Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    19,016
    Total Members
    49,013
    Most Online
    loganboehmewx
    Newest Member
    loganboehmewx
    Joined

July 2019 General Discussions & Observations Thread


bluewave

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
57 minutes ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

I first noticed it way back in July 2003. We had a solid week of powerful surging waves that seemingly came out of nowhere. Minor beach wash overs and swell periods of 20-17 seconds, something completely unheard of on the east coast. I looked around the North Atlantic and there was no tropical activity or storms at all. I figured it had to have come from a huge storm the week before that was unusually far north in the Southern Hemisphere. So I sent a question to Sean Collins the founder of Surfline and the king of surf forecasting. He sent me back a response on their “who knows” detailing the storm that caused the swell and how it’s entirely possible given the right circumstances. They have been talking about this current swell on their premium subscription forecasts for over a week now!!!

We have had several smaller events since 03 but this is the only other that stacks up.

Check out the swell periods on the NY Harbor Buoy. There are our typical local wind waves with the periods below 10 seconds and then the southern hemi swells with the periods over 13 seconds. 

https://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=44065

 

I’ll be in Montauk tomorrow. I’ll check it out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

I first noticed it way back in July 2003. We had a solid week of powerful surging waves that seemingly came out of nowhere. Minor beach wash overs and swell periods of 20-17 seconds, something completely unheard of on the east coast. I looked around the North Atlantic and there was no tropical activity or storms at all. I figured it had to have come from a huge storm the week before that was unusually far north in the Southern Hemisphere. So I sent a question to Sean Collins the founder of Surfline and the king of surf forecasting. He sent me back a response on their “who knows” detailing the storm that caused the swell and how it’s entirely possible given the right circumstances. They have been talking about this current swell on their premium subscription forecasts for over a week now!!!

We have had several smaller events since 03 but this is the only other that stacks up.

Check out the swell periods on the NY Harbor Buoy. There are our typical local wind waves with the periods below 10 seconds and then the southern hemi swells with the periods over 13 seconds. 

https://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/station_page.php?station=44065

 

Pretty cool. Up to 16 seconds at times. I look at the buoys often but would have just glossed right over that this week. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2019 at 4:53 AM, donsutherland1 said:

I think LGA has perhaps the best chance, along with EWR to reach 100 today. JFK might make a run at it. Central Park will probably fall a few degrees short.

We did hit 100 here on Sunday and the HI was 118, hottest day in quite a few years!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2019 at 12:12 PM, psv88 said:

Impressive event for LI. Yesterday’s 99 was hottest temp I’ve recorded on any pws of mine, since I got my first one in 2012. 4 years of records out here in Suffolk, the other 3 in western Nassau (highest there was 98)

Did you have it set up in 2010 and 2011?  In 2010 we exceeded 100 on three days and in 2011 we reached 104!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2019 at 3:03 PM, bluewave said:

JFK approaching its all-time heat index record. Currently sitting at 114 degrees.

97/78/114


Kennedy Intl   FAIR      97  78  54 SW16      29.78F HX 114

 

 

 

 

what is there all time heat index record?  I assume it's from 2011?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2019 at 4:51 PM, purduewx80 said:

looks like it was just W enough to have little trajectory over the bay over the past 30 min. any farther north and it would probably be 100 there.

914394373_ScreenShot2019-07-21at4_49_37PM.png.e656d85d0eb5b966c6e78a9fa1ab6ac3.png

Indeed- we reached 100 here and I'm a few miles east of JFK and dont get the bay influence here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2019 at 4:24 PM, bluewave said:

Some of the equipment may have been moved as early as 1992. That is the first mention of obstructions. NYC was very close with Newark for warm season high temperatures during the 1970’s and 1980’s. It was even a warmer spot than LGA on numerous occasions. But things really shifted after the 1990’s. 

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datasets/GHCND/stations/GHCND:USW00094728/detail

Topography Descriptions

TOPOGRAPHY BEGIN DATE¹ END DATE¹
HIGHEST POINT IN CENTRAL PARK. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT SURROUNDED BY SKYSCRAPERS ON ALL SIDES, HIGHEST TO SOUTH. HEAVILY POPULATED. HUDSON RIVER IS LOCATED 1 MILE WEST. EQUIPMENT IS LOCATED ON A STONE BASE IN A FENCED IN ENCLOSURE WITH TREES ON ALL SIDES JUST SOUTH OF BELVEDERE CASTLE. 2017-08-01 Present
HIGHEST POINT IN CENTRAL PARK. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT SURROUNDED BY SKYSCRAPERS ON ALL SIDES, HIGHEST TO SOUTH. HEAVILY POPULATED. HUDSON RIVER IS LOCATED 1 MILE WEST. EQUIPMENT IS LOCATED ON A STONE BASE IN A FENCED IN ENCLOSURE WITH TREES ON ALL SIDES JUST SOUTH OF BELVEDERE CASTLE. 2016-06-15 2017-08-01
HIGHEST POINT IN CENTRAL PARK. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. HEAVILY POPULATED. HUDSON RIVER 1 MI WEST 1992-01-01 2016-06-15

Obstruction Descriptions

OBSTRUCTIONS BEGIN DATE¹ END DATE¹
TREES 2017-08-01 Present
TREE 020-340 deg 25-25 ft 20-54 deg 2016-06-15 2017-08-01
HYGR 090/4 TREES ENCIRLCE/25/20-54 IN FENCED ENCOLSURE 50 FT X 25 TH 1995-06-27 2016-06-15
UNIV 050/4 CRS 180/9 H083 SENSOR 200/8 TB 220/20 TREES ENCIRCLE/25/20-54 EQUIPMENT IN FENCED ENCLOSURE 50 FEET X 25 FEET 1992-01-01

So the real reason for moving the equipment was to stop the vandalism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2019 at 4:40 PM, bluewave said:

Here is a great article that explains how LGA was often cooler than Central Park back in the 1970’s. I didn’t realize how much vandalism was an issue for the weather station at the castle.

https://www.nytimes.com/1977/07/22/archives/vandals-in-central-park-forcing-weather-service-to-seek-new-site.html

Vandalism Disrupts Work

“Mostly we suffer from malicious destruction,” Mr. Gibson said. “The problem up here can be as little as somebody pulling a circuit‐breaker switch that stops the current and halts the measurements. But from our standpoint, that's almost as bad as stealing all the equipment—it disrupts our work.”

The last break‐in occurred two weeks ago. The thermometer was not damaged, but the anemometer, which meastures wind speeds, was stolen, and other equipment has not functioned properly since.

When the devices at the castle are not functioning, the Weather Service substitutes readings from La Guardia Airport. But Mr. Gibson said those readings do not really reflect conditions in the city, because they may be several degrees cooler in summer or warmer in winter than those in Central Park.

 

Thats a real shame.  Instead of moving the equipment, maybe they should have fenced off part of the park with barbed wire and electric fencing and made it inaccessible to the public.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last 2 days of July are averaging 82degs., or 5.5degs. AN.

Month to date is +2.8[79.4].      July should end at  +3.1[79.6].

77.9* here at 6am.  Finally 80.0* by 10am.     82.2* by Noon, but down from 84.5* minutes ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Central Park site is sheltered to the north by the Belvedere Castle and surrounded by deciduous trees and shrubs.  I'd think both temperature and wind measurements there would be impacted.

There is additional instrumentation mounted on the Castle, but for what purpose is not known.

I personally think the site is foolishly hostile to visitors, hiding in the shrubbery, unmarked and behind a chain link fence, with various instruments resting on a crushed stone base. It almost invites vandalism. The siting seems especially poor considering that this is a also place where literally millions of kids and other visitors pass by annually. A little bit of signage to document what the instrumentation is used for and perhaps some training of the volunteer guides that work at the Castle would be much more protective of the instrumentation and help spark interest and understanding among the public.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, etudiant said:

The Central Park site is sheltered to the north by the Belvedere Castle and surrounded by deciduous trees and shrubs.  I'd think both temperature and wind measurements there would be impacted.

There is additional instrumentation mounted on the Castle, but for what purpose is not known.

I personally think the site is foolishly hostile to visitors, hiding in the shrubbery, unmarked and behind a chain link fence, with various instruments resting on a crushed stone base. It almost invites vandalism. The siting seems especially poor considering that this is a also place where literally millions of kids and other visitors pass by annually. A little bit of signage to document what the instrumentation is used for and perhaps some training of the volunteer guides that work at the Castle would be much more protective of the instrumentation and help spark interest and understanding among the public.

 

 

Yes they should have someone there 24/7 to protect it.  I wonder if there's a way to permanently mount it so it can never be moved?  Once they get it back to where it used to be, of course.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

Thats a real shame.  Instead of moving the equipment, maybe they should have fenced off part of the park with barbed wire and electric fencing and made it inaccessible to the public.

 

It looks like the old thermometer was located on the castle in the sunlight before the 1990’s. That’s why NYC had more 90 days before the 1990’s than after. High temperatures on the castle were often warmer than LGA and very close to Newark. But putting the thermometer under the thick canopy and vegetation around November 95 caused an artificial decline in high temperatures. So we really can’t compare pre-1995 temperature data with post. Here is another NYT article about when the thermometer in the castle got vandalized in 1977. They had to start taking temperatures at LGA for a while. 

https://www.nytimes.com/1977/12/31/archives/castle-is-secure-but-weathermen-are-still-moving.html

Vandals’ destruction of equipment in the castle had disrupted the Weather Service's collection of meteorological data so frequently that the service had decided not to bother with repairing the station after a particularly severe incident of vandalism two months ago, Instead, the service took all its temperatures at an alternative station at La Guardia Airport in Queens,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, bluewave said:

It looks like the old thermometer was located on the castle in the sunlight before the 1990’s. That’s why NYC had more 90 days before the 1990’s than after. High temperatures on the castle were often warmer than LGA and very close to Newark. But putting the thermometer under the thick canopy and vegetation around November 95 caused an artificial decline in high temperatures. So we really can’t compare pre-1995 temperature data with post. Here is another NYT article about when the thermometer in the castle got vandalized in 1977. They had to start taking temperatures at LGA for a while. 

https://www.nytimes.com/1977/12/31/archives/castle-is-secure-but-weathermen-are-still-moving.html

Vandals’ destruction of equipment in the castle had disrupted the Weather Service's collection of meteorological data so frequently that the service had decided not to bother with repairing the station after a particularly severe incident of vandalism two months ago, Instead, the service took all its temperatures at an alternative station at La Guardia Airport in Queens,

All of the reasons everyone has mentioned is probably why most major cities just use the airports. Could be tough to find a place with enough space to have an acceptable sitting, yet safe and protected from vandals and other interference. The sheep meadow would be nice but imagine permanently closing that to the public lol.  I don't think vandalism at the castle would be as much of a problem now as it was back then anyway. They probably could put it back with little issue. The current site can be easily vandalized too but that doesnt seem to be a problem.

I wonder, they cant get permission from the city to trim the trees around it? Maybe cut down a couple all together. It wouldnt be perfect but itd be an improvement and wouldnt involve breaking the continuity by moving the site. They could offer to pay for the planting of a few new trees elsewhere to make up for it.

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...