Welcome to American Weather

MegaMike

Meteorologist
  • Content count

    265
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MegaMike

  • Birthday 09/09/1993

Profile Information

  • Four Letter Airport Code For Weather Obs (Such as KDCA)
    KSFZ
  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Pawtucket, RI
  1. I agree with Brony Ellinwood. This would be a very subjective model that would vary from person to person. That being said/written!!! I'd use variables that correlate weather to physical and psychological health. Therefore, you'd have a standardized, universal method to calculate "what the weather is like" at a certain location via health. Some variables that I'd consider: Coefficient of Pressure (fluctuates blood pressure///can cause joint pain///headaches///sinuses) Coefficient of Temperature (narrowing of blood vessels///dehydration///hypothermia///heart attacks)... Coefficient of Temperature wrt (with respect to) Time (may cause illness [could look at Pressure and DP Temp change too for this]) Coefficient of Dew Point Temperature (difficulty to breath/cool off under high humidity) Coefficient of Heat Index (Combination of Temp and DP Temp [might be unnecessary or vise versa]) Coefficient of FROPAs (thinning and thickening of blood vessels via cold or warm fronts [diabetics]) Coefficient of Cloud Cover (depression///migraines on bright days) Coefficient of Precipitation (i.e... 'Cloud Cover') Coefficient of Precipitation Type (shoveling snow can cause deaths for a number of reasons///ice can cause fatalities due to knocking out power (exposure), driving accidents, etc...) Coefficient of Air Quality (respiratory problems[asthma])... Coefficient of Insurance Claims (from weather related damages) Sum Value Coefficients (one, overall value to determine "what the weather is like" wrt health)... The Köppen climate classification categorizes regions of similar climate. It doesn't numerically calculate the livability of a given location. If you can derive something to numerically portray livability, you'll create a model that's useful/helpful imo. Admittedly, if you choose to create a model similar to what I mentioned above, it will likely resemble the Köppen climate classification. I hope my template gives you some ideas!!! You can always choose to create a model that determines the livability wrt weather enthusiasts, snow lovers, etc... basically anything. This is where things become subjective though.
  2. The virus is pretty effective! Each year, I always see dozens/hundreds of caterpillars stuck on the trunks of trees around my mothers property. At first, I presumed they were alive because their bodies looked intact albeit motionless. After a couple days, their bodies liquify, wither, and then literally fall apart. The liquified goo stains the trunks of the trees in which they climbed. Nasty stuff if you're a caterpillar!
  3. Agreed! I've been working with ice/wet SWE/utilities for about a year now and it's challenging to find reliable/consistent observations. Discrepancies in how an observer measures ice accumulation makes modeling potential outages more difficult. I'd also like a weight component to hourly snowfall observations. Probably too expensive to incorporate, but it's good to be optimistic!
  4. It'd be nice if there was a universal "snowboard" to measure ice accumulation.
  5. Just about!!! I forgot who derived it, but radial ice accumulation is equal to 'ice thickness' multiplied by '0.394.' The FRAM SM, in particular, uses the conversion to go from ice thickness over to radial ice accumulation.
  6. The last 4/6 photos had file sizes greater than 9.77MB so they're located via these links. Thanks in advance!!! http://tinypic.com/r/2zr40i1/9 http://tinypic.com/r/r2unlw/9 http://tinypic.com/r/2em1jqf/9 http://tinypic.com/r/2wok5ls/9
  7. Does anyone have experience converting digital photographs into a canvas? I'd like to expand, print, then hang a couple of my photographs for prosperity. I'm not 100% confident that they're worth the investment though (resolution, lighting, etc...). Here are 2/6 of my prospects : I'm not too fond of these 2 photos, but people seem to really like them.
  8. Yes! I noticed that too. The accuracy of the images that I derive from modeled output are somewhat inaccurate for a number of reasons. My supervisor makes it clear that they shouldn't be taken too seriously. Regardless, companies that I provide these images to do take them seriously. I would like to verify these numbers, but nothing really measures wet snow loading on utility wires.
  9. I've been doing some work with ArcMap today on wet snow loading. I don't see any harm in posting one image from one model run just for comments and possibly even some feedback. Locations in the map that I attached that are expected to receive 0.5 inches (contoured) of 'Wet SWE' are at risk of losing power. Other models are fairly similar in terms of magnitude and locations of heavy snow loading. All credit goes to LSC for allowing me to use their programs to derive this image!
  10. Thundersnow in Attleboro according to my brother and friend (about 3 miles away from each other). I chose to stay in VT to finish some work. I don't remember such consistent and region wide observations of thundersnow.
  11. Totally agree with that! Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont have something similar. http://newengland511.org
  12. Looks like a storm total of 9.2 inches for Pawtucket. Just for S&Gs, I'm going to measure a couple fields at Slater Park later this morning. I believe it's trespassing if you visit a park one-half hour before sundown.
  13. That's pretty unfortunate, but it does support my observations in Pawtucket. I have about 6.5 inches so far. I expect 1-3 more inches of additional snowfall.
  14. Smithfield, RI reported 2.8 inches at 2:34PM so even if they received 1 inch/hr for two hours, that'd bring them to 4.8 inches. Attleboro (NWS employee) reported 3.2 inches at 3:40PM. I'm confident with what I have for Pawtucket. 4 inches seems reasonable.
  15. Pawtucket. That's why lol. But seriously, though. That was an estimate. It hasn't looked too impressive here so far (snow growth being a huge problem). I just went outside to validate my estimate and I was spot on. A little over 4 inches. i measure in a protected area too. I don't measure each hour so compaction may be an issue.