OceanStWx

I mean his personal life may have been a mess, but that doesn't mean we can't be awed by his talent. It was very cool watching him win this tourney again. I mean Jack was 46 when he won, Tiger is 43 and needed to fuse part of his spine together to compete again. It's AT LEAST as impressive as Jack if not more.

Going to be a stiff breeze tomorrow too. MAV and MET are around 15 knots (MAV a little higher) which would be good for gusts into the 30 mph range. I like the final score to not be much lower than it is today, maybe -15.

My biggest issue is posture I think. I get lazy and slouch over. Currently I'm athletic enough to get through the ball with a crap turn, but that's usually a handsy swing and hook. When I stand tall and swing to a good finish I get my baby draw back. But all those years fearing a slice and now I LOATHE a hook.

I took tropical meteorology during my semester "abroad" at UH Manoa. The only time we discussed TCs was the cases when the form from the TUTT (the prof's general reasoning being that we spend far more days without TCs than with them). Just a whole semester on sea/land breezes, trade winds, inversions, shear lines, etc. It was fascinating really. TCs are fairly obvious elements of a tropical forecast, but day to day tropical meteorology is so subtle.

Why choose. Half day lift ticket and hit 9 holes on the way home.

Drop it under 2 m too so you can grab the near surface moisture.

I know you're trolling but... There's a reason why you yourself forecast 4-7 with lollis to 10" during events. You know there will be areas that get higher, but you don't know exactly where. Local flow, local elevation, etc will all effect snowfall amounts. But so will measurements. Cory was measuring (not clearing) frequently, and reported his highest snowfall depth which is totally within the guidelines. But if someone measured when the snow ended only, or an hour after, or an hour before, snowfall could be inches different. And mapping software just isn't equipped to handle that level of detail when you have to fill in areas of no obs compared to areas with 3 very different obs in the same town. We could create that map and put it on the website and you would complain it looks like swiss cheese with all the circles in it, but that's what happens when you include every outlying ob. There is zero issue with a map that says 8-12" over a large area but including lollis to 16".

Our internal storm report system logs it all. We can even log null events if we are cold calling spotters. It’s just that the maps look so bad when there are high and low bullseyes everywhere. And snow is so subjective to begin with that you end up with a lot of reports not jiving with each other.

Actually Joe D rows a dinghy out into the harbor with a portable snow board and 8" gauge during every snow storm now. I really wouldn't waste too much time worrying about whether you're in the PNS or not, especially the final PNS. We use those to generate our observed snowfall maps. And outliers make the map look like shit, even if you're an outlier because of elevation. We remove reports all the time to smooth the map out. It's not an indictment of your measuring technique (except when it is *cough* Lunenburg *cough*).

The time listed is just the time of the LAST report, it doesn't say anything about the number of measurements. BOS being an LCD site means that the contract observer is measuring every 6 hours. Also ASOS liquid is considered the standard, with only rare circumstances requiring contract observer liquid being used for the official ob. So the fact that the ASOS measured 1.06" is likely just coincidence, because the treatment plant's 8" gauge would likely be different by a small number and their observer wouldn't be hitting refresh on the web to find out how much BOS measured to estimate snowfall.

Official coop guidance now is one clear every 24 hours. But as long as you aren't clearing more frequently than every 6 hours, I'm fine with it. We only require that at LCD sites though.

Yeah that's just generated off the most recent reports (PNS), nothing more nothing less. As more reports come in that map will fill out some, and at the end of the event we do remove any obs that appear to be strong outliers.

Not bad when the snow didn't start at BOS until 10 pm. Hard to complain when you nearly average 2"/hr for 8 hours.

My guess is the HRRR timing was a little off and the goods just happened. Those cold cloud tops coincided with the Chelsea report of 3-4"/hr.

Man those cloud tops near BOS cooled quickly.

Yeah, that mix line isn't getting any farther NW now. Racing to the canal.

It's a bit of a proxy, but you can see how averaging f-gen over more depth doesn't really change the location of the most intense frontal creation. So the lift is a lot more "upright" than a typically sloping ascent of WAA.

Similar process to February 2013 over LI and CT I suspect.

You're really close to the mixing, so there's probably a ton of liquid water in there to rime onto the flakes. Nice to see a CCB again.

I mean based on the site info at NCEI, it's measured at the treatment plant. Technically, that is on the beach in Winthrop though.

That's one thing that was well modeled leading up to the event. The output and probabilities for 1 and 2 inches per hour kept increasing right through 00z last night.

And collapsing from the W across LI. Foster-Gloucester wins again.

IJD just ripped off 0.08" liquid in 25 minutes. That's some heavy snow.

Right in that 0 to -1 wet bulb is prime.