Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,509
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

Spring Banter & General Discussion/Observations


CapturedNature

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
9 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Any reports further north? It seemed like that area got smoked relative to other parts of the state. Anything further west in the Monads?  The winds had to be above 70 at the height. DIT approved.

Definitely DIT approved winds. To do that kind of damage to that many trees, I'm starting to think 70+ range. If you just go off the EF scale damage indicators, snapping those trunks would be pushing 80 or 90 mph. I know there was a Facebook post on the NHEC where someone claimed a friend hit 109 on their home anemometer in the Route 109 area. Now there could be any number of issues with that sensor, but it's in the ballpark. 

I feel like we would need elevation like the Front Range to get those triple digit wind accelerations, but really we had like a 70 knots LLJ, so it wouldn't take much acceleration to get into some big numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, OceanStWx said:

Definitely DIT approved winds. To do that kind of damage to that many trees, I'm starting to think 70+ range. If you just go off the EF scale damage indicators, snapping those trunks would be pushing 80 or 90 mph. I know there was a Facebook post on the NHEC where someone claimed a friend hit 109 on their home anemometer in the Route 109 area. Now there could be any number of issues with that sensor, but it's in the ballpark. 

I feel like we would need elevation like the Front Range to get those triple digit wind accelerations, but really we had like a 70 knots LLJ, so it wouldn't take much acceleration to get into some big numbers.

I mean who knows...you got that acceleration....precip falling into a drying layer etc. We gust. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/20/2017 at 0:06 PM, jbenedet said:

I follow this logic, but how do we explain the superior performance of the mesos outside of 24 hr?  Or was this a case of the mesos being right for the wrong reason(s) (excluding the convection trend inside 24 hrs) ? 

I still have suspicion that the early occlusion of the h500 low relative to the coastal surface reflection played a significant role in the modeling error. Is it possible that synoptic wave development via packing of the thickness gradient leading to positive feedback and further surface pressure falls was adversely affected/disrupted  by the premature occlusion? This then lead to the best surface pressure falls being further west, in an area collocated with the deepest convection? 

It could be right for the wrong reasons. Convection certainly would tend to pump up heights and send it west. But the models also had a lot of convection in their output, so I suspect that was already baked in.

But a stronger northern stream, that wasn't always modeled. And that combined with convection might have been enough to get the ultimate solution to come in west of consensus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CoastalWx said:

I mean who knows...you got that acceleration....precip falling into a drying layer etc. We gust. 

It's about as good an example of downslope winds I've seen in our area. As far as reporting goes anyway. We have very little measured verification, except for the fact that MWN hit 138 I think. If they popped 138, 2000 feet lower certainly could have been pushing 100 mph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OceanStWx said:

The people are very excited about it.

We are actually taking a closer look at the data to see if we can confirm downslope or not.

Nice.

I don't think I mentioned it, but there was a dramatic picture of a flipped plane at the Moultonborough airport in the Laconia Daily Sun.

Though, it was one of those little planes I could probably flip by hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, eekuasepinniW said:

Nice.

I don't think I mentioned it, but there was a dramatic picture of a flipped plane at the Moultonborough airport in the Laconia Daily Sun.

Though, it was one of those little planes I could probably flip by hand.

To me this is definitely a case of: let's figure out what happened so we don't miss it again.

Because we definitely missed it this time around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, OceanStWx said:

To me this is definitely a case of: let's figure out what happened so we don't miss it again.

Because we definitely missed it this time around.

We need some more pictures.  Would love some images to go with this discussion.  Someone has to have a gallery somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since we are bantering about the blizzard, here is a picture I took during the storm.  I took the drone up today so I could accurately measure the distance to the trees behind that apple tree.  It was 300 feet to my back deck. You can barely see some other trees behind the rock that were a bit further.   Other than perhaps a brief snow squall this is the hardest synoptic snow I have seen.  Even so I only got about a foot.  I can't imagine what 4-6" per hour snows would be.  

 

 I was curious about what the real visibility was.  People say, it's a whiteout, zero vis.   I have never seen visibility less than what it was during this storm.  

Blizzard 3 14 2017.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, wxeyeNH said:

Since we are bantering about the blizzard, here is a picture I took during the storm.  I took the drone up today so I could accurately measure the distance to the trees behind that apple tree.  It was 300 feet to my back deck. You can barely see some other trees behind the rock that were a bit further.   Other than perhaps a brief snow squall this is the hardest synoptic snow I have seen.  Even so I only got about a foot.  I can't imagine what 4-6" per hour snows would be.  

 

 I was curious about what the real visibility was.  People say, it's a whiteout, zero vis.   I have never seen visibility less than what it was during this storm.  

Blizzard 3 14 2017.jpg

You can also use Google Earth to get super precise distance measurements. That apple tree is 63' away from the closest corner of your deck.  The rock by the pond is 181' away.  My deck is 75,179' from yours.

I'm envious of your yard.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, eekuasepinniW said:

You can also use Google Earth to get super precise distance measurements. That apple tree is 63' away from the closest corner of your deck.  The rock by the pond is 181' away.  My deck is 75,179' from yours.

I'm envious of your yard.

 

lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eekuasepinniW said:

You can also use Google Earth to get super precise distance measurements. That apple tree is 63' away from the closest corner of your deck.  The rock by the pond is 181' away.  My deck is 75,179' from yours.

I'm envious of your yard.

 

Wow eek. I've used Google Earth for distances of miles but I've never used it on my property to measure within feet that is very cool feature. I'm going to have to use it for some of my further away Pines to get a good sense of exactly how far things are thanks

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...