Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,540
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    clydes6
    Newest Member
    clydes6
    Joined

-NAO Coastal Bomb March 1-3, 2018 Disco


WeatherFeen2000

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
6 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

Sandy's surge was 4-5 feet above Irene's or anything seen in recorded history in these parts from northern LBI through NYC and western LI (that's a huge departure from previous records).  There is zero risk of tidal surges being anywhere near Sandy levels, let alone Irene levels.  Some minor to moderate coastal flooding is, indeed, possible, but we're not goint to see Manhattan (and its tunnels) flooded from tidal sources.  

Irene’s surge here was about 4.5 feet, Sandy was 8.5 feet. The storm tide in Sandy was 10.5 feet here, so the high tide added 2 feet to the surge. Waves on top of that were upward of 12-15 feet. 

Not to drag it off topic but this will be nothing like that anywhere here. 

And the NAM is most like the evolution I see happening (although it’s the NAM so yeah). Maybe a period of snow at the end after 95% of it’s over near the city, heavy snow in high elevations, heavy rain and tidal flooding in NJ/Long Island, and a big snow for New England and maybe Boston since they don’t need the help we need and the evolution favors them anyway for snow. Plenty of surprises possible though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Snow88 said:

I warned about the models being too warm. I have been on the cold and south train for this storm. Seeing the AO at -5 is intriguing and points to a colder storm.

It would be a shame to see this potential turn into your average coastal storm.

the big dogs always have the storm models move multiple directions.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jm1220 said:

Irene’s surge here was about 4.5 feet, Sandy was 8.5 feet. The storm tide in Sandy was 10.5 feet here, so the high tide added 2 feet to the surge. Waves on top of that were upward of 12-15 feet. 

Not to drag it off topic but this will be nothing like that anywhere here. 

And the NAM is most like the evolution I see happening (although it’s the NAM so yeah). Maybe a period of snow at the end after 95% of it’s over near the city, heavy snow in high elevations, heavy rain and tidal flooding in NJ/Long Island, and a big snow for New England and maybe Boston since they don’t need the help we need and the evolution favors them anyway for snow. Plenty of surprises possible though. 

Same at Battery Park: 13.0 feet for Sandy; Donna was 10.0 feet, in 2nd place all-time (although the 1821 hurricane was estimated to be 11.2 feet).  And same all over NJ from northern LBI through Sandy Hook and Raritan Bay with 3-5 foot differentials between Sandy and previous records (at Sandy Hook, it was 13.3' when the gauge stopped working, which was 3.2' higher than it was in March 1960).  I also don't want to sidetrack the thread, but people do need to know that this will not in any way, shape or form be like Sandy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

Sandy's surge was 4-5 feet above Irene's or anything seen in recorded history in these parts from northern LBI through NYC and western LI (that's a huge departure from previous records).  There is zero risk of tidal surges being anywhere near Sandy levels, let alone Irene levels.  Some minor to moderate coastal flooding is, indeed, possible, but we're not goint to see Manhattan (and its tunnels) flooded from tidal sources.  

That is good news, but if memory serves we did see significant flooding in the Dec 92 event; it was called the storm of the century....until March 93 came along. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

Same at Battery Park: 13.0 feet for Sandy; Donna was 10.0 feet, in 2nd place all-time (although the 1821 hurricane was estimated to be 11.2 feet).  And same all over NJ from northern LBI through Sandy Hook and Raritan Bay with 3-5 foot differentials between Sandy and previous records (at Sandy Hook, it was 13.3' when the gauge stopped working, which was 3.2' higher than it was in March 1960).  I also don't want to sidetrack the thread, but people do need to know that this will not in any way, shape or form be like Sandy.  

Again, that is good news that it won't be anything like that, but the potential for serious damage is there nonetheless if it approaches the Dec 92 levels; I used to keep a boat in S Amboy near the old Club Bene. Morgan Creek was way over its bank and up to the street; never saw anything like that before. Boats came unmoored all over Smith Creek in Woodbridge too. I'm just not a fan of these big rain systems and flooding tides. I believe Sea Bright took a big hit that time as well. Now, this was before the era of some of the mega storms we have since seen, so maybe my memory has been shaped by that. I'm trying to take some reassurance here that this won't be that bad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

If anyone in this forum has a realistic shot at accumulating snow it’s you. This is your elevation storm

As others have noted. The highlands in nw nj need a bombing low with ccb.  Models runs today wobbled to a less impressive low. 0 nam took a favorable turn. Big low storms are always complicated to forecast. Temps are marginal at best. I can see a cold rain around 34f over to an inch or 2 of slop to maybe 6-8 inches after a monsoon.

i would be shocked if this storm turned into a complete dud.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, weatherpruf said:

Again, that is good news that it won't be anything like that, but the potential for serious damage is there nonetheless if it approaches the Dec 92 levels; I used to keep a boat in S Amboy near the old Club Bene. Morgan Creek was way over its bank and up to the street; never saw anything like that before. Boats came unmoored all over Smith Creek in Woodbridge too. I'm just not a fan of these big rain systems and flooding tides. I believe Sea Bright took a big hit that time as well. Now, this was before the era of some of the mega storms we have since seen, so maybe my memory has been shaped by that. I'm trying to take some reassurance here that this won't be that bad. 

Yes, there is certainly the threat of moderate and even significant tidal flooding with a raging nor'easter, especially if it stalls/retrogrades, and a lunar high tide on Thursday, which I had noted earlier - don't think we're going to see 1992 levels, which were in the top 3-4 ever for NJ, but I can't say that for sure.  I just wanted to distinguish this storm and 1992 from the absolutely catastrophic flooding seen during Sandy, which was a life and death situation for tens of thousands (that will not be the case here, except in very isolated cases).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Animal said:

As others have noted. The highlands in nw nj need a bombing low with ccb.  Models runs today wobbled to a less impressive low. 0 nam took a favorable turn. Big low storms are always complicated to forecast. Temps are marginal at best. I can see a cold rain around 34f over to an inch or 2 of slop to maybe 6-8 inches after a monsoon.

i would be shocked if this storm turned into a complete dud.

 

There’s an impressive upper air low coming through, I don’t see it becoming a dud. There’s always the chance this shears out underneath the block, but I’d say the NAM has a good idea of the evolution (if overdone). I’d be starting to get excited if I lived on I-90 in Mass especially in hilly areas. Boston would get crushed as well with the bombing low off Cape Cod. Hopefully this keeps trending north and it tracks over us, that way there’s less onshore flow and less rain due to the dry slot. A more southerly track doesn’t help make it cold in this case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jm1220 said:

There’s an impressive upper air low coming through, I don’t see it becoming a dud. There’s always the chance this shears out underneath the block, but I’d say the NAM has a good idea of the evolution (if overdone). I’d be starting to get excited if I lived on I-90 in Mass especially in hilly areas. Boston would get crushed as well with the bombing low off Cape Cod. Hopefully this keeps trending north and it tracks over us, that way there’s less onshore flow and less rain due to the dry slot. A more southerly track doesn’t help make it cold in this case. 

I think our best chance of snow down here is with the CCB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Snow88 said:

I think our best chance of snow down here is with the CCB.

I agree, but it would have to bomb really quickly and off the NJ coast instead of waiting until off Cape Cod. That may bring the cold air in quicker and have heavier precip as snow in low elevations. If it waits until off Cape Cod to bomb, we’re left with lighter snow at the end while the real stuff is going to town in New England. The lack of prior cold air is killing us, and past storms like this have slammed I-90 with the snow, and down here only high elevations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Enigma said:

THIS is a post that exposes you and a few others on this board for the lack of knowledge that you have. Surface temperatures are NOT exclusive of latitude. Adiabatic cooling combined with low H5 heights and temps CAN allow for quite heavy thump to occur. Read more and post less!

Such a great post 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will paste N and W and some of us were saying this before the models began to see the dynamic cooling

The high res models are going to catch this first.

Now what is really interesting to me and a bit of a test , and again it's still not really seen on the guidance is how crazy Long Island may get for a few hours with several hours of wet snow 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, PB COLTS NECK NJ said:

This will paste N and W and some of us were saying this before the models began to see the dynamic cooling

The high res models are going to catch this first.

Now what is really interesting to me and a bit of a test , and again it's still not really seen on the guidance is how crazy Long Island may get for a few hours with several hours of heavy wet snow and very gusty winds out over Suffolk County on the backside of this 

 

 

 

 

Nam shows a 979 low near our latitude with snow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buoy 44025 wave heights dropped from yesterday's 21' prediction to just 8' today.

EURO now playing the same game it did with this system, when it produced one fantastic run with loads of snow all around us a few days ago,---- as it looks at Mar. 07-08 period.    Current EURO looks like energy is far east and we are in the tail of a retreating system.

I always liked Mar. 07-08 territory more if there were properly placed features---since I never saw any long range output that had a bettor's chance of being a BN day before then.   Relying on adiabatic cooling is not a good hand late in the season.

The NAM on the Cobb Method does have  RNSN mix at end of storm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, EastonSN+ said:

Not that I necessarily believe it, but the 6z GEFS now has at least six members which get a period of snow to the entire area. This is what the NAM is showing. 

Long shot, but even the December 1992 storm brought accumulating snow down to Long Island. Here in coastal CT 6 inches were realized on the last day! I think parts of Long Island received the same.  Obviously not the same type if storm and its unlikely, but CAN happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, PB COLTS NECK NJ said:

This will paste N and W and some of us were saying this before the models began to see the dynamic cooling

The high res models are going to catch this first.

Now what is really interesting to me and a bit of a test , and again it's still not really seen on the guidance is how crazy Long Island may get for a few hours with several hours of heavy wet snow and very gusty winds out over Suffolk County on the backside of this 

 

 

 

 

Your point about the high resolution models is a crucial one, not just for the upcoming event but for the possible late-season events. One need only look back to February 17-18 when the GFS forecast little or no snow across the region and much of southern New England. Instead, New York City saw 4.4", its northern and western suburbs picked up 6" or more, and Boston received 5.6". The higher vertical resolution models (ECMWF, RGEM, and NAM) correctly picked up the colder atmospheric thermal profile that the lower vertical resolution GFS missed. In marginal situations, those details can make a big difference in forecasting outcomes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, EastonSN+ said:

Long shot, but even the December 1992 storm brought accumulating snow down to Long Island. Here in coastal CT 6 inches were realized on the last day! I think parts of Long Island received the same.  Obviously not the same type if storm and its unlikely, but CAN happen.

Anything is possible. In Upton's AFD, they are uncertain too and this just might go down to "nowcasting". Guess we'll see where all the players on the field set up. Model watching and trends is the way to go with this event.

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...