Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

February 2023 Obs/Discussion


Baroclinic Zone
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, WinterWolf said:

Just getting up…5 below and a gorgeous sunny morning here after a fresh foot plus yesterday. Buried here. 

Lots of foot-plus reports CAR north.  PQI hit -18 this morning, we were about +5.

There and in Western Maine have done quite well after a slow start.

I'm 1" AN season to date, thanks mainly due to being in the jack area in mid-December.  If there's no snow thru next Tuesday it will be 1" BN. 
That Northeast snowfall table had all but 3 stations far below normal - BGR is only slightly BN.  I can't recall seeing such a wall-to-wall ratter in progress.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SnowGoose69 said:

Its gonna be way harder to get that crazy hookup with the wavelengths in March...I'd bet my life it won't happen

It’s not hooking up on that image. You still have that lobe to the northeast. 
 

But, we need that ridge in Greenland to build SW or we run the risk of lows up our fannies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

Did many of the GEFS or EPS members warm us up for early March as the se ridge flexed or not ?

It’s sort of hard to tell from reading the mornings posts , I don’t Think I have access to the individual EPS members 

I was a little disappointed that my concern sort of appeared on the EPS, but as I said…..it was just one run.

 

That said, that Greenland ridge needs to flex SW.  That’s what the weeklies showed, but who knows.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Baroclinic Zone said:

3 storm signals to close out the month, with the 1st being the least likely for wintry precip but the following 2 look more promising,

Feb 23rd, 26th, 28th

Spaced that close together in time, amid a ripping velocity saturated shear pattern? 

Nope -

...can't call those "storms"     There's not enough time for all required synoptic parametric ingredients to situate in between. 

In fact, that kind of minuscule temporal-spacial layout is more indicative of how a fast large scale pattern type is intrinsically a negative interference against any embedded smaller scale disturbances (where/how 'storms' form)..

Anyway, the former is just semantics rant ( haha) where because those would be physically challenged/limited in what they can be, 'minoring events' is more apropos.   When we say "threat" and "storm" at any passing dent in the curvature of the field, and ( likely...) merely a magnified result perpetrated by the modeling cinema out in time..., then, bounce adjectives of the like  back in forth in the colloquialism of the group physics, the group synoptic impression ends up stranded up a on a ledge where the only way down to reality is at 9.8 m/s-squared!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, George001 said:

The winter as a whole is likely beyond saving in SNE at this point but that doesn’t mean we can’t get a big storm in March. Hell, wasn’t 1996-1997 a ratter outside that big April blizzard? Even bad winters often have at least one big (12+) storm. Regardless, have to give credit where it’s due. Boston is at 8 inches of snow for the entire season and it’s mid Feb, and the seasonal average is in the mid 40s. The Pope was dead on with his winter forecast. I will certainly be keeping an eye on the geese next fall to clue me in on what to expect next winter. My winter forecast was a huge bust (again), but we live and learn.

The Pope is one of the best!!!...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, George001 said:

The winter as a whole is likely beyond saving in SNE at this point but that doesn’t mean we can’t get a big storm in March. Hell, wasn’t 1996-1997 a ratter outside that big April blizzard? Even bad winters often have at least one big (12+) storm. Regardless, have to give credit where it’s due. Boston is at 8 inches of snow for the entire season and it’s mid Feb, and the seasonal average is in the mid 40s. The Pope was dead on with his winter forecast. I will certainly be keeping an eye on the geese next fall to clue me in on what to expect next winter. My winter forecast was a huge bust (again), but we live and learn.

1996-97 was above normal after the April fools blizzard which is an all timer.  However, leading up to it snow was sub par but nothing like recent ratters like 2001-02, 2011-12, and this season so far.  There was a nice snow in early December-like 4-7 or something which was supposed to be rain.  A few days later inland areas got nailed (cantore famous thundersnow shot in ORH).  ORH got 14 inches.  January was generally pretty cold and we did get 7 inches from a system that was supposed to miss us early in the month.  I remember xc skiing that day in the Arboretum.  February was an absolute torch mainly snowless but mid March on was cold and snowy.   So that season is a bad example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, weathafella said:

1996-97 was above normal after the April fools blizzard which is an all timer.  However, leading up to it snow was sub par but nothing like recent ratters like 2001-02, 2011-12, and this season so far.  There was a nice snow in early December-like 4-7 or something which was supposed to be rain.  A few days later inland areas got nailed (cantore famous thundersnow shot in ORH).  ORH got 14 inches.  January was generally pretty cold and we did get 7 inches from a system that was supposed to miss us early in the month.  I remember xc skiing that day in the Arboretum.  February was an absolute torch mainly snowless but mid March on was cold and snowy.   So that season is a bad example.

Yeah the weenie deformation snows from that low. I remember that Jan event. Had like 8-10” towards Brockton. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Ukie was a nice snow thump for pike region. GGEM was a pelletfest

Seems like you're standing in line sneak 'n' txting  ...   It may be tedious to mention still at 120+ range, but both the GFS and GGEM were a deg or two colder in the llv/wedging air mass. 

I also - personally - find it hard to believe that a 1030+mb robust +PP situated over W QUE, already dammed into the region prior to arrival of WAA burst ..., will ever yield at the sfc.  It may be one of those scenarios where the lift escapes and runs off the region exposing a llv 900 to sfc icy layer. Skies brighten... but don't really clear.   Rad looks like the warm front must've made it all the way to RUT-PWM or so... but it's really down along the L.I. S or even south of there.    

In general, I see two aspects evolving this week:

1 ... more suppression ( how much or little notwithstanding).  

2 ... lower overall verification over present QPF ( again, how much or little - ). 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, ORH_wxman said:

Biggest barrier for many moving to NNE (who want to) is economic opportunity. Esp outside of the hubs like PWM/BTV and maybe you could include some of the southern NH towns like ASH/MHT/PSM. 
 

Though the increase in remote work maybe be helping some for those who want a new landscape. But remote work is very white collar so that isn’t an opportunity for everyone. 
 

But it still holds true that many just hate the cold up there too…lol. I def wouldn’t mind but so many other people I know who go up there to ski or vacation in the summer are always like “winters are too damned cold up here…I couldn’t live full time here”. I’d prob live in Rangeley in a bachelor pad if I wasn’t married. 

ASH is a Boston suburb at this point. Average home price like $500k. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

Seems like CNE/NNE has higher qpf relative to SNE on models ..so wouldn’t a suppression being that higher QPF zone south 

well... circumstantially, that would be true, ...but I'm speaking of 'farmer john's standard correction' for modeling at 120+hr range.

I have not seen any graphics that out right compare empirical results to model prognostic values, relative to any time leads...   but, anecdotally, I get a very strong impression that the error tends to increase in the ^ amts, farther out in time.  I've been jokingly referring to this as 'model magnification'  

I think of it as when an system first appears at the outer boundary of the model distant times... it's like the moon coming over the horizon on the clear dusty summer evening. It's the size of a pie pan...  - fun metaphor.  

But I think it's because the models don't "see" or detect the physical offsetting destructive interference minutia that are inevitably going to materialize, due to the fact that ultimately ...they don't really predict the future. Those emergent offsets cannot be predetermined - until the human brain trust finally does figure out how quantum mechanics identifies future events...  But by then?  they'll be controlling that space and along with it, how those events unfolds. Technologies like "the Weather Modification Net" ...  and this sort of speculation will have long been a thing of the past.   Rain and snow and temperature variance all happening by a carefully prescribed dosing by the technology.   No more interesting anything - ...   sign me up! :cliff:

Excluding that wild science fiction digression...  what the models are left with in the D6 on range is a like 'purified' emergence that isn't being held back by "reality" at those time ranges. 

 

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...