Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,502
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Weathernoob335
    Newest Member
    Weathernoob335
    Joined

NNE Winter Part 3


mreaves

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I have not been paying attention to this weekend but just looked at the 12Z gfs.  Looks like a slug of moisture will be passing through and it would be cold enough for snow in NNE. This would be Saturday night, more than 4 days out, so I would not put much stock in it working out but something to watch I guess.

For some reason it feels like it is later in the week already.  I guess it isn't Thursday yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moved the last half-cord of split wood onto the porch Saturday, which should last for about 1,000 HDDs, and the pile that had been there before should get me thru the first week of April. Late May cutoffs with rainy 40s may require me to work up some of the 6-foot stuff now well-buried in white. One hopes the days with HDDs in the 50s and 60s end today - from only the non-recording indoor-outdoor instrument, my low this morning looked very similar to yesterday's.

MPV

December...20.9F (-1.9 from normal)

January...14.8F (-1.1 from normal)

February...16.2F (-2.4 from normal)

March...15.4F (-12.0 from normal)

MBY (based on records beginning 1998-99)

DEC....15.6 (-6.2)

JAN.....11.2 (-2.9)

FEB.....13.9 (-3.9)

MAR 1-24...16.0 (-10.4)

This is my first year that all four months were at least 2F below the avg.

thats impressive, thanks for sharing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Higher elevations about the same" ... not from that map.

 

I guess higher elevations may need some clarifying...but like Nittany showed, I just looked at my notes and Mansfield's snowpack is actually fairly similar.  There was more liquid in the snowpack at this time last year.

 

Speaking of more liquid in the snowpack...right now we are at around 18" per the last snow survey.  To contrast this was April 16th last year...just an astonishing amount of water in the snowpack.  This goes down as "ripe"...but in order to get near this we'll need to pick up 6-10" of QPF between now and mid-April and contain it all in the snowpack. 

 

Around 64" depth at the 3,000ft bench (you can see the 4,000ft+ ridgeline in the background).

 

 

Last year mid-April contained an astonishing 26" of liquid eqiv...yes, Mount Mansfield here manages to max out the scale and start going around for lap number 2 on the dial.

 

 

 

 

I usually think by "higher elevations" they are talking that 2,000-4,000ft elevation band.  This season the biggest difference in snowpack is from 2,000ft or 1,500ft and lower...technically still "lower elevations" around here.  Depends if you are talking "inhabited" elevations though, but in terms of snowmelt and hydro, the uninhabited areas matter just as much in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Higher elevations about the same" ... not from that map.

 

 

Mount Mansfield:

 

  85.0 2014-03-25  

  82.0 2013-03-25

 

 

I guess higher elevations may need some clarifying...but like Nittany showed, I just looked at my notes and Mansfield's snowpack is actually fairly similar.  There was more liquid in the snowpack at this time last year.

 

Speaking of more liquid in the snowpack...right now we are at around 18" per the last snow survey.  To contrast this was April 16th last year...just an astonishing amount of water in the snowpack.  This goes down as "ripe"...but in order to get near this we'll need to pick up 6-10" of QPF between now and mid-April and contain it all in the snowpack. 

 

Around 64" depth at the 3,000ft bench (you can see the 4,000ft+ ridgeline in the background).

 

Last year mid-April contained an astonishing 26" of liquid eqiv...yes, Mount Mansfield here manages to max out the scale and start going around for lap number 2 on the dial.

 

 

I usually think by "higher elevations" they are talking that 2,000-4,000ft elevation band.  This season the biggest difference in snowpack is from 2,000ft or 1,500ft and lower...technically still "lower elevations" around here.  Depends if you are talking "inhabited" elevations though, but in terms of snowmelt and hydro, the uninhabited areas matter just as much in this case.

I don't want to put words in  danstorm's mouth but I think he may have possibly thought the phrase "Higher elevations about the same" meant that the valleys have the same snowpack depth as the higher elevations instead of as compared to last year at this time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The monthly March temperature for BTV is presently 19.9F.  BTV NWS lists the lowest monthly temperature for March at 20.7F, set way back in 1916.  This weekend looks to be warmer than normal (especially night time lows), so the monthly temperature will increase.  But enough to move into 2nd place? 

 

Year Average Temp (F)

1916: 20.7

1912: 21.9

1984: 21.9

1923: 22.0

1926: 22.5

1900: 23.2

1950: 23.4

1956: 23.7

1937: 23.8:

1941: 23.8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The monthly March temperature for BTV is presently 19.9F.  BTV NWS lists the lowest monthly temperature for March at 20.7F, set way back in 1916.  This weekend looks to be warmer than normal (especially night time lows), so the monthly temperature will increase.  But enough to move into 2nd place? 

 

Year Average Temp (F)

1916: 20.7

1912: 21.9

1984: 21.9

1923: 22.0

1926: 22.5

1900: 23.2

1950: 23.4

1956: 23.7

1937: 23.8:

1941: 23.8

 

Here are the five coldest Marchs for Farmington COOP, 1893 on:

1984....20.77

1926....21.53

1916....21.85

1923....21.98

1967....22.26

 

I don't have up-to-yesterday records for Farmington, but thru 3/25 my average is 15.54.  Using daily means estimated at 20 for today and tomorrow, then 30-35 for each of the final four days, I would finish March at about 18.2.  Since my first March here (1999), I've averaged 1.9F lower than Farmington in March.  Using some extrapolation, this year has a very good chance to be their coldest March in 122 years of record.  Respectable.

 

PF, I'm a bit surprised at how much lower the Mt's SWE is this year compared to last, even considering the thaws and earlier snow drought.  This time last year my SWE was 6-7" max.  This year, with my most recent core of 9.28" on 3/15 and 1.44" (all but 0.16" was snow) coming since and with max temp of 37 in that period, I'm probably 4" ahead of last year.  Similar latitude, quite a difference, with much of it probably due to pack-holding CAD working well this winter in my neighborhood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to put words in  danstorm's mouth but I think he may have possibly thought the phrase "Higher elevations about the same" meant that the valleys have the same snowpack depth as the higher elevations instead of as compared to last year at this time?

 

Nah, I meant that the snowpack at higher elevations looked to be greater than last year.

 

However, to this lowlander, the definition of higher elevations is weaker than you hearty mountain folks.  I wasn't thinking Mansfield and similar elevations, more like 1500+... and the map doesn't show topography, I was going by my understanding of topo patterns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, I meant that the snowpack at higher elevations looked to be greater than last year.

However, to this lowlander, the definition of higher elevations is weaker than you hearty mountain folks. I wasn't thinking Mansfield and similar elevations, more like 1500+... and the map doesn't show topography, I was going by my understanding of topo patterns.

Yeah it's all in the context of what you think higher elevations means...but in general the snowpack is pretty similar up in the 1,500-2,000ft and higher range to last year. The increase you see on the map is generally in that 500-1500ft range, noteably the CT Valley between NH/VT as well as most of the mountain towns that reside at that elevation range. However around here 1,200ft can be "lower elevations" if you are in the context of all terrain and landmass. If talking purely inhabited areas, then I'd put 1200ft as a higher elevation as inhabitants generally end at 1500ft for the most part aside from a few weenie spots that can go up to 2,300ft or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it's all in the context of what you think higher elevations means...but in general the snowpack is pretty similar up in the 1,500-2,000ft and higher range to last year. The increase you see on the map is generally in that 500-1500ft range, noteably the CT Valley between NH/VT as well as most of the mountain towns that reside at that elevation range. However around here 1,200ft can be "lower elevations" if you are in the context of all terrain and landmass. If talking purely inhabited areas, then I'd put 1200ft as a higher elevation as inhabitants generally end at 1500ft for the most part aside from a few weenie spots that can go up to 2,300ft or so.

Yeah, the topo maps and Google earth put me at 1250' or so but there is decent population up over 1500' which then thins out up to 1800' - 1900'.  By that time you're on dirt roads and out of the village of Upper Graniteville.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the topo maps and Google earth put me at 1250' or so but there is decent population up over 1500' which then thins out up to 1800' - 1900'.  By that time you're on dirt roads and out of the village of Upper Graniteville.

 

Yeah, I'm at about 875' and that's just not good enough for me.  My real estate agent thinks I'm nuts, I'm pretty sure, as I've told her I won't look at a new place below 1400'-1500'...lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm at about 875' and that's just not good enough for me.  My real estate agent thinks I'm nuts, I'm pretty sure, as I've told her I won't look at a new place below 1400'-1500'...lol.

Worcester and parts of Middlesex are good for that.  Also, if you go out County Road, past Maple Corners into Woodbury, it's not quite at that elevation but they get a ton of snow and have crazy retention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worcester and parts of Middlesex are good for that.  Also, if you go out County Road, past Maple Corners into Woodbury, it's not quite at that elevation but they get a ton of snow and have crazy retention.

 

Thanks, mreaves, I've been eying the Middlesex area just west of me north of I-89, the area up County Road you mentioned up toward the Sabin Pond area, and even the west slopes of the Worcester range.  The latter area is where poster ono lives, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 Some rare sightings of a powderfreak today... man was it good out there.  Snowiest March in at least the last 5 years on the mountain with still one week left.  I may take a lot of photos, but I can ski for the camera too ;)

 

1557706_10152102501948579_453874494_n.jp

 

1002672_10101836734541120_1138107201_n.j

 

1966755_10101836732664880_282082440_n.jp

 

 

 

Those are great pics PF; man, what a day it was out there on Sunday.  It wasn’t made great by being the day after a huge storm, although a fresh half foot certainly helped, but the 20 inches in 72 hours, on top of previous feet with no thaws will definitely do it.  Skiing the low elevation, south facing terrain above Meadows in full equinox sun, and having it stay fluffy and bottomless in the afternoon tells you just what sort of conditions came together.  I couldn’t say enough to extol the virtues of just how good that snow was – I spent the whole first paragraph of my trip report from Sunday talking about it.  Here’s an excerpt, and folks can use the linked text to the report if they want to read more:

 

“Today will simply have to go down as one of the best days of the season at Stowe; I just can’t see how it wouldn’t.  Another half foot of snow fell overnight, bringing snow totals to 20 inches in the past 72 hours, and that’s on top of the multiple feet of snow that have fallen in the past three weeks.  Off piste, people push their ski poles into the snow and they go up to and beyond the handle before they hit a firm surface, and the depth of the snowpack at the Mt. Mansfield Stake is approaching 90 inches…”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PF I love ya man. Keep up the passion. All joking aside....your passion is palpable.

Haha I'm a little crazy about it... But I grew up knowing I wanted to ski a lot and watch it snow.

Thanks and yeah, I enjoy the joking on here. We've got a good core group of posters from NNE and SNE in here, and still one of my goals is to go to one of the SNE get-togethers.

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...