Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,502
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Weathernoob335
    Newest Member
    Weathernoob335
    Joined

February Banter 2019


George BM
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, North Balti Zen said:

K. The lambs won’t stop screaming for me after the January thing never really got going. here.

Same here. One thing I'm not gonna be doing- and it may be somewhat different where you are- is hoping this event will "over perform" to make up for that, so to speak. These types of setups typically disappoint outside of the favored areas west of the fall line. This seems to have a bit more potential than the usual west track/CAD deal however. It is somewhat unique compared to other similar events in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: LWX constantly updating their snowfall maps......idk, everyone has their own style. CWG had me in a 2-5" zone earlier today with a boom of 8". That's a CYA forecast if there ever was one. And, I really like CWG, but it seems like they always produce a product that makes it very hard for anyone to claim they were wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, C.A.P.E. said:

Same here. One thing I'm not gonna be doing- and it may be somewhat different where you are- is hoping this event will "over perform" to make up for that, so to speak. These types of setups typically disappoint outside of the favored areas west of the fall line. This seems to have a bit more potential than the usual west track/CAD deal however. It is somewhat unique compared to other similar events in my mind.

I still think this whole deal is really tenuous. Without rates it is going to suck, and it’s very common for us to all hype big rates only for the radar to be spotty and weak for hours on end. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PDIII said:

No one is getting 4" inch an hour rates. That's Sierra Nevada powder keg stuff.   I think the most I ever measured in an hour in my lifetime was 3 and that was once in 2010 and once in January 2011.  I think Valentines Day 2015 may have came close.. but that was a frontal passage.. freak show event.

In terms of banding.. Check Mappy's post above. You really dont know where the deathband(s) will set up.   Banding is going to be meso and we probably wont have a handle on it until some time tomorrow night or right before game time.  

I've had 4"/hr rates twice in my entire life. 4.25"/hr in the crazy thundersnow, deathband in the 2006 coastal, and Feb 2013 in Boston for the blizzard (Nemo) up there. 4"/hr was the max up there, but we had 3 separate 3"/hr bands. It was nutty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

I still think this whole deal is really tenuous. Without rates it is going to suck, and it’s very common for us to all hype big rates only for the radar to be spotty and weak for hours on end. 

Well yeah, if the FGEN forcing doesn't maximize over this area- could happen more to the SW or the NE, or just be generally "spotty" in our region- then the cold column might be wasted with hours of light to moderate snow that doesn't amount to that much in a lot of places.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, snowfan said:

Re: LWX constantly updating their snowfall maps......idk, everyone has their own style. CWG had me in a 2-5" zone earlier today with a boom of 8". That's a CYA forecast if there ever was one. And, I really like CWG, but it seems like they always produce a product that makes it very hard for anyone to claim they were wrong. 

I like how they've made "weather cool" again which I like (if that makes sense).  But their forecast maps are a complete joke especially when they grade themselves after every storm.  "We're giving ourselves an A!  We forecasted a 40% chance of 3-6" for DC with a 30% chance of 1-3" and a 30% chance of 6"+ and DC got 3"....bravo by us"

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, nw baltimore wx said:

If you've got the cash, try Glengoyne.  I also like the Speyside scotches a lot.  Very briny without the peat.

I know this is beer, but I think you would appreciate this one. Erie Brewing Co. has a beer called Derailed Ale. It's a black cherry cream ale. Silky smooth finish with wonderful cherry notes. Had it at a brewhouse in PA back in January when I visited some friends near Ephrata. Best freakin beer I've had imo. Elliotness is second on my list. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MillvilleWx said:

They change it due to new data, collaborations with WPC and neighboring offices to maintain some continuity. They don't do it because they feel like it. 

All I'm saying is its not modelogy its meteorology.. 

there neighboring offices do a much better job with forecast maps imo…..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MillvilleWx said:

I know this is beer, but I think you would appreciate this one. Erie Brewing Co. has a beer called Derailed Ale. It's a black cherry cream ale. Silky smooth finish with wonderful cherry notes. Had it at a brewhouse in PA back in January when I visited some friends near Ephrata. Best freakin beer I've had imo. Elliotness is second on my list. 

Heck yeah!  I'll look for it.  Thanks!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Snowchaser said:

All I'm saying is its not modelogy its meteorology.. 

there neighboring offices do a much better job with forecast maps imo…..

 

I went to school in CTP's coverage. Trust me, LWX was better with things. And those collab calls have pretty good detailed discussions with lots of feedback from both the WFO and WPC. It isn't just all models. In fact, taking a look at the Super Plume data, they are slightly more aggressive than guidance. They are handling this well, and this certainly isn't the final call for them. They can make adjustments when necessary up until it starts, then they adjust given radar, satellite, and observed trends. There's so much work involved with a winter wx scenario, it's not even funny. Only thing worse is severe imo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A long time ago on weather.com I read that Baltimore had 5"/hour rates in PD I in 1979. I'm not that surprised since the people who are old enough say it had the heaviest rates they've ever seen. I think some of the jackpot areas of CT in Feb 2013 also had 5"/hour rates, maybe a little more, and those are the spots that ended up with 3'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MillvilleWx said:

I went to school in CTP's coverage. Trust me, LWX was better with things. And those collab calls have pretty good detailed discussions with lots of feedback from both the WFO and WPC. It isn't just all models. In fact, taking a look at the Super Plume data, they are slightly more aggressive than guidance. They are handling this well, and this certainly isn't the final call for them. They can make adjustments when necessary up until it starts, then they adjust given radar, satellite, and observed trends. There's so much work involved with a winter wx scenario, it's not even funny. Only thing worse is severe imo. 

Alright you clearly know more than me..

I just hate seeing the forecast map change so much 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, nw baltimore wx said:

If you've got the cash, try Glengoyne (I think it's around $50).  I also like the Speyside scotches a lot.  Very briny without the peat.

thanks, i'll keep those in mind because my cousin is going to scotland soon and i told him to bring me back something.  scotch might be like beer for me...i'm picky and i think the peat is similar to the extra hoppy beers that i don't like.  however, for some reason, i haven't met any bourbons that aren't at least drinkable, though i do try to stay away from the ryes.  maybe all this is tied to my general distaste for bitterness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fozz said:

A long time ago on weather.com I read that Baltimore had 5"/hour rates in PD I in 1979. I'm not that surprised since the people who are old enough say it had the heaviest rates they've ever seen. I think some of the jackpot areas in Feb 2013 also had 5"/hour rates, maybe a little more, and those are the spots that ended up with 3'.

I was in the bullseye for Feb 5, 2010, and I think the rates overnight in the thunder snow were probably 3-4"/hr.  But I stayed in bed because my wife was 9 months pregnant and I needed to maximize sleep...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Snowchaser said:

Alright you clearly know more than me..

I just hate seeing the forecast map change so much 

It can drive one crazy, and the forecasters at the offices get pretty crazy over the constant collabs and stuff too. Trust me haha. Just know, there's a pretty hefty process involved with significant winter wx. Lot of discussion behind the computers. LWX, CTP, Blacksburg and Pitt will all have their hands full. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MillvilleWx said:

It can drive one crazy, and the forecasters at the offices get pretty crazy over the constant collabs and stuff too. Trust me haha. Just know, there's a pretty hefty process involved with significant winter wx. Lot of discussion behind the computers. LWX, CTP, Blacksburg and Pitt will all have their hands full. 

:thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fozz said:

A long time ago on weather.com I read that Baltimore had 5"/hour rates in PD I in 1979. I'm not that surprised since the people who are old enough say it had the heaviest rates they've ever seen. I think some of the jackpot areas of CT in Feb 2013 also had 5"/hour rates, maybe a little more, and those are the spots that ended up with 3'.

The rates on President's Day 1979 were some of the highest I have ever experienced.  Absolutely poured snow for hours.  I also remember standing in the middle of my street during the 1983 blizzard when the skies lit up with lightning followed by an immediate crack of snow-muffled thunder.  I almost crapped myself, but it was pouring dessert plates at the time.  Those rates may have been even heavier than '79, but didn't last as long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, nw baltimore wx said:

The rates on President's Day 1979 were some of the highest I have ever experienced.  Absolutely poured snow for hours.  I also remember standing in the middle of my street during the 1983 blizzard when the skies lit up with lightning followed by an immediate crack of snow-muffled thunder.  I almost crapped myself, but it was pouring dessert plates at the time.  Those rates may have been even heavier than '79, but didn't last as long.

Yeah I heard Feb 1983 hit very quick and hard, also with lots of thundersnow. What do you think the visibility was in Feb 1979? I think the lowest I've seen was slightly under 1/10 of a mile, in both January 2016 and Feb 10, 2010.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, nw baltimore wx said:

The rates on President's Day 1979 were some of the highest I have ever experienced.  Absolutely poured snow for hours.  I also remember standing in the middle of my street during the 1983 blizzard when the skies lit up with lightning followed by an immediate crack of snow-muffled thunder.  I almost crapped myself, but it was pouring dessert plates at the time.  Those rates may have been even heavier than '79, but didn't last as long.

Actually I want to correct what I said above. I chased a lake effect event back in 2001 or 2002 where it snowed like 3 feet in like 10 hours... Tughill.. I passed out drunk when the it wents nuts... But I remember waking up the next morning thinking.. Jesus.. there was like only 6 inches on the ground when I passed out.. wtf?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, C.A.P.E. said:

Well yeah, if the FGEN forcing doesn't maximize over this area- could happen more to the SW or the NE, or just be generally "spotty" in our region- then the cold column might be wasted with hours of light to moderate snow that doesn't amount to that much in a lot of places.

And I think we all know where that will be.....

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...