mentally addressed that question, have been assuming we would all know in advance when they were going to switch the reference point and make our forecasts based on that expectation? I will ask each regular entrant what they think of the situation by private message and get back to the group on that. I was told by Don S that the 1991-2020 normals won't be "ratified" before May of this year so it seems unlikely to me that they would put them into use before that. Also I assume people made their forecasts so far with reference to 1981-2010 averages. I will ask if anyone has made any forecasts on any other assumption. The 1991-2020 normals are probably going to be only 0.2 to 0.5 higher, I already worked out NYC on a file I am developing and the results are in that range generally. If others read this and want to comment, go ahead but look for a message in your in-box. The policy I would most likely go with is to use whatever normal they use whether people know in advance or not, if the differentials are fairly small I can't see where it would greatly influence the outcome. If we go retroactive then the main beneficiary would be anyone who went a bit warmer than consensus on all locations, their errors might then shrink down by 6-10 points a station as the new normals would be closer to their forecasts than the current ones (in most cases). Unless I hear a different consensus from the group, we would use the anomaly reported on the 1st of the next month on the relevant CF6 monthly summaries, and if they change those anomalies later, so be it, the first reported value would be "contest official." There is no absolute guarantee that the CF6 has the final actuals either, I seem to remember one occasion when they sent a memo around saying that Boston actuals had been changed several weeks after the month had ended for some reason, and we didn't go back in and change the scores for that month although it probably changed the outcome. Maybe we should have done so? I might not have been scoring then, this was perhaps back around 2009. If you want to suggest any possible approaches to this, be my guest. I started scoring this contest around 2011 and I don't remember if we had a similar situation at the end of 1971-2000 normals or not. The material is lost over on defunct Eastern Weather Forum now, including the trainwreck of the March 2012 contest where NYC ran +12 or something like that. Even the 2190-2220 normals would have failed to save anyone there.

Table of forecasts for March 2021 FORECASTER __________________ DCA _ NYC _ BOS ___ ORD _ ATL _ IAH ____ DEN _ PHX _ SEA ____ Bias vs con wxdude64 __________ (-1%) _____+3.1 _ +2.3 _ +1.9 ___ --1.3 _ +1.1 _ +1.2 ___ --2.2 _ +1.1 _ --1.1 ____ --0.59 so_whats_happening (-2%) _____+3.1 _ +2.3 _ +1.8 ___ +2.6 _ +3.2 _ +3.4 ___ +1.8 _ +2.2 _ --0.5 ____ +0.94 RJay __________________________ +2.5 _ +2.5 _ +2.5 ___ +2.5 _ +1.5 _ +2.0 ___ +2.5 _ +2.5 _ --2.0 ____ +0.57 Tom _______________ (-5%) ______+2.2 _ +2.0 _ +2.2 ___ +1.6 _ +1.8 _ +1.9 ___ +1.0 _ +0.5 _ +0.2 ____ +0.42 hudsonvalley21 ________________+2.0 _ +1.7 _ +2.1 ___ +2.2 _ +2.4 _ +2.3 ___ +1.6 _ +1.7 _ --1.0 ____ +0.40 BKViking ______________________ +1.9 _ +1.4 _ +1.0 ___ +2.5 _ +1.1 _ +2.0 ___ +1.1 _ +1.1 _ --2.0 ____ --0.14 ___ Consensus ________________ +1.9 _ +1.5 _ +1.3 ___ +2.2 _ +1.2 _ +2.0 ___ +1.1 _ +1.2 _ --1.0 DonSutherland 1 ______________ +1.5 _ +1.4 _ +1.2 ___ +3.0 _ +2.5 _ +3.1 ___ +2.2 _ +0.3 _ --2.1 ____ +0.19 wxallannj ______________________+1.4 _ +1.5 _ +1.3 ___ +2.9 _ +1.2 _ +1.3 ___ +2.2 _ +1.2 _ --1.8 ____ --0.02 Scotty Lightning _______________+1.0 _ +1.0 _ +0.5 ___ +0.5 _ +1.0 _ +2.0 ___ +1.0 _ +1.5 __ 0.0 ____ --0.32 ___ Normal _____________________ 0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 _____ 0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 ____ 0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 ____ --1.27 RodneyS ______________________--0.1 _ --0.2 _ --0.1 ___ +0.8 __ 0.0 _ +0.2 ___ +0.9 _ +0.6 _ --0.5 ____ --1.09 Roger Smith __________________ --1.2 _ --1.4 _ --1.8 ___ --1.5 _ --0.5 _ --0.5 ___ +1.0 _ +1.2 _ --1.2 ____ --1.92 =========================================================== Color codes show warmest and coldest forecasts. Normal is coldest for PHX. Bias shows your forecast tendencies averaged out relative to group consensus. Most are expecting slightly warmer than average (which is probably where the 1991-2020 normals will come in).

<<<<<< ================ - - - - Annual Scoring for 2021 (Jan-Feb) - - - - ==================== >>>>>>>> FHigh scores for nine locations shown in red, high scores for regions in bold. FORECASTER _________________DCA_NYC_BOS__east_ ORD_ATL_IAH__cent_ c/e ___ DEN_PHX_SEA__west___TOTALS RodneyS ______________________ 160 _170 _170 __500 __ 69 _148 _ 52 __269 __ 769 __112 _184 _164 __460 ____ 1229 DonSutherland1 _______________142 _128 _114 __384 __105 _152 _ 96 __353 __ 737 __114 _166 _146 __426 ____ 1163 BKViking ______________________ 132 _150 _164 __446 __ 20 _152 _ 72 __244 __ 690 __ 68 _178 _158 __404 ____ 1094 ___ Consensus ________________ 158 _154 _154 __466 __ 38 _128 _ 66 __232 __ 698 __ 78 _182 _130 __390 ____ 1088 wxdude64 _____________________ 142 _134 _156 __432 __ 61 _102 _ 66 __229 __ 661 __ 86 _194 _134 __ 414 ____ 1075 hudsonvalley21 ________________ 146 _126 _142 __414 __ 51 _130 _ 82 __263 __ 677 __ 60 _170 _140 __370 ____ 1047 Tom ___________________________ 160 _168 _174 __502 __ 25 _ 90 _ 64 __ 179 __ 681 __ 62 _192 _ 98 __ 352 ____ 1033 Scotty Lightning _______________ 134 _134 _132 __400 __ 06 _152 _ 88 __246 __ 646 __ 88 _172 _114 __ 374 ____ 1020 wxallannj ______________________ 140 _154 _142 __436 __ 38 _120 _ 48 __206 __ 642 __ 66 _170 _128 __364 ____ 1006 Roger Smith ___________________ 122 _108 _ 84 __314 __111 _ 98 _158 __367 __ 681 __ 74 _ 104 _100 __278 _____ 959 ___ Normal _____________________124 _134 _142 __400 __ 00 _112 _ 64 __176 __ 576 __ 78 _172 _124 __374 _____ 950 so_whats_happening ___________144 _112 _100 __356 __ 56 _158 _ 42 __256 __ 612 __ 54 _190 _ 72 __316 _____ 928 RJay __________________________ 134 _112 _ 82 __ 328 __ 56 _112 _ 64 __232 __ 560 __ 84 _142 _ 78 __ 304 _____ 864 ____________________________________________________________________________ Best scores for the locations and regions FORECASTER _______________ DCA _ NYC _ BOS __ east __ ORD _ ATL _ IAH __ cent __ c/e ___ DEN _ PHX _ SEA __ west ___ Totals RodneyS _____________________ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ______ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 1 _____ 1 __ Feb DonSutherland1 ______________ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ______ 1 ____ 0 ____ 1 ____ 1 ____ 1 _____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 1 _____ 0 _____ 1 __ Jan BKViking _____________________ 0 ____ 0 ____ 1 _____ 1 ______ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 _____ 0 __ ___ Consensus _______________ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ______ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 _____ 0 __ wxdude64 ____________________ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ______ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 1 ____ 1 ____ 0 _____ 1 _____ 0 __ hudsonvalley21 _______________ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ______ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 1 _____ 0 _____ 0 __ Tom __________________________ 1 ____ 1 ____ 1 _____ 1 ______ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 1 _____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 _____ 0 __ Scotty Lightning ______________ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ______ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 _____ 0 __ wxallannj _____________________ 0 ____ 1 ____ 0 _____ 0 ______ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ____ 1 ____ 0 _____ 0 _____ 0 __ Roger Smith __________________ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ______ 1 ____ 1 ____ 1 ____ 1 ____ 0 _____ 1 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 _____ 0 __ ___ Normal ___________________ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ______ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 _____ 0 __ so_whats_happening _________ 1 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ______ 0 ____ 1 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 _____ 0 __ RJay _________________________0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ______ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 ____ 0 ____ 0 _____ 0 _____ 0 __ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXTREME FORECAST STANDINGS High score must go to either the extreme warm or cold forecast, or second most extreme, for a station to qualify. So far this year, nine locations out of 18 have qualified, 4 in Jan and 5 in Feb. Of those, five were awarded to warmest forecasts, four to coldest. A loss in the standings represents a case where second most extreme forecast had the high score and the win for that month. FORECASTER _________ Jan __ Feb ______ TOTAL to date Roger Smith ___________ 2-1 __ 2-0 _______ 4-1 DonSutherland1 _______ 2-0 __ 1-0 _______ 3-0 wxdude64 _____________ ---- __ 1-0 _______ 1-0 so_whats_happening ___---- __ 1-0 _______ 1-0 __________________________________________

--1.2 _ --1.4 _ --1.8 _ --1.5 _ --0.5 _ --0.5 _ +1.0 _ +1.2 _ --1.2

Predict the temperature anomalies relative to 30-year average still in use (1981-2010 until notified otherwise) ... DCA _ NYC _ BOS __ ORD _ ATL _ IAH ____ DEN _ PHX _ SEA

Final scoring for February 2021 Scores are based on final anomalies as listed two posts back in the thread. Scores with ^ symbols are based on the max 60 rule, any raw scores that would be higher are left standing. With eleven forecasts, the scoring progression for boosted scores is 60, 54, 48, 42, 36, 30, 24, 18, 12, 06, 00. DEN needs minimum progression, the highest raw score at present is only 11. (outcome -7.1, lowest fcst -1.1). Scores for IAH would also go to this progression if max raw score was under 60. That would require an anomaly of -5.1 or colder. With warmer weather setting in (20th) this is still going to be difficult (-9.6 after 21 days, est -9.0 after 22). However, at the end, very warm weather has reduced the anomaly to -4.7 which produces a max score of 66 and eliminates the scoring boost (sorry, I was the culprit there). ORD has performed a similar reduction of the previously huge negative anomaly to -7.5, and once again you're stuck with raw scores because of my wild guess of -6.0. Despite those two point-bagging episodes, my other cold forecasts scored low and I'm at the bottom of the table anyway. For the minimum progression adjustments, consensus will be the same as one of these and Normal is scored from its relative position. FORECASTER _____________DCA_NYC_BOS__east__ORD_ATL_IAH__cent _ c/e __ DEN_PHX_SEA__west ___ TOTAL RodneyS ___________________ 84 _ 84 _ 84 ___ 252 __ 19 _ 86 _ 00 __ 105 __ 357 __ 48^_ 96 _ 68 __ 212 _____ 569 Tom _______________________ 94 _ 94 _ 98 ___286 __ 25 _ 52 _ 00 __ 077 __ 363 __ 30^_ 98 _ 36 __ 164 _____ 527 wxdude64 __________________62 _ 60 _ 80 ___ 202 __ 39 _ 48 _ 00 __ 087 __ 289 __ 60^_100 _76 __236 _____ 525 ____ Normal ________________ 76 _ 78 _ 82 ___ 236 __ 00 _ 70 _ 06 __ 076 __ 312 __ 42^_ 74 _ 60 __ 176 _____ 488 DonSutherland1 ____________ 72 _ 72 _ 66 ___ 210 __ 09 _ 60 _ 02 __ 071 __ 281 __ 42^_ 82 _ 80 __ 204 _____ 485 Scotty Lightning ____________56 _ 58 _ 62 ___ 176 __ 00 _ 90 _ 00 __ 090 __ 266 __ 42^_ 94 _ 50 __ 186 _____ 452 ____ Consensus ____________ 70 _ 58 _ 66 ___ 194 __ 10 _ 66 _ 00 __ 076 __ 270 __ 30^_ 98 _ 50 __ 178 _____ 448 BKViking ___________________42 _ 54 _ 66 ___ 162 __ 00 _ 86 _ 00 __ 086 __ 248 __ 24^_ 94 _ 70 __ 188 _____ 436 hudsonvalley21 ____________ 70 _ 56 _ 80 ___ 206 __ 03 _ 66 _ 10 __ 079 __ 285 __ 12^_ 92 _ 42 __ 146 _____ 431 so_whats_happening _______44 _ 54 _ 62 ___ 160 __ 10 _ 98 _ 00 __ 108 __ 268 __ 06^_ 98 _ 24 __ 128 _____ 396 wxallannj __________________ 52 _ 54 _ 54 ___ 160 __ 10 _ 44 _ 00 __ 054 __ 214 __ 54^_ 72 _ 48 __ 174 _____ 388 RJay _______________________36 _ 38 _ 32 ___ 106 __ 00 _ 70 _ 06 __ 076 __ 182 __ 18^_ 94 _ 50 __ 162 _____ 344 Roger Smith ________________34 _ 28 _ 14 ___ 076 __ 85 _ 00 _ 66 __ 151 __ 227 __ 00 _ 76 _ 14 __ 090 _____ 317 _____________________________________________________________ ======================================================== EXTREME FORECAST REPORT Four locations are wins for coldest forecasts -- ORD and IAH (Roger Smith), DEN (wxdude64) and SEA (DonSutherland1). ATL is a win for highest forecast (so_whats_happening). ========================================================= IAH has been adjusted and annual scoring (Jan-Feb) will follow later today. Worth noting that 7 of 9 locations averaged below normal in February, the average departure of all nine was --2.3 F.

Tips for shovelling a sleet drift ... 1. Don't.

DT looks fairly solid to me, would loop that 1" line around western Lake Ontario and put a 3" lolly in there, get some clients in Hamilton, football capital of Canada. A town near there has had 3 feet of snow in the last week mostly from lake effect in east winds.

I hope it's sleet and not freezing rain, that can do a lot more damage to trees and power lines. There's a ton of moisture streaming into the frontal system near the MS-AL border in the same packet that will be over Virginia in 24 hours. You don't have as much wind-turbine component in your energy grid as Texas, I hope.

Agree with the 3 to 6 inch calls (I-95) with best snow axis MRB to 50s ABE ... slight uncertainty remains about part two which depends on any development of low pressure currently in the central GOM south of Houma LA at about 27.5 N, oil rig obs indicate a juicy warm sector has developed (75/73 south wind to 30 mph) and this is supposedly heading for landfall near Pensacola or Mobile Bay then tracking through southern GA and up the Carolina coast. However, almost all guidance does nothing more than drag along an ill-defined trailing wave to the first low that forms in resonance with the inland snowfall energy, and eventually most models just ripple all the energy forward into that leading wave for explosive development south of NS Canada by Friday (late). If that were to prove inaccurate and this Gulf low maintains a stronger and more intact center and develops a circulation, then it could increase your snow and decrease the otherwise apparently inevitable sleet producing longer duration portion of the event. Let's say later models show a 1004 mb center deepening to 996 mb (which is probably only now on a few perturbations in the ensemble) then it would distort the thermals enough to keep the column colder and might turn into a heavier snowfall. That's the only route I see to anything heavier than about 6" and my forecast range is 3-6" for the three airports, 6-8" Frederick and 8-12" max in the MRB to MDT zone. A different evolution of the Gulf low could add several more inches to that but as I say no guidance supports this, although it has to be said that the weak feature now on the map is managing to produce quite a good circulation at the moment in the central to western GOM. Probably what would be needed is more digging of the upper trough to energize this low further, it has all the thermal gradients a low could possibly use.

Here are the forecasts for the snowfall contest (last updated Feb 28 in the previous post) ... Winter Snowfall contest 2020-2021 -- Table of entries FORECASTER ______ DCA _ NYC _ BOS __ ORD _ DTW _ BUF ___ DEN _ SEA _ BTV ___ current total dep snowfall to Feb 28___5.4 __ 38.6 _ 38.4 ___47.0 _ 41.3 _ 71.5 __ 33.6 _ 12.9 _ 58.2 wxallannj __________ 21.0 _ 29.0 _ 37.0 __ 43.0 _ 47.0 _ 70.0 __ 51.0 __ 5.2 _ 77.0 _____ 81.7 (24.2) Tom _______________ 18.1 _ 29.8 _ 42.5 __ 43.3 _ 44.1 _102.5__ 59.6 __ 4.2 _ 78.3 ____117.9 (21.2) hudsonvalley21 ____ 16.3 _ 30.4 _ 44.5 __ 39.7 _ 48.2 _ 87.9 __ 61.1 __ 6.8 _ 83.2 ____114.4 (21.6) Scotty Lightning ____15.0 _ 25.0 _ 40.0 __ 50.0 _ 40.0 _125.0__ 75.0 __ 3.0 _ 90.0 ____ 165.7 (24.8) Roger Smith _______ 14.5 _ 28.2 _ 60.5 __ 35.5 _ 39.9 _ 80.5 __ 55.5 _ 12.5 _ 90.5 ____ 118.1 (23.7) wxdude64 _________ 13.2 _ 29.7 _ 45.9 __ 41.7 _ 44.2 _ 97.7 __ 73.2 __ 7.1 _ 84.1 ____ 125.3 (20.0) RJay ________________8.0 _ 20.0 _ 35.0 __ 40.0 _ 40.0 _ 75.0 __ 65.0 __ 4.0 _ 65.0 _____ 83.5 (39.2) Don Sutherland1 ____ 6.0 _ 11.5 _ 28.0 __ 38.5 _ 44.0 _ 87.0 __ 57.5 __ 3.4 _ 72.9 _____112.9 (55.5) RodneyS ____________ 4.4 __ 8.5 _ 20.0 __ 31.6 _ 38.0 _ 78.9 __ 55.5 __ 5.1 _ 66.6 _____113.7 (76.0) __ consensus _______14.5 _ 28.2 _ 40.0 __ 40.0 _ 44.1 _ 87.0 __ 59.6 __ 5.1 _ 78.3 ______100.3 (25.2) snowfall to Feb 28 ___5.4 __ 38.6 _ 38.4 ___47.0 _ 41.3 _ 71.5 __ 33.6 _ 12.9 _ 58.2 _________________________________________________________________________ Current best forecasts are in red. Underlined means settled as there was no higher forecast. In the "total current departure" the first number is subject to reductions as your higher forecasts converge on the eventual totals but a few forecasts (including all at SEA and NYC) are already below the outcome and so the number in brackets is your total non-reducible error (the portion of total departure that can only grow larger). Hard to say who has the advantage at this point, the larger departures will catch up at 2x new snowfalls (in some cases, if you're above the seasonal total and fellow competitor is below) until new snowfalls increase beyond predictions.

Unless this thing explodes you will be near the top, with seven weeks to go until it gets too warm for snow ... seven agonizing, slowly unfolding weeks of dribs and drabs of snow that will move mappy and stormpc inexorably closer to victory.

Something to watch with this storm's development is potential for explosive development as that extreme cold air mass over Texas has pushed out over most of the Gulf of Mexico, at this point the front runs from between Veracruz and Tampico in eastern Mexico across the Gulf at around 25 N towards southwest Florida. Models are showing development somewhat further north than the best thermal gradients which implies there could be a deeper low starting from a more southerly point of origin. I don't think this would affect the eventual track as depicted but it might provide an even stronger low running along that track. Here's a buoy located in the central Gulf at about the longitude of New Orleans, with full meteorological reporting. The east Gulf buoy about 240 miles to its east no longer has wind direction but you can surmise from wave directions what is happening there, even that location is now behind the advancing front. (second link) https://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=KATP https://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=42003 With this cold air over much of the Gulf, lift potential in the subtropical jet region will be considerable.

RIC now reporting 7.0" after 2.6" fell today. I see BWI at 9.0 and DCA at 4.5 by the way (0.1 went to wrong station perhaps?)

First look at anomalies and projections, and an update of seasonal snowfalls ... ___________________________ DCA _ NYC _ BOS __ ORD _ ATL _ IAH ___ DEN _ PHX _ SEA 11th ____ (anom 10d) _____ +0.8 _ --1.1 _ +0.1 __ --9.3 _ +0.8 _ +2.2 __ +0.8 _ +5.2 _ +0.1 21st ____ (anom 20d) _____ --2.6 _ --2.9 _ --2.4 __--12.7 _ --1.1 _--9.9 __ --8.5 _ +2.5 _ --2.6 11th ____ (p anom 20d) ____ 0.0 _ --1.5 _ --1.5 __ --8.0 _ +0.3 _ --2.0 __ --2.0 _ +2.0 _ --1.5 11th ____ (p anom 28th) ___+0.5 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 __ --5.5 _ +1.0 _ --0.5 __ --1.0 _ +1.5 _ --0.5 21st ____ (p anom 28th) ___ --1.5 _ --1.5 _ --1.5 __--8.0 __ 0.0 _ --5.0 __ --5.0 _ +2.0 _ --2.0 1st ___ (final anomalies) _ --1.2 _ --1.1 _--0.9 __--7.5 _ +1.5 _--4.7 __--7.1 _+1.3 _--2.0 to Feb 28 _________________ 5.4" _38.6" _38.4"__47.0"_DTW41.3"_BUF71.5"_33.6"_BTV 58.2"_12.9" __________________________________________ ** + ** + ** ____________________________________ 11th _ Extreme cold has dominated most of the Midwest and plains states but has made only limited impacts on the east and southeast. A rather mild start to February has faded in the west as the extensive arctic outbreak spills into the Rockies. The next ten days do not look a lot different although the east will probably accumulate slight negative anomalies and cold will deepen for a while in DEN and SEA. The projection for the 21st to end of month (using GFS guidance to 27th) was based on zonal flow returning and a more normal regime across the northern states. Snowfall totals will be updated in this table whenever new snow is reported at any of the nine locations. My very cold regime looks like it might bust at all locations except ORD and IAH, and there it will be a case of hanging on at the end. 16th _ Major changes to snowfall at SEA which got a heavy dumping over the weekend, additions to some other locations. ORD is now at -12.5 for an anomaly and DEN is down to -9.3, IAH has dropped to -5.9, ATL slid down a bit to +1.3. Recent daily anomalies near -50 F deg have been reported in parts of Texas. On the 15th, DFW had a lower max (14F) than its previous record low min (15 F). 28th to 1st March _ Anomalies are being posted as they appear overnight ... scoring is being updated as these values are adjusted. ... As of 1520z the anomalies are all confirmed and scoring is now final.

Nope, you're thinking of the earlier storm and like with models, error then does not imply error now. Sunday 7th snow potential was botched by just about everybody as I recall. All I'm saying is, suppression seems overdone on Euro, there isn't that much further push south with this Midwest high weakening and being pulled across to your north although obviously the fronts will sag some distance further south before settling for the wave to run along.

I feel somewhat more optimistic given that the cold high in Iowa is fading while the parent high, a monster 1062 mb center up in the NWT, is slowly pushing south. That should stop the southward push on the wave train and when I look at the RGEM output the precip shield looks realistic but the thickness and thermal profiles look unrealistic (too far north) which would argue for more of the depicted precip to fall as snow. Hence an early call of 4-7" for the I-95, max could be a bit south of the DC-BWI-ILG corridor at 5-9" but I don't think it would be pushed as far south as RIC.

It was really though because President Dewey resigned over that fiasco.