Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,515
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    wigl5l6k
    Newest Member
    wigl5l6k
    Joined

Summer Doldrums Banter

Baroclinic Zone

By Baroclinic Zone,
in New England

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
powderfreak

powderfreak

Posted
Posted

HubbDave comes pretty much in line with MPM temps I bet.

Hubby 88F in line with other areas. MPM 84-85F?

I'm not trying to bust his balls, I love MPM, my winter QPF partner in Western New England. But if it was me, I'd be trying to figure out the same thing of why I'm different from other nearby areas. I'd wonder the same thing if he was 93F and everyone else was 88-89F.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted

Hubby 88F in line with other areas. MPM 84-85F?

I'm not trying to bust his balls, I love MPM, my winter QPF partner in Western New England. But if it was me, I'd be trying to figure out the same thing of why I'm different from other nearby areas. I'd wonder the same thing if he was 93F and everyone else was 88-89F.

 

Yeah I think some people take it personally when obs are questioned when it is not about questioning someone's integrity. Any good scientist should be skpetical of data that is a large outlier within a pretty good sample.

 

In order to verify an outlier obs, you first start eliminating potential biases in the obs. If you cannot eliminate them, then you are probably looking at a flawed obs. If you are able to effectively eliminate the potential biases/errors through tests and QC, then you have performed the scientific method well. That's what it is all about.

 

We do it all the time...not just for temps. I drove up route 31 through Holden and into Princeton the day after the Retro rainstorm in 2010 because Hubbdave, Subdude, and a few other posters were telling me they had like a foot of snow while I was sitting in northern ORH with 3"...I didn't think they were deliberately lying, but part of me was thinking maybe it was closer to 7-8" rather than 10-12"...but I drove up and found that it was indeed double digits. I was amazed. My skepticism was unfounded that time...but I checked for myself. Hell, Accordian Corey drove up winter hill this past April to see for himself the 1" of paste that fell while everyone else had nothing in the city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
powderfreak

powderfreak

Posted
Posted

Yeah I think some people take it personally when obs are questioned when it is not about questioning someone's integrity. Any good scientist should be skpetical of data that is a large outlier within a pretty good sample.

 

In order to verify an outlier obs, you first start eliminating potential biases in the obs. If you cannot eliminate them, then you are probably looking at a flawed obs. If you are able to effectively eliminate the potential biases/errors through tests and QC, then you have performed the scientific method well. That's what it is all about.

 

We do it all the time...not just for temps. I drove up route 31 through Holden and into Princeton the day after the Retro rainstorm in 2010 because Hubbdave, Subdude, and a few other posters were telling me they had like a foot of snow while I was sitting in northern ORH with 3"...I didn't think they were deliberately lying, but part of me was thinking maybe it was closer to 7-8" rather than 10-12"...but I drove up and found that it was indeed double digits. I was amazed. My skepticism was unfounded that time...but I checked for myself. Hell, Accordian Corey drove up winter hill this past April to see for himself the 1" of paste that fell while everyone else had nothing in the city.

 

Yeah its not personal, I'm just curious as to "why".  I'm not just trying to say "na na na MPM is a liar".  His temperature obviously is what it is at that site.  But you can't look at all the other sites and go, "the Berkshires at 1,000ft had a high of only 84F today." 

 

I've been doing more digging, as I'm curious, not just because I'm trying to be a d-bag. 

 

As I mused earlier, I wonder if his site as good afternoon shade or something like that.  Looking at the temperature graphs of other area sites, you can see what I'm speculating.

 

MPM's spot at 1,050ft hit 84F at 12:30pm, but then failed to rise at all during the entire afternoon.  From noontime onward, MPM's temperature held between 83 and 84.4 with no further rise in temperature.  Every other station I looked at, continued to climb upward all afternoon.

 

This is MPM's graph:

 

 

Looking at the most nearby station to him in Shelburne Falls (KMASHELB6) at 1,100ft, shows a similar temperature to him as of 12:30pm (84.2F at this station vs. 83.7F at MPM).

 

However, during the course of the afternoon, the KMASHELB6 continued to rise and hit a high of 89F more in line with what one would expect at that elevation given the airmass.

 

 

We'd have to hear from MPM, but I wonder if he gets afternoon shade at his instrument site, as the two Shelburne Falls sites were very close to each other through 12:30, but then deviated by 5F over the course of the afternoon.

 

Even right now, his site is back in line with the rest of the East Slopes now as the shadows grow longer and those earlier 87-91F temps fall back into the 82-85F range.  Its like when MADIS looks at a site and says its temperatures are quality in the evening, overnight, and morning, but is 2-3F too cold during the afternoon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ginx snewx

Ginx snewx

Posted
Posted

Yeah its not personal, I'm just curious as to "why".  I'm not just trying to say "na na na MPM is a liar".  His temperature obviously is what it is at that site.  But you can't look at all the other sites and go, "the Berkshires at 1,000ft had a high of only 84F today." 

 

I've been doing more digging, as I'm curious, not just because I'm trying to be a d-bag. 

 

As I mused earlier, I wonder if his site as good afternoon shade or something like that.  Looking at the temperature graphs of other area sites, you can see what I'm speculating.

 

MPM's spot at 1,050ft hit 84F at 12:30pm, but then failed to rise at all during the entire afternoon.  From noontime onward, MPM's temperature held between 83 and 84.4 with no further rise in temperature.  Every other station I looked at, continued to climb upward all afternoon.

 

This is MPM's graph:

 

attachicon.gifMPM2.jpg

 

Looking at the most nearby station to him in Shelburne Falls (KMASHELB6) at 1,100ft, shows a similar temperature to him as of 12:30pm (84.2F at this station vs. 83.7F at MPM).

 

However, during the course of the afternoon, the KMASHELB6 continued to rise and hit a high of 89F more in line with what one would expect at that elevation given the airmass.

 

attachicon.gifKMASHELB6.jpg

 

We'd have to hear from MPM, but I wonder if he gets afternoon shade at his instrument site, as the two Shelburne Falls sites were very close to each other through 12:30, but then deviated by 5F over the course of the afternoon.

 

Even right now, his site is back in line with the rest of the East Slopes now as the shadows grow longer and those earlier 87-91F temps fall back into the 82-85F range.  Its like when MADIS looks at a site and says its temperatures are quality in the evening, overnight, and morning, but is 2-3F too cold during the afternoon.

Not that it matters but the majority of us in rural areas are 75% shaded, wouldn't that better represent the actual air temp. I know what the official rules are so no lectures. Heavily forested areas are cooler by nature. Mike has stated before though he is in a field with trees on his perimeter. Its 87 here at work in the full sun, I know at my house its 100% shaded by trees and hills right now, the temp is 84 but that is the actual temp at my house. Just seems to me that local differences should be accounted for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted

Not that it matters but the majority of us in rural areas are 75% shaded, wouldn't that better represent the actual air temp. I know what the official rules are so no lectures. Heavily forested areas are cooler by nature. Mike has stated before though he is in a field with trees on his perimeter. Its 87 here at work in the full sun, I know at my house its 100% shaded by trees and hills right now, the temp is 84 but that is the actual temp at my house. Just seems to me that local differences should be accounted for.

 

 

The other temp obs beg to differ on that as being the reason. If 75% of the rural areas are shaded and thus much cooler than everyone else, then roughly 75% of the rural PWSs should match his reading. But they don't. His is exceptional in its cooler reading. Even when compared to other rural stations.

 

So perhaps there is another reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
powderfreak

powderfreak

Posted
Posted

splain this

 

We talked about that earlier...look at the elevation of some of those sites.  But if Hubb took that screen shot at the time he posted it, most sites had already been easing off their afternoon highs.  Yes it was 82-85F at Savoy, Plainfield, Windsor, etc but they are 1,800-2,200ft (essentially MRG's 2kft sites).  That should be 3-5F colder than MPM's elevation.

 

Ginxy, I asked you earlier, but can you honestly look at the big picture and the area observations, and the scientist in you doesn't want to figure out why?   You aren't intrigued as to how his temperature didn't rise at all this afternoon?  How it steadily went up through 12:30 and then just stopped completely while everyone else continued to rise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...