J.Spin

Thanks for the quick fix - I was able to update the snowfall for yesterday’s event and everything seems back to normal.

I definitely concur with Dendrite’s comment – having a snow “table” (i.e. elevated snowboard) is great for convenience in measuring, can be helpful in catching accumulations in marginal events, etc., but they are certainly more susceptible to the wind. If you set up an elevated system, just make sure you have it backed up with ground boards as well. Even in my sheltered location, I always have my elevated board backed up with at least one ground-based board to ensure I’ll be able to get a good reading no matter what.

Event totals: 0.4” Snow/Trace L.E. Details from the 6:00 P.M. Waterbury observations: New Snow: 0.4 inches New Liquid: Trace Temperature: 26.8 F Sky: Flurries Snow at the stake: 4.5 inches

I think something might be up from the tweaking – I was entering data for today’s event and after it posted to the table it came up with no name in the entry. I deleted it after noticing this issue, and upon further investigation I noticed that there was no place in the entry form to put the date. Also, when I’m logged in and go to my entries, it doesn’t show just my entries, it seems to show them all. I figured I’d pass it along if you’re doing some troubleshooting.

I hadn’t really been looking at much since the last storm, but I had a chance to take a peek at the weather models this morning, and it looks like we’ve got three potential snow events to consider over the next several days: 1) Today: upper level shortwave and associated warm front 2) Friday afternoon-Friday night: cold front and associated squalls 3) Monday-Tuesday: potential system off the coast At this point, the BTV NWS doesn’t really anticipate much of an effect up here with respect to the coastal system, but some of the models do suggest some fringe effects in the area, so we’ll have to let that get sorted out as we get closer in time.

Starting this season, I don’t even have to melt the snow down to quantify the liquid. I’d been wanting to skip the melting and simply do it by density for a while, and just hadn’t gotten around to looking for an appropriate scale or balance. This off season I finally started looking, and they’ve got 0.01 g resolution scales all over the place now for ~$10 or so. I’ve got one of those, and it’s great. Depending on whether it’s dry or wet snow, I just tare my corer or another vessel, and bam, there’s your liquid. It’s far more accurate and precise than trying to measuring volumes down to 0.01 mL, it’s much faster than dealing with melting the snow down, and there’s the added benefit of not losing any sample in container transfers.

Event totals: 5.1” Snow/0.85” L.E. We’ve still got some flakes out there, and the models suggest that there’s potential for them to continue through tomorrow, so we’ll see if anything else accumulates to finish off this event. Details from the 6:00 P.M. Waterbury observations: New Snow: 0.4 inches New Liquid: 0.01 inches Snow/Water Ratio: 40.0 Snow Density: 2.5% H2O Temperature: 17.4 F Sky: Flurries Snow at the stake: 5.0 inches

You are supposed to report the greatest new depth attained during the collection interval, which in some cases may be limited by whether you’re there to be able to catch the measurement or not, but if a certain depth is attained and then it’s compressed or melts, you still report that greatest depth.

Event totals: 4.7” Snow/0.84” L.E. It looks like we’re moving toward the back side of this storm cycle now, and the snow density this morning has come down quite a bit. Details from the 12:00 P.M. Waterbury observations: New Snow: 1.0 inches New Liquid: 0.09 inches Snow/Water Ratio: 11.1 Snow Density: 9.0% H2O Temperature: 26.4 F Sky: Light Snow (3 to 10 mm flakes) Snow at the stake: 5.0 inches

Event totals: 3.7” Snow/0.75” L.E. Aside from some interludes with larger flakes, the snowfall from this system has been impressively dense, and the bulk of the snowfall I’ve typically seen has been made up of small, granular flakes. I thought I heard a few ticks of sleet yesterday in the late evening, but there was nothing obvious in this morning’s core that I used for analysis. In any case, with the dense, granular flakes the storm has already brought 0.75” of liquid despite only 3.7” of snow accumulation. It’s actually snowing quite steadily out there this morning, but it’s not obvious at first glance due to the small size of the flakes. Details from the 6:00 A.M. Waterbury observations: New Snow: 1.8 inches New Liquid: 0.41 inches Snow/Water Ratio: 4.4 Snow Density: 22.8% H2O Temperature: 20.8 F Sky: Snow (1 to 2 mm flakes) Snow at the stake: 4.0 inches

Event totals: 1.9” Snow/0.34” L.E. Details from the 10:00 P.M. Waterbury observations: New Snow: 1.7 inches New Liquid: 0.30 inches Snow/Water Ratio: 5.7 Snow Density: 17.6% H2O Temperature: 25.0 F Sky: Snow (3 to 20 mm flakes) Snow at the stake: 3.0 inches

Wow, I’ve been amazed at the consensus on this, and fairly astonished that nobody seems to appreciate how fantastic it is to have the heated walkways. I’d install a system like that at my place in a second if it was practical/economical. We’re talking about areas that need to be cleared of snow anyway, so why in the world would people want it to fall there and then be required to clear it manually? Unless you chemically treat (salt) surfaces like that, they’re never really cleared of the remnants of the shoveling process; you end up with various patches of snow and ice all over the place depending on areas of sun and shade, and it looks like crap. And of course there’s the safety element as well. PF knows exactly how it looks in the Spruce Peak Village, and I can’t believe the aesthetic isn’t appreciated. You have picturesque deep snow exactly where it belongs, without the extra lumpy shoveled snowbanks filled with gray snow, gravel, and salt, and then the snow literally stops right where it’s supposed to and you’ve got a pristine walkway to walk on. It’s far more picturesque, safer, and friendlier to the surrounding grass and other vegetation than the alternative with salting.

I’ve got the updated BTV NWS maps for the storm below – indeed like PF mentioned in his thoughts, they’ve got some substantial areas in the northern Champlain Valley with the 12-18” shading.

Event totals: 0.2” Snow/0.04” L.E. The first salvo of snow from this cold front began late yesterday evening, with a mix of rain and snow falling that transitioned to all snow as the temperatures fell back below freezing. This morning there was a dense refrozen accumulation on the boards with additional light snow/flurries falling. Some areas of snow from the previous storm did make it through to this event, so we’ll see what happens with this next run of snow in terms of how long this stretch of snow on the ground continues. Details from the 6:00 A.M. Waterbury observations: New Snow: 0.2 inches New Liquid: 0.04 inches Snow/Water Ratio: 5.0 Snow Density: 20.0% H2O Temperature: 30.6 F Sky: Light Snow/Flurries Snow at the stake: Trace

I just figured it was because of the potential mixed precipitation, and indeed if you work your way through the point forecasts moving eastward in the county from here, the projected accumulations do drop off a bit. With county-sized chunks of real estate, I’m sure it’s tough for the BTV NWS folks to decide where to draw the line and categorize each county. For extreme cases like eastern/western Chittenden, Addison, etc. they have subdivided the counties when needed as I recall.

We were in the garage doing some winter prep on the vehicles and I got a text message that we were under a Winter Weather Advisory for the upcoming storm. On the updated advisories map I can see they’ve got a mixture of Winter Weather Advisories and Winter Storm Warnings for the area. The updated projected accumulations map has just a touch of that 12-18” shading near some of the peaks, with our area at the 8-12” level. The point forecast here suggests accumulations through Tuesday of 6 to 12 inches, with the potential for some mixed precipitation, which seems generally in line with the map.

I see that the BTV NWS now has the following headline for the upcoming event on their homepage, and linked from that is an updated snow map with areas of 12-18” projected accumulation shading for some of the higher elevations. Winter Storm Watch in Effect Monday Afternoon Through Tuesday Afternoon for the Adirondacks in New York and portions of northern Vermont A period of moderate to heavy snowfall will be possible Monday afternoon through Tuesday afternoon. Snowfall accumulations of 5 to 8 inches will be possible. A band of heavy snow could develop Monday evening into early Tuesday morning. Travel could be very difficult, especially within the band of heavy snow.

Well, the wink is presumably a bit of a nod to the situation, but LOL... come on. As much as your posts are eloquently written and based in science, they are awash in subjective weenie passion that can be challenging to figure out. I don’t think it necessarily needs to be perceived as an unwanted struggle, but in each post it’s as if the scientist in you and the weather weenie in you are engrossed in this sort of battle, with the scientist trying to dispassionately get his work done at the bench while the weenie keeps poking his head in and writing these little textual jabs and emotional side notes between the lines that are in indelible ink and can’t be removed in the final draft for submission. The end result is typically quite intriguing, but definitely takes some figuring by the reader.

A few shots from yesterday’s ski tour:

I visited Bolton yesterday to get in a ski tour and check out the new snow, so I’ll pass along some beta on the snow depths and general conditions. With the fairly fluffy nature of the snow and based on what I’m seeing at the house, I’m sure there had been some settling since it fell, but here’s the snow depth/elevation profile from the base of the Bolton Valley Access Road up to the local summit areas: 340’: 1-2” 1,000’: 2-3” 1,500’: 3-4” 2,000’: 4-6” 2,500’: 6-7” 3,000’: 7-9” I was up there around midday, when temperatures were just edging a bit above freezing at our house down in the valley, but above 1,500’, and certainly above 2,000’, temperatures never got above freezing so the snow was all winter consistency. In terms of the skiing, it was undoubtedly early season, and rock skis would be your best bet if you’re going on anything with substantial pitch. I actually found the skiing better on the lower half of the mountain because there was a bit of a base there – I think more of the snow down in those elevations was melting on contact with the ground to create that dense layer. Up higher, the consistency of the snow was more straight fluff from top to bottom. As is often the case, most water bars had reasonable crossings at least at one point, but a few were dicey and took some extra navigation. There’s still running water in plenty of spots, and ponding in some flat areas. On my descent it was obvious that my skis got in contact with at least traces of that moisture, because about halfway down I had to pull out a credit card and spend probably 10 minutes doing a scrape down on the ski bases to really get things back in shape for gliding. That effort was worth it though, because for the bottom half of my run I was on Lower Turnpike, and that offered what was unquestionably the best skiing of the tour. The combination of that bit of dense snow that accumulated as some base down in those elevations, plus some skier traffic packing down areas of the new snow as well, clearly created the best subsurfaces I encountered. On top of that you’ve got the fact that Lower Turnpike is essentially all grassy terrain, and it has a pitch that isn’t really overbearing for the amount of snowpack we’ve got, and it comes together for real winning combination. Even with some skier traffic, there was still plenty of powder to play around in throughout the trail, so that was a great way to finish off my run. For anyone heading up, you may still want to hit the summit areas to check things out and get the exercise from a more substantial tour, but if you’re just looking to get out from some quality turns, Lower Turnpike is probably going to get you the most bang for your buck. It’s one of the designated ascent routes anyway, so there’s a nice skin track and it’s an efficient way to in some nice turns on the new snow. I’ve got a few images from yesterday, so I’ll try to pass some along when I get a chance to get them off my camera.

I saw this morning that the BTV NWS has us under a Winter Storm Watch in association with this next winter storm. As far as I know, this is the first one of the season around here. I see that mreaves has some of the watch text posted, and here are the associated maps:

Event totals: 7.1” Snow/0.35” L.E. We’ve mostly cleared out here at the house this morning, so I’d say this event is complete. It’s certainly not uncommon for us to get events like this in November, but getting one in the first third of the month is notable. Details from the 6:00 A.M. Waterbury observations: New Snow: 0.2 inches New Liquid: Trace Temperature: 13.3 F Sky: Mostly Clear Snow at the stake: 5.5 inches It doesn’t look like there’s going to be much of a break before the next system moves into the area though. The BTV NWS says that an incoming front begins to affect the area tomorrow, and then it sort of stalls out. Our graphical point forecast for here in the valley has precipitation moving back in tomorrow, and then hanging around for a while as snow:

Event totals: 6.9” Snow/0.35” L.E. We’ve got another resurgence of snowfall taking place this evening as this event continues. The snowfall was actually more substantial back in town that here at the house, but we’ve still got some flakes coming down with a bit of accumulation. Details from the 6:00 P.M. Waterbury observations: New Snow: 4.9 inches New Liquid: 0.17 inches Snow/Water Ratio: 28.8 Snow Density: 3.5% H2O Temperature: 26.1 F Sky: Light Snow (1 to 2 mm flakes) Snow at the stake: 6.0 inches Using the snowfall data set for our site, I recently calculated the average dates for several storm accumulation thresholds, and this is actually on the early side for the first ≥6” storm of the season. Since we’re still fairly early in November, this is actually on the early side for any storm ≥2”. The list of mean dates with S.D. for first storms up to the 12” threshold at our site is below for reference: Storm size: mean date of first occurrence in season Trace: 10/21 ± 7 days Measurable: 10/27 ± 11 days ≥1”: 11/8 ± 15 days ≥2”: 11/24 ± 11 days ≥3”: 11/27 ± 12 days ≥4”: 11/27 ± 12 days ≥6”: 11/29 ± 14 days ≥8”: 12/11 ± 21 days ≥10”: 12/12 ± 21 days ≥12”: 12/31 ± 33 days

Yeah, it’s at just about 5” now and the overnight stuff was cleared away this morning. The snowfall rate has tapered down a bit now, but you can see that great northwest flow into the area:

It’s really pounding in that band that is affecting the area – when I checked the cam at 8:30 A.M. there was about an 1.5” new, but by 9:30 A.M. there was about 4-5” new.