Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

Son of April Fool's Birch Bender


HoarfrostHubb

Recommended Posts

I'm thinking 3-6" is a safe middle ground forecast for BOS right now, but I'd be more worried about being low rather than high. Generally I'd say BOX has the right idea with their map and their watches right now - someone in NEMA into NH is going to get smoked though.

 

Going 3-6" for CT hills, 1-3" Hartford north, slush south of there for my forecast tonight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 minute ago, SR Airglow said:

I'm thinking 3-6" is a safe middle ground forecast for BOS right now, but I'd be more worried about being low rather than high. Generally I'd say BOX has the right idea with their map and their watches right now - someone in NEMA into NH is going to get smoked though.

 

Going 3-6" for CT hills, 1-3" Hartford north, slush south of there for my forecast tonight.

3-6" for Boston is the safe call, but I prefer the right call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

3-6" for Boston is the safe call, but I prefer the right call.

I could also easily see it being 1-3" of slop with a ton of rain in the middle if the rates are lousy or the column is a hair warmer than predicted(or even if we miss a band and end up in lighter precip for a while - 0.03" per hour isn't going to get it done here). I definitely think you've got a shot at verifying a 6-12" there, but I'd feel a lot more comfortable with those numbers a bit further inland or with one more cold tick. So I'm hedging my bets for now.

I really hope you're right though. I'm recerting WFA this weekend so I'm stuck in Boston unless they cancel due to weather and then I can head north and actually put this snow to good use :ski:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SR Airglow said:

I could also easily see it being 1-3" of slop with a ton of rain in the middle if the rates are lousy or the column is a hair warmer than predicted(or even if we miss a band and end up in lighter precip for a while - 0.03" per hour isn't going to get it done here). I definitely think you've got a shot at verifying a 6-12" there, but I'd feel a lot more comfortable with those numbers a bit further inland or with one more cold tick. So I'm hedging my bets for now.

I just hedge towards experience when models struggle.
We'll see...either call makes sense.

 

I think you have a better shot of verifying at Logan, than downtown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

:lol:

When did he finally admit it?

Last minute maybe? 

I'll never forget Harvey though. JC Monahan talked about how there could be a few inches of snow in the interior on her noon broadcast. The euro came in 15 minutes later and Harvey tweets "growing confidence in a major snowstorm for the Boston area." As if to say, move over...Daddy is in the house. From what I hear, Harvey is staying for awhile. Very happy to hear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CoastalWx said:

Last minute maybe? 

I'll never forget Harvey though. JC Monahan talked about how there could be a few inches of snow in the interior on her noon broadcast. The euro came in 15 minutes later and Harvey tweets "growing confidence in a major snowstorm for the Boston area." As if to say, move over...Daddy is in the house. From what I hear, Harvey is staying for awhile. Very happy to hear.

Thank god...its like a Brady/ BB dynamic,.....you know the end is coming, but you just dissociate as best you can-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Damage In Tolland said:

There just seems to be this idea from a few mets here that CT sees nothing . I don't see how we don't end up with minimum few inches 

You have to understand how close it is Though. I don't think you'll see nothing, but temps aloft definitely het concerning. It's a real tough call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

He is THE only OCM that I will watch....and its playing with fire because I fear slipping, and falling into a Wankum telecast..gotta fear sleet to get the goods.

If he ends up on, I just click my heels together and repeat to myself...
"Harv made the maps", "Harv made the maps"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I feel like DT is a good met, but just lacks any semblance of a grasp of NE climo, therefore he sucks here.

I think Pete B is an awful met.

PB is so efffin' stubborn.   I think he knows his science but just doesn't apply himself.   The 70s and 80s were the glory days of Boston mets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

He is THE only OCM that I will watch....and its playing with fire because I fear slipping, and falling into a Wankum telecast..gotta fear sleet to get the goods.

Yep, some non-elevated non-weenie area that dances with the devil but doesn't flip is going to see 12''+. I'd be lying if I said I didn't hope it was ASH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Dt said a couple of weeks ago that no one but NNE Mts would see snow the rest of the Spring. These southern Mets need to stick to their climo

I went for a big March, but I honestly thought it was over a few days ago...wasn't even watching until I saw Kev's FB post on Monday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

If he ends up on, I just click my heels together and repeat to myself...
"Harv made the maps", "Harv made the maps"...

He's the best OCM here. He gets the regional climo stuff.  He actually questioned the big Feb 2010 bust. That was the mid Atlantic blizzard that ordered schools off here for 2" of snow on the grass. He was saying how can you get good snow was no height falls? I think we actually had height rises in that. Long story short, height falls have to do with a few things. Dynamics like strong WAA and PVA are two of them. That was when Ekster pointed out the veering and then backing of winds aloft. That is a no no. Backing means subsidence and cold air advection. You want a veering wind profile on soundings. Anyways he sort of saw this through old school meteorology and was right. 

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...