bluewave Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 JJA has a chance at finishing with at least a slightly negative departure for the NYC-LGA-JFK-EWR summer average temperature. June......+0.8 July........-0.4 August...-1.7 so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnoSki14 Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 JJA has a chance at finishing with at least a slightly negative departure for the NYC-LGA-JFK-EWR summer average temperature. June......+0.8 July........-0.4 August...-1.7 so far I didn't even think that was possible anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 I didn't even think that was possible anymore. To come in slightly below normal when compared to the warmest 30 year average on record? Yea I think it's been 12 years since that last happened. What an accomplishment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntenseBlizzard2014 Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 I'm starting to question about extended heat in September now. It's looking less likely now for extended heat now. The main reason for this is because the amount of heatwaves that occurred at NYC in September is 10. This was since the time Central Park started observing weather back in 1871. The amount of heatwaves back in August was staggering in comparison to September (80 heatwaves). So if we are going to have any heatwaves, the remaining 14 days of month will be perfect for that. After that, it's going to be very tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doncat Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Temp maybe over performed a bit today finally, making it to 85 here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 I'm starting to question about extended heat in September now. It's looking less likely now for extended heat now. The main reason for this is because the amount of heatwaves that occurred at NYC in September is 10. This was since the time Central Park started observing weather back in 1871. The amount of heatwaves back in August was staggering in comparison to September (80 heatwaves). So if we are going to have any heatwaves, the remaining 14 days of month will be perfect for that. After that, it's going to be very tough. 90 Yeah, my guess is that there will be no official heatwave at Central Park in 2014. The two 90 days in a row back in July should be the max this year. The last time that I could find three 90 degree days in a row at Central Park beginning on or after September 1st on was in 1985. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle W Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 most days 90 or better for September in KNYC... 8 in 1961 7 in 1970 7 in 1983 6 in 1895 6 in 1898 5 in 1914 5 in 1915 5 in 1931 5 in 1941 plus 2 in October 4 in 1937 4 in 1942 4 in 1953 4 in 1973 3 in 2010 1993 1985 plus other years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 most days 90 or better for September in KNYC... 8 in 1961 7 in 1970 7 in 1983 6 in 1895 6 in 1898 5 in 1914 5 in 1915 5 in 1931 5 in 1941 plus 2 in October 4 in 1937 4 in 1942 4 in 1953 4 in 1973 3 in 2010 1993 1985 plus other years... For some unknown reason, September is the only month of the year at NYC with no record daily highs in the 2000's so far. We have to go all the way back to 1991 for a record high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailMan06 Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Yeah, my guess is that there will be no official heatwave at Central Park in 2014. The two 90 days in a row back in July should be the max this year. The last time that I could find three 90 degree days in a row at Central Park beginning on or after September 1st on was in 1985. When was the last year the park never experienced a heat wave? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forkyfork Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 central park's ASOS isn't sited properly. it's useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEXtreme Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 central park's ASOS isn't sited properly. it's useless. And the ones near the Tarmac are sited properly too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doncat Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 And the ones near the Tarmac are sited properly too?I like the one at linden airport... on google earth there is a helicopter not far away on a taxi way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEG NAO Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 add to that that many reporting stations - Newark being an example have not reached 90 yet this month and now we should start watching for no 90 degree readings in August 2014 - the GFS through the 25th does not reach 90 - even 2009 had a few 90 degree days in August at Newark - anyone know when the last time Newark did not reach 90 in August ? http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KEWR/2014/8/2/MonthlyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA Looks like the chances of no 90 degree days in August at Newark and many other stations in the region are quite high now - anybody know when the last time we had no 90 degree days in August ? http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KEWR/2014/8/17/MonthlyHistory.html http://wxweb.meteostar.com/sample/sample.shtml?text=kewr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Even Philly which also has a record going back to the 1870's like NYC has a lack of September record heat for the 2000's. The Best Philly could do since 2000 was a single record high tie. The last new record high for Philly in September was in 1998. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BucksCO_PA Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Even Philly which also has a record going back to the 1870's like NYC has a lack of September record heat for the 2000's. The Best Philly could do since 2000 was a single record high tie. The last new record high for Philly in September was in 1998. Screen shot 2014-08-18 at 7.30.54 AM.png For Philly lack of record heat yes however overall warmth is a completely different story, since 9/2000 the SEPT average at Philadelphia is 70.1 degrees - warmest of any SEPT period on record, approaching 2 degrees warmer than SEPT during the decade of the 80's. Three years, 2002, 2005 & 2010 are among the top 10 warmest SEPT's on record & 2007 is tied for 11th. When you hit 96 on 9/1/2010 & the record is 97 it's pretty toasty for that time of year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 For Philly lack of record heat yes however overall warmth is a completely different story, since 9/2000 the SEPT average at Philadelphia is 70.1 degrees - warmest of any SEPT period on record, approaching 2 degrees warmer than SEPT during the decade of the 80's. Three years, 2002, 2005 & 2010 are among the top 10 warmest SEPT's on record & 2007 is tied for 11th. When you hit 96 on 9/1/2010 & the record is 97 it's pretty toasty for that time of year. Same story here. Despite the overall warmth those years, they can't touch the record heat of the earlier years. Warmest September readings Philly: 102...1882 100...1953 98.....1983 98.....1980 97.....1983 97.....1973 97.....1932 97.....1895 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forkyfork Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 And the ones near the Tarmac are sited properly too?they're sited on open grass 100 feet from any obstacles so yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEXtreme Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 they're sited on open grass 100 feet from any obstacles so yes 100 feet only? How many feet were they away from obstacles 60 years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 And the ones near the Tarmac are sited properly too? Manhattan is a giant tarmac, so yes those stations are more representative of what millions of people actually experience. Have you ever been to New York? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forkyfork Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 irrelevant question, NE. this is improper siting and renders the asos useless. from june 2013: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 100 feet only? How many feet were they away from obstacles 60 years ago? I don't know if you realize that you're arguing against UHI right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle W Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 there isn't a perfect observation sight in NYC being used...either it's near tar and cement or shaded by trees... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isotherm Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 The airports are usually good spots for weather stations, as it's difficult to find a location sufficiently displaced from obstructions in urban/suburban environments. As long as the station is sited in the grass, 100ft from a paved surface, it's OK. http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/coop/standard.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDMK6GLI Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 irrelevant question, NE. this is improper siting and renders the asos useless. from june 2013: That is useless placement. Why would it be placed there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isotherm Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 That is useless placement. Why would it be placed there? Because there's probably no other location in all of Manhattan that fits the bill of being 100ft+ from a paved surface (and/or sufficiently displaced from vertical obstructions). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 Manhattan is a giant tarmac, so yes those stations are more representative of what millions of people actually experience. Have you ever been to New York? None of those sites are useful for your area or a lot of Queens, Staten Island and the Bronx, where millions live. Central Park and LGA are the most accurate for these areas. While Central Park is useless for most of Manhattan, it's very useful for the suburban parts of NYC's boroughs. For this year, Central Park seems VERY accurate, if you compare it to LGA. The 2 stations have similar temp stats and figures. I think the NWS tweaked the ASOS because I haven't noticed any issues at all this year so far and MANY times Central Park was the warmest station. Warmer then EWR even on several instances, over the past 45 days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 there isn't a perfect observation sight in NYC being used...either it's near tar and cement or shaded by trees... But the majority of NYC residents live in the cement, not the trees. So places like LGA are representative of the area. LGA came first, then the weather station. So the tarmac was always there in some fashion. As Queens built up around the airport the temps went up (this is not including general temp rises from global warming.) NEextreme is saying the station is improperly placed, but technically it isn't because it has 100 feet of clearing and grass all around. And it still represents the majority of the people. For me where LGA fails is at night. Because I live in a almost suburban like part of Queens my lows are practically always lower than LGA's. But for most of the city LGA is just fine. So it's representative of the majority of the people and it's properly sited as per the NWS. Central Park doesn't meet either one of those conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 None of those sites are useful for your area or a lot of Queens, Staten Island and the Bronx, where millions live. Central Park and LGA are the most accurate for these areas. While Central Park is useless for most of Manhattan, it's very useful for the suburban parts of NYC's boroughs. For this year, Central Park seems VERY accurate, if you compare it to LGA. The 2 stations have similar temp stats and figures. I agree, I wrote something similar in my last post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isotherm Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 None of those sites are useful for your area or a lot of Queens, Staten Island and the Bronx, where millions live. Central Park and LGA are the most accurate for these areas. While Central Park is useless for most of Manhattan, it's very useful for the suburban parts of NYC's boroughs. For this year, Central Park seems VERY accurate, if you compare it to LGA. The 2 stations have similar temp stats and figures. I think the NWS tweaked the ASOS because I haven't noticed any issues at all this year so far and MANY times Central Park was the warmest station. Warmer then EWR even on several instances, over the past 45 days. I agree that Central Park is more representative of suburban/rural nearby areas. Mentioned in a post awhile back that NYC's 38 90 degree days in 2010 was almost exactly in line with what I recorded. The airport stations of EWR, LGA and JFK represent that vast majority of New Yorkers due to their urban residences. Those of us in more suburban areas will obviously fall short of the extreme highs, and tend to cool off more at night as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 I think that the reason that NYC and LGA have been close this year is due to the strong southerly flow during our warm days where the sea breeze pushed all the way to LGA. If there was more of a SW to W flow like recent summers, LGA then would be warmer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.