OceanStWx

I wouldn't be surprised if post analysis counts it for Storm Data anyway. Some of it is a bit subjective, but if DAW, PSM, and PWM all hit blizzard up here how could I say coastal York wasn't also a blizzard.

In a typical developing (i.e. not peak intensity) storm your frontogenesis is going to be sloped towards the cold air. 850 is farther southeast than 700 mb, and so on. Lift tends to be maximized around 700 mb, hence congrats Dendrite. This storm bombed out a little farther south, so one of the first things I noticed was the position of the forecast 700 and 850 mb frontogenesis. While still sloped a bit, it's far more collocated/vertically stacked. That signaled to me that one major band would develop. And that look at 700 mb with a secondary band farther north suggested to me that it wasn't going to be a uniform precip shield. That a subsidence zone was possible between the two. I may have sent a text about toaster baths in the LWM area to @CoastalWx and @CT Rain Sunday. I made a little gif too, so you can see how the forcing is overlaid. I do think part of the problem with the secondary band was that it was advecting so much dry air into the storm. @dendrite posted somewhere along the line the map of RH, and 50% across central NH just wasn't going to get it done for that northern extent. It was like a dry wedge in the usually CAD spots.

One of the weirdest storms I’ve ever worked up here. Huge bust on snow totals - I have nothing on my snow board and snow depth went down a half inch today. I would guess I have around 2”. BUT PWM did verify a blizzard warning.

The reality is that outside of some real fluffy lake effect type stuff, measuring every 24 vs every 6 hours is only going to move your SLR from 12:1 to 14:1 not 12:1 to 20:1.

I think it's only required if they are paid observers. Either a volunteer near the airport or a FAA contracted observer at the airport.

Correct, last I saw officially you only need once in 24 hr measurement, but can clear up to every 6 hours.

At some point this year I would imagine, the evaluation period ended 12/1.

The NBM includes just about everything. In the extended it's primarily the ensembles members and then starts to bring in meso models in higher weights as you get inside 36 hours. There is dynamic weighting based on recent model performance (which is great when the pattern is stable, not so great when big changes occur). And some NBM fields are bias corrected on a grid by grid basis. Overall it's pretty good, but there are blind spots that humans can still improve on.

Unfortunately ASOS is king, and that liquid is what goes in for the climate. Even if the snow observer reports more (or less).

You can see from the study that only 1 in 4 obs is greater than 13:1 in SNE, maybe 1 in 10 greater than 20:1. Even factoring in people who measure once when the storm is done or the next morning with compaction, you're maybe moving the SLR 2 inches, not 5+.

We're still getting used to the forecast process now, and the NBM is good, but it still has some big holes. One is that it provides us with snow ratios, but it nearly always too high. It is too frequently in the 15-20:1 range. As an example for BOX's CWA, if you just had your extended forecast living in the 8-14:1 range you would be a lot less susceptible to these kinds of NBM busts.

@ORH_wxman Honestly he may have even done the work 20 years ago.

They are just like a coop, once daily measurement in the morning. But they will report to us on the 6 hours when they are in the office.

2 NNW is Pennichuck water. Their data is pretty meh overall, they do us a free service but there are occasional mistakes and they like their "round" numbers x.0 and x.5. The Hudson coop had 28.6" and is a former met, so pretty reliable obs there.

It won't necessarily get weaker, but you will see the band contract in size as the warm advection moves north and it becomes more driven purely by deformation.

Once a certain amount of time passes it is no longer a local WFO thing. Only NCEI can change it, so IIRC when Will pieced together the missing records it was too late for BOX to change things. And NCEI is notoriously unwilling to change data (with good reason, don't need ulterior motives driving data changes).

I believe they got 2" Brutal. But we did actually get those 20+ totals in the south.

This one's right up there with the St. Valentine's Day massacre of 2015 for GYX.

Congrats Dendrite!

Day drinking FTL

I'm just doing the math from the 5 inches on the ground at 7 pm last night before the snow started.

I actually can't myself. I know GYX has internal documents we keep of the top 10 lists, I know BOX has similar. But that's what I mean about them not being digitized. Without asking BOX directly, you can't really search on your own.

Seeing BOX LSRed a 31.5 in Warwick, so they are buying the 30+ reports now. Should start coming fast and furious now.

SNINCR 4/37! That's a +32 change from this storm.