Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Syrmax

  1. Usually, I'd say we need a storm to end the nonsense back n forth but how'd that work this time?
  2. Adults are having a discussion. Go back to your room and take your meds.
  3. Harder to figure exact ratios for Oswego cty and when they occurred based on CoCoRaHS as reports are usually 7-9 a.m., which includes the high ratio LES/enhancement after midnight. And the KART qpf data from NWS for 2/3, 2/4 are "M".
  4. ROC Climate data for the 2 days. Weighting the ratios based on % of total precip each day yields net ratio of 11.9:1. SYZ was 9.9:1 using same method for those days combined.
  5. Below is KSYZ data for the Storm. 2/3 was 9.3:1 and 2/4 was 10.9:1. What fell after midnight (today) there was undoubtedly higher ratio. I had 30:1...
  6. You are closer to L.O. and better wind direction, but mostly closer to lake this time, I think. This stuff was low topped and barely registering on radar.
  7. Good grouping of snowfall reports in no. Onondaga. Looks like double that at in Oswego Cty.
  8. 3.0" evening/overnight here. 0.1" melted, spot on 30:1. Almost no radar reflection from it.
  9. Really. This isn't Mt. Tolland. ROC 10-12", I'm buying that. The 14" in Wayne (per NWS PNS) and 20" in eastern Monroe (CoCoRaHS) ctys as of this a.m.? Not so much.
  10. Should be a good time for you to practice that slantwise snow measuring then.
  11. I'll tell you where the Sizzle is right now...SNE. A friend in CT reporting his "Bomb Storm" 15" has been melted faster than Frosty the Snowman...
  12. Saw the RGEM and FV3 looking like that. WRF-ARW has a stream a bit west of that but shows lakeside east of ROC also getting in on it.
  13. I'm sure we can dredge up a Kuchie map that gives us 6+".
  14. You are correct Sir. Didn't have my engineering brain engaged in my response...multitasking...
  15. Agree. Noone was reporting ratios that high upstate. Maybe one of the hilltops on the Chattaqua ridge saw that but that's about it.
  16. Could be but i dont think wind was all that high. That was more of a concern for the recent Nor'easter in SNE with winds ripping. I think the real issue was qpf a touch overmodeled and UVV wasn't impressive...which isn't surprising as this was an overruning or anafrontal system. There wasn't a strong slp or ULL and dynamics were comparatively weak. Hence, snow growth was not impressive.
  17. Agree, was just looking at that. From SYR, Oswego area to ROC and BUF looks like 7-11" fell. A little on the lower end of models in general but not far off. BGM to ALB never got into the 5"+ realm that GFS was putting out. Overall models did well. The areas in CNY that did best were a bit south of here and had some elevation, again, as was generally depicted in models. The iffy dendrite size was what I was concerned about and it was a factor here, along with less qpf than modeled (SYZ was generally 1.1-1.4" and we got about about 0.82" IMBY including the rain up front).
  18. Real iffy to get to 10" we'd need another 2-2-2.5" to get there, generally. This 3rd wave looks weakish, maybe an inch. No idea if any meaningful LES will arise later to "Top off the tank" so to speak. Always possible here.
  19. Well at least we'll be able to call the Giants putrid offense Kafkaesque.
  20. Totals here, 7.5" / 0.73 liquid. Total ratio 10.2:1. The 2.5" that fell after 10pm had 0.28" liquid equivalent, only a 9:1 ratio. Up to 10 pm was 11:1. Odd, would have expected higher, not lower ratio, later in storm. Noticed the Rome report here earlier was about a 6:1 ratio. This is why I stay clear of Kuchie Koo maps.
  • Create New...