Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

Summer 2017 Banter Thread


dmillz25

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 869
  • Created
  • Last Reply
23 hours ago, WeatherFeen2000 said:

In my opinion the jet stream is influenced by water temperatures but also how much day light you're losing during the summer or gaining during spring. Spring time generally speaking the jet stream will head north. During the summer it will head south, especially almost in the middle of summer. It's a fact that as soon as summer rolls we begin losing sunlight. The point is the summer peaked but it just depends were that heat sets up and it depends on the water temperatures. During this time of the yea the jet stream should be generally scooting south.

You have it in reverse...glad this is in banter tho. It's a good read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2017 at 11:56 PM, WeatherFeen2000 said:

In my opinion the jet stream is influenced by water temperatures but also how much day light you're losing during the summer or gaining during spring. Spring time generally speaking the jet stream will head north. During the summer it will head south, especially almost in the middle of summer. It's a fact that as soon as summer rolls we begin losing sunlight. The point is the summer peaked but it just depends were that heat sets up and it depends on the water temperatures. During this time of the yea the jet stream should be generally scooting south.

Sure, you lose daylight as summer goes on, but it's assymetric.  Check out timeanddate.com   I set Brooklyn as my home location, and analyzed the different timings, sunset doesn't start getting earlier until after July 4th, and solar noon doesn't until after August 2nd!  I believe that's more important than the length of the actual day.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Juliancolton said:

Has anyone ever stopped to consider that the Park is the only site measuring things correctly and everybody else has it wrong...

None of the sites are wrong (I mean none of the equipment is malfunctioning)- but Central Park isn't following the guidelines for clearing the foliage around the site equipment.   The problem is they're measuring in a Park and NYC is an urban area.  So the readings at Central Park aren't representative of New York City and shouldn't be used in reference to New York City weather and climate records.  You see this with wind measurements too, even when we have strong winds, Central Park comes in with light/variable winds.   In view of the fact that the vast majority of measuring equipment is located in airports, that right there shows why Central Park can't be compared to any other measuring site.  You can't make a scientific comparison when you're trying to compare apples to oranges- and Central Park is the odd one out.  The only way to do a scientific comparison between sites is to have ALL measuring stations be airports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Paragon said:

None of the sites are wrong- but Central Park isn't following the guidelines for clearing the foliage around the site equipment.   The problem is they're measuring in a Park and NYC is an urban area.  In view of the fact that the vast majority of measuring equipment is located in airports, that right there shows why Central Park can't be compared to any other measuring site.  You can't make a scientific comparison when you're trying to compare apples to oranges- and Central Park is the odd one out.  The only way to do a scientific comparison between sites is to have ALL measuring stations be airports.

That's what Big Airport wants you to think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Juliancolton said:

That's what Big Airport wants you to think.

I edited my post to add a bit more, JC.  The readings at Central Park aren't representative of New York City and shouldn't be used in reference to New York City weather and climate records.  You see this with wind measurements too, even when we have strong winds, Central Park comes in with light/variable winds. 

 

The readings at Central Park might be more representative of how the City was before urbanization though- I'd agree with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an OT question, but I've always wondered, is there an "absolute" objective way to measure total heat?  I don't mean the subjective "feels like" method of the heat index, but since higher humidity means the sun has to work harder to raise temps, is there an absolute scale that shows the total heat content of the local atmosphere (in other words the total energy), that combines the temp and the humidity in an objective way?  You could use such a scale to figure out how high the temp might have been had the humidity been lower and even be able to figure out what the temperature needs to be if the humidity is, say, 60%, to have an equivalent heat content to a desert SW city (say, Needles, CA) that has a temp of 115 and humidity of 15%.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paragon said:

I edited my post to add a bit more, JC.  The readings at Central Park aren't representative of New York City and shouldn't be used in reference to New York City weather and climate records.  You see this with wind measurements too, even when we have strong winds, Central Park comes in with light/variable winds. 

 

The readings at Central Park might be more representative of how the City was before urbanization though- I'd agree with that.

The main point is that the Central Park readings aren't even representative of Central Park. Sensors in wooded areas need to be in clearings or open spaces like OKX and the NY mesonet rural sites. The old Central Park sensor was in the open on the castle before the switch in the 90's.

http://www.weather2000.com/ASOS/NYC_ASOS.html

http://wx1.bnl.gov/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, bluewave said:

The main point is that the Central Park readings aren't even representative of Central Park. Sensors in wooded areas need to be in clearings or open spaces like OKX and the NY mesonet rural sites. The old Central Park sensor was in the open on the castle before the switch in the 90's.

http://www.weather2000.com/ASOS/NYC_ASOS.html

http://wx1.bnl.gov/

BW, is there any reason they don't want to move the sensors back to the old location?  Mets have openly talked about the issues on TV and on social media, why the hesitancy to move the equipment back to where it used to be?  They fixed the JFK snowfall measurement issue, now it's time to fix this.  Heck, they even go back and adjust snowfall amounts months after the fact lol.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Paragon said:

BW, is there any reason they don't want to move the sensors back to the old location?  Mets have openly talked about the issues on TV and on social media, why the hesitancy to move the equipment back to where it used to be?  They fixed the JFK snowfall measurement issue, now it's time to fix this.  Heck, they even go back and adjust snowfall amounts months after the fact lol.

 

I think the NWS lost interest in the integrity of the site once they moved from 30 Rock out to to OKX. You can see from the video below how a clearing or open space away from trees is necessary for correct measurements.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bluewave said:

I think the NWS lost interest in the integrity of the site once they moved from 30 Rock out to to OKX. You can see from the video below how a clearing or open space is where an official site needs to be in a park or rural setting.

 

That's sad, especially since they could so easily remedy the situation and that would be the end of the controversy.

Any idea about my other question, on total heat content, Chris?  Is there an objective way to compare total heat content between a higher temp/lower humidity place or day vs a lower temp/higher humidity place or day (since the sun has to do extra work to heat up air that has more moisture)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Paragon said:

That's sad, especially since they could so easily remedy the situation and that would be the end of the controversy.

Any idea about my other question, on total heat content, Chris?  Is there an objective way to compare total heat content between a higher temp/lower humidity place or day vs a lower temp/higher humidity place or day (since the sun has to do extra work to heat up air that has more moisture)?

I guess the best way we have right now is the heat index. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, bluewave said:

I think the NWS lost interest in the integrity of the site once they moved from 30 Rock out to to OKX. You can see from the video below how a clearing or open space away from trees is necessary for correct measurements.

 

 

The new mesonet system is amazing! And not just because the wantagh station is a couple blocks from my house.

Its a weather geeks dream come true. I can't wait to track lake effect with the western NY stations and low temps in the Adirondacks this winter. I love the snow measuring poles on the live cams!!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

The new mesonet system is amazing! And not just because the wantagh station is a couple blocks from my house.

Its a weather geeks dream come true. I can't wait to track lake effect with the western NY stations and low temps in the Adirondacks this winter. I love the snow measuring poles on the live cams!!! 

The South Shore needed a professional weather site for a while now and I am glad that we finally got one. The readings there are very similar to my location in SW Suffolk near the GSB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bluewave said:

The South Shore needed a professional weather site for a while now and I am glad that we finally got one. The readings there are very similar to my location in SW Suffolk near the GSB.

I wish there was one near the southern state.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Paragon said:

That's sad, especially since they could so easily remedy the situation and that would be the end of the controversy.

Any idea about my other question, on total heat content, Chris?  Is there an objective way to compare total heat content between a higher temp/lower humidity place or day vs a lower temp/higher humidity place or day (since the sun has to do extra work to heat up air that has more moisture)?

theta e

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...