Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,508
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

NESIS Ranking - Blizzard of 2016

dmb8021

By dmb8021,
in New York City Metro

NESIS Category  

108 members have voted

  1. 1. What NESIS category will the blizzard of 2016 receive?


Recommended Posts

Guest Pamela

Guest Pamela

Posted
Posted

2016 was definitely a more impressive storm than 2006 for it's aerial coverage of large amounts...among other non-snow factors as well.

 

But the point still stands about how official measurements are made today vs decades ago. You can probably cut about 15% off the totals of current day KU monsters to get what the measurements would have been back in the day. This is ignoring whether one thinks the airport totals were "right" or not based on other nearby amateur measurements. We've all had that discussion before. But all else equal, the numbers will be higher clearing every 6 hours.

 

So we are taking off 4 to 5 inches with what I would deem very sound reasoning...reducing the reality to a 2 foot storm.

 

Impressive, but not earth shaking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 202
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Guest Pamela

Guest Pamela

Posted
Posted

 

 

Even cutting off the 15% you mentioned would give Queens (one of the most heavily populated areas in the world) 24"-28" (using LGA's 28.1" and JFK's 30").

 

Taking 15% off 30" does not yield 28". The population is quite besides the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ag3

ag3

Posted
Posted

Agreed, but with 2016, snow depth measurements almost matched the 6 hour measurement totals.

I believe LGA reported 26" of snow depth the following morning (28.1" using the 6 hour method). The other stations were close to their official measurements as well.

 

Even cutting off the 15% you mentioned would give Queens (one of the most heavily populated areas in the world) 24"-28" (using LGA's 28.1" and JFK's 30").

 

 

Page 12 of the analysis,http://www.nws.noaa.gov/os/assessments/pdfs/2016_blizzard_snowfall_evaluation.pdf

 

 

LGA: 28.2" official with 27" peak depth

JFK: 30.6" with 28" peak depth

NYC: 26.8" (now 27.5) with peak depth of 22"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted

Agreed, but with 2016, snow depth measurements almost matched the 6 hour measurement totals.

I believe LGA reported 26" of snow depth the following morning (28.1" using the 6 hour method). The other stations were close to their official measurements as well.

 

Even cutting off the 15% you mentioned would give Queens (one of the most heavily populated areas in the world) 24"-28" (using LGA's 28.1" and JFK's 30").

 

Yeah I'm not saying the storm wasn't impressive...it just may not be more impressive than a storm like, say, December 1947 for NYC metro. Or 1888.

 

So when we talk about record books, the differences due to the measurements might matter. It is definitely a top 3-5 storm though for that metro area...I don't think I'd put Feb '06 in that category though since the heavy snowfall was in a much narrower band.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rjay

Rjay

Posted
Posted

There were verified blizzard conditions for 8+ hours at KJFK and KLGA.

For LI, it was just a regular major snowstorm. But for the NYC Metro itself it was a top 2 snowstorm with only 1996 as the other argument, IMO.

What? It was my greatest snowfall I've had at my location.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SEC

SEC

Posted
Posted

Amazing northern cutoff on this one.  "just" 14 inches here 60 miles northeast of the Jackpots of 30.  (and even less 30 miles north of here on the order of 3-6 inches)

 

I'm 90 miles northwest of the City and I got nothing that day. Zilch. NADA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SEC

SEC

Posted
Posted

Had to be brutal to watch that.   I know Poughkeepsie got zip.   We skied Thunder Ridge in Paterson the day after and it looked like maybe 3 or 4 there.

 

It was brutal, Brian. I lived in Brooklyn most of my life (over 55 years) and had to listen to my older brother brag about how great the 1947 storm was. This would have been my redemption (if I was still in Brooklyn). Watching it all on tv was tough knowing that I was missing out on it.

 

I suppose I have only myself to blame. I bought snowtires this past season after two bad winters up here in the Catskills. We ended up with about (only) 12 inches of snow. .  :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
psv88

psv88

Posted
Posted

Sorry. I should've said SW Nassau and most of Nassau got clobbered too.

 

Western Suffolk did well...my area got around 20 i believe, south of me in SW Suffolk got close to 24"

 

NorthshoreWX who measured 17(?) is about 10 miles to my east, so there was a sharp cutoff in western suffolk as well.

 

So yes, Nassau and West had a record snowfall, but western suffolk got around 20, which is definitely not just a normal major snowstorm, as you said...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
uncle W

uncle W

Posted
Posted

December 1947 had 25" of snow on the ground...most of any storm on record...1" was on the ground before the storm...1888 could have been higher but there is no record of snow depth after the storm...

deepest snow cover in Central Park...some measurements are estimated...it is not known what was the deepest snow depth at any given time...I think December 1947 or February 1961 is # 1 and 2...snow depth measurements are different times of the day in some past years...nine of fifteen years on the list are from 1994 to the present...

12/27/1947...25"....1" snow depth before the storm...26.4" storm...

02/04/1961...24"....8" snow depth before the storm...17.4" storm...

01/27/2011...23"....6" snow depth before the storm...19.0" storm...

02/11/1994...22"....9" snow depth before the storm...12.8" storm...

01/24/2016...22"....no snow on the ground before the storm...27.5" storm...

02/27/2010...21"....no snow on the ground before the storm...20.9" storm...

02/12/2006...20"....no snow on the ground before the storm...26.8" storm...

02/11/1926...20"....8" snow depth before the storm...12.0" storm...

12/27/2010...20"....no snow on the ground before the storm...20.0" storm...

01/08/1996...20"....1" snow depth before the storm...20.2" storm...

03/13/1888...20"....no snow on the ground before the storm...21.0" storm...

02/13/1899...20"....5" on the ground before the storm...16.0" storm...

02/17/2003...19"....trace of snow on the ground before the storm...19.8" storm...

03/07/2015...19"....12" snow depth before the storm...7.5" storm...

02/12/1983...19"....1" snow depth before the storm...17.6" storm...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mitchel Volk

Mitchel Volk

Posted
Posted

I did a study on this, by reading news paper article about the 1947 storm.  In those articles they talk to people who experience the 1888 storm.  They think that the 1947 storm was greater.  In addition drifting was far greater during the 1888 storm so you could have taken more impressive photos from that storm.  The pictures from the 1947 storm looked less impressive than the 2016 storm, so me me it is king city wide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
masomenos

masomenos

Posted
Posted

where I am in southern Staten Island we didn't get as much snow as Central Park...We were in light to moderate snow most of the day...it snowed very hard in the early morning and evening hours here...

I was in Monmouth County for the storm...same deal. The snow quality was generally very poor.

 

2006 is still king for me as far as snowfall rates go...I'll never forget those 3 hours of continuous thundersnow. Despite all the great storms we've had since then, nothing quite has approached that level of intensity. It was off the charts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
masomenos

masomenos

Posted
Posted

I did a study on this, by reading news paper article about the 1947 storm.  In those articles they talk to people who experience the 1888 storm.  They think that the 1947 storm was greater.  In addition drifting was far greater during the 1888 storm so you could have taken more impressive photos from that storm.  The pictures from the 1947 storm looked less impressive than the 2016 storm, so me me it is king city wide.

Yeah, I've seen different pictures over the years of that storm and can't say that I'm overly impressed compared to some of the other big dogs. That storm was kind of like 2006 in a way--pretty small area of big snows. I think NJ really got clobbered though if I'm not mistaken. I believe it actually owns the state record for storm total.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Allsnow

Allsnow

Posted
Posted

In my lifetime, since 1981, the  Jan. 2016 Blizzard was the greatest snow depth and snow storm for the NYC metro area. 1996 was close, but not quite. 30"+ amounts were verified by an official station (JFK) and all the major stations recorded 27"+ for 2016.

 

Snow removal has improved dramatically over the last 15 years as well. No comparison to the 1980s or 1990s.

this

 

 

Pretty embarrassing for nyc, ewr, and dca. How the heck do you loose a snowboard lolz 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
uncle W

uncle W

Posted
Posted

I was born in March 1949 and grew up listening to stories about the big snow of Dec 1947 from my mother, aunts and uncles...My mother was pregnant with me during the December 1948 storm with 16" in Central Park and 19.6" in Battery Park...She fell walking from the train and was helped by a passer by...She was lucky and so was I...Maybe this is why I like snow so much...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
famartin

famartin

Posted
Posted

EWR has been measuring snow hourly since 1996.

Almost all their snow records should be null and void.

The report says they *may* have been.  Cross checking totals versus depth shows that most of the totals they've reported seem legit.  They will be looked at closely by Dave Robinson among others; I suspect they will mostly check out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
famartin

famartin

Posted
Posted

Larger storms have been disproportionately affected by the change in measuring techniques as well. A 27" storm in 2016 or even 1996 would probably be like a 23" storm 70 years ago.

 

Snow measuring is tricky.  The report mentions IAD's daily depth of 28", but our max depth was actually 29" at 6Z on the 24th (it settled a bit from 6Z-12Z), and our 6-hour clearing total was 29.3", so that's really close.  

 

Measuring snow is like modeling the atmosphere... the longer and larger (the storm or the model), the more time and space within which errors multiply.  Blowing and drifting make total measurements increasingly error prone as the total snowfall increases.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBG

JBG

Posted
Posted

Yeah I'm not saying the storm wasn't impressive...it just may not be more impressive than a storm like, say, December 1947 for NYC metro. Or 1888.

 

So when we talk about record books, the differences due to the measurements might matter. It is definitely a top 3-5 storm though for that metro area...I don't think I'd put Feb '06 in that category though since the heavy snowfall was in a much narrower band.

The optics of Mayor Lindsay, 1983, 1996 and Boxing Day were more dramatic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
famartin

famartin

Posted
Posted

I'm surprised it took until the end of April for them to realize the measurement was off.

 

Very impressive storm in the five boroughs with widespread 2 feet+ totals at many stations.  22 inches here.

 

It takes 2 months to write a report and get everyone interested to comment and then sign off on it.  Lets just say... I've known a lot more than you have known about this report for some time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Pamela

Guest Pamela

Posted
Posted

It takes 2 months to write a report and get everyone interested to comment and then sign off on it.  Lets just say... I've known a lot more than you have known about this report for some time.  

 

Congratulations on getting out of Nevada...sort of like being exiled to Elba...you are now at Dulles Field?

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...