Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,515
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    amirah5
    Newest Member
    amirah5
    Joined

Feb 23-24 OBS Thread


free_man

Recommended Posts

I think it was eduggs the other day who was poopooing this event and saying that you can't count on a weenie NORLUN band for heavy snows. I tried to tell him that synoptically this inverted trough would look much better for a larger area.

 

 

Yeah it seems a lot of people only remember the busted norlun events...this wasn't a norlun event. It was an inverted trough (a norlun is a specific type of inverted trough...a special case...for those who don't know) with a lot of synoptic support. We've had some pretty solid events from inverted troughs. They still aren't easy to forecast but they are better than trying to forecast a more purely norlun instability trough....and they produce much wider areas of moderate to heavy snow. March 12, 2005 was an inverted trough event here that produced nearly a foot and widespread warning totals in SNE. The coastal kind of escaped and upper air came in just on it's heels and saved the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Yeah it seems a lot of people only remember the busted norlun events...this wasn't a norlun event. It was an inverted trough (a norlun is a specific type of inverted trough...a special case...for those who don't know) with a lot of synoptic support. We've had some pretty solid events from inverted troughs. They still aren't easy to forecast but they are better than trying to forecast a more purely norlun instability trough....and they produce much wider areas of moderate to heavy snow. March 12, 2005 was an inverted trough event here that produced nearly a foot and widespread warning totals in SNE. The coastal kind of escaped and upper air came in just on it's heels and saved the day.

 

Heck 12/20/07 was an inv trough too.That was widespread snows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it was eduggs the other day who was poopooing this event and saying that you can't count on a weenie NORLUN band for heavy snows. I tried to tell him that synoptically this inverted trough would look much better for a larger area.

 

Yeah, I remember that, And socks tried to reinforce  those thoughts last night to

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck 12/20/07 was an inv trough too.That was widespread snows.

 

Yeah, that def had a bit more norlun in it though...moreso than this one anyway...but it was more widespread than a narrow band,

 

March 2, 1996 was another good example of an inverted trough with the coastal way offshore well outside the 40/70 benchmark that produced widesprerad heavy snow for SNE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it seems a lot of people only remember the busted norlun events...this wasn't a norlun event. It was an inverted trough (a norlun is a specific type of inverted trough...a special case...for those who don't know) with a lot of synoptic support. We've had some pretty solid events from inverted troughs. They still aren't easy to forecast but they are better than trying to forecast a more purely norlun instability trough....and they produce much wider areas of moderate to heavy snow. March 12, 2005 was an inverted trough event here that produced nearly a foot and widespread warning totals in SNE. The coastal kind of escaped and upper air came in just on it's heels and saved the day.

 

That was key, This was not strictly a norlun, Those are where you hope you geet lucky enough to end up under the firehose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks have short memories and they are quick to point out the phailed trough from a couple weeks back

 

 

Its understandable...nobody likes failed forecasts. I have had to suffer through the same issues with myself when I made some bad forecasts. Its hard to forget them. The same sentiment was prevalent before the blizzard earlier this month too...even many of us mets (including me) was skeptical of the Euro blizzard solution even after like 3-4 runs in a row when other guidance wasn't biting. We kept remembering the storms that didn't pan out and that the Euro showed a couple other phantoms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 How on God's Green Earth did they do so well downsloping from all directions? That's hard to believe.

 

For some weenie fun, here are a few of our higher coop totals that month.

 

78.9" Rumford, ME

83.2 York Pond, NH

88.3" Long Falls Dam, ME

89.0" Harris Station, ME

172.8" at the top of Mount Washington

 

Definitely noticeable the prevailing flow that month. These are all sites (besides the rockpile) that have high terrain directly to the NW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it was eduggs the other day who was poopooing this event and saying that you can't count on a weenie NORLUN band for heavy snows. I tried to tell him that synoptically this inverted trough would look much better for a larger area.

I was downplaying for SNE.  Felt the coastal would miss SE and the BL would taint Sat night.  Told Will I would go a little lower than his numbers and would go low for BOS.  Favored the northern ski country.  The jackpot zone was a little higher than I expected, but the spatial coverage was right on.  I think I was right to downplay when many people were starting their minimum at 6".   You lucked out, but looking at the snow reports, not everyone did. 

 

You can't count on mesocale features for widespread heavy snow.  You just can't.  It can not be modeled well enough yet to determine who gets hit and who misses.  I never referred to this setup as a weenie norlun band.  I argued for a more conservative forecast.  And when you compare what I was saying to the maps from 2 days ago, that seems like the right way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its understandable...nobody likes failed forecasts. I have had to suffer through the same issues with myself when I made some bad forecasts. Its hard to forget them. The same sentiment was prevalent before the blizzard earlier this month too...even many of us mets (including me) was skeptical of the Euro blizzard solution even after like 3-4 runs in a row when other guidance wasn't biting. We kept remembering the storms that didn't pan out and that the Euro showed a couple other phantoms.

 

 

Yeah, The blizzard, The Euro was rock solid for those 3-4 runs and then when it continued, That's when it really started getting many's attention, As before that it had been almost human on a few events so there was some doubt's early on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was downplaying for SNE.  Felt the coastal would miss SE and the BL would taint Sat night.  Told Will I would go a little lower than his numbers and would go low for BOS.  Favored the northern ski country.  The jackpot zone was a little higher than I expected, but the spatial coverage was right on.  I think I was right to downplay when many people were starting their minimum at 6".   You lucked out, but looking at the snow reports, not everyone did. 

 

You can't count on mesocale features for widespread heavy snow.  You just can't.  It can not be modeled well enough yet to determine who gets hit and who misses.  I never referred to this setup as a weenie norlun band.  I argued for a more conservative forecast.  And when you compare what I was saying to the maps from 2 days ago, that seems like the right way to go.

 

 

I think my 5-9/6-10 worked out very well for the ORH hills. I didn't expect much BL issues because of elevation and that is how it worked out. I agreed with you that lower down should be cautious. And FYI, Scott was poo-pooing this event for BOS for days

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3/4 last night1/4 today, why?

I didn't get squat last night(or it fell and melted while I slep which is totally possible).  Just surprised a few miles east towards you and you got snow last  night.

 

I did just go outside and see that I got about 1/4" tonight (had not been outside since 6:00 or so).  All together about 1/2" from this HUGE event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Approaching 2". Pretty much as expected, but I did not see the reason to be so down for area in Maine and NH on down to ORH. This wasn't mesoscale, you had larger scale synoptic features driving the snow....the inv trough was only part of the puzzle.

I told my buddy in Dorcester to expect 2" so now I feel good. Dedham is at about 2" as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think my 5-9/6-10 worked out very well for the ORH hills. I didn't expect much BL issues because of elevation and that is how it worked out. I agreed with you that lower down should be cautious. And FYI, Scott was poo-pooing this event for BOS for days

Your call worked out well locally. 

Scott's insinuation was that people (possible myself included) were poo pooing an event because they were not in the party.  I have missed most of the snow since December and this is the first decent threat that I argued for lower than consensus.  I think it was the right call here.  Temps and moisture barely came together for some, and it worked out nicely.  But this was not the widespread heavy snow for Mass that many were calling for a few days ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...WORCESTER COUNTY...
   STERLING               9.1  1031 PM  2/24  GENERAL PUBLIC
   BOYLSTON               8.3   618 PM  2/24  TRAINED SPOTTER
   HOLDEN                 7.0   920 PM  2/24  TRAINED SPOTTER
   LEOMINSTER             7.0   938 PM  2/24  TRAINED SPOTTER
   WESTMINSTER            6.5   629 PM  2/24  HAM RADIO
   WORCESTER              6.5   701 PM  2/24  AIRPORT
   HUBBARDSTON            6.5   942 PM  2/24  HAM RADIO
   ASHBURNHAM             6.5   514 PM  2/24  COOP OBSERVER
   GARDNER                6.0   812 PM  2/24  PUBLIC
   SHREWSBURY             5.8   657 PM  2/24  PUBLIC
   TEMPLETON              5.2   944 PM  2/24  NONE
   EAST TEMPLETON         4.2   714 PM  2/24  NONE
   MILFORD                3.3  1005 PM  2/24  NONE
   LEICESTER              3.2   119 PM  2/24  PUBLIC

 

 

 

I think 5-9/6-10 looked like a good forecast for the ORH hills. Esp since this report is not final as most totals will be bumped up before the final report. I'm not trying be confrontational with eduggs as he made some reasonable points about going that high for the ORH hills, I just disagreed and thought they wouldn't be much of a factor here, and much more of a factor lower down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your call worked out well locally.

Scott's insinuation was that people (possible myself included) were poo pooing an event because they were not in the party. I have missed most of the snow since December and this is the first decent threat that I argued for lower than consensus. I think it was the right call here. Temps and moisture barely came together for some, and it worked out nicely. But this was not the widespread heavy snow for Mass that many were calling for a few days ago.

Well you and Socks share that common denominator and regardless, it wasn't the right logic that you threw out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your call worked out well locally. 

Scott's insinuation was that people (possible myself included) were poo pooing an event because they were not in the party.  I have missed most of the snow since December and this is the first decent threat that I argued for lower than consensus.  I think it was the right call here.  Temps and moisture barely came together for some, and it worked out nicely.  But this was not the widespread heavy snow for Mass that many were calling for a few days ago.

 

 

That's exactly what it was though...a local call. I didn't forecast that for the coastal plain. You told me to go lower and that ORH does well on thump snows, not so much this type of stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...