Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,509
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

Feb 28th-March 1st long duration Miller B threat


George001
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, weatherwiz said:

One thing I think that will happen which is kind of impossible to incorporate into forecast maps is there will likely be some embedded subsidence zones. SREF plumes and bufkit (12z) though was solid 5-8'' statewide and 3-5'' along the shoreline. 

Well I can tell you where one will be. Right over my valley floor head.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

hmm this actually is a bit more complicated. Looking at 0z HRRR then going back to the 18z guidance, there could be a maximum from northern NJ across southeast NY and...the the western shoreline of Connecticut and maybe as much as 6-10''. Totals could then drop off quickly say eastern Connecticut (east of the River) so something more along the line of 3-6''

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No change for CT but we did add some text for NW CT to highlight the potential for the highest amounts and possibly 8" or more locally. For The tri-state i brought the ranges south a bit to include LI and northern NYC for 2-4, then 1-2/0-1 south of there and in the southern city. 

Looking at bufkit the DGZ looks pretty high up and quite narrow with modest lift, so snow growth doesnt look to be the best. The uvv does look to be somewhat centered in the DGZ, so its not horrible like some storms weve see. 12Z runs were showing close to 10:1 at the shore and 12-13 well inland, so about average. I'm pretty much using just 10:1 everywhere. With these systems approaching from the W with an easterly flow and warming mid levels we usually don't have have the best ratios but that may be offset by some heavy rates near the snow/mix or snow/rain line near the shore. 

I'm definitely worried a bit about NYC/LI/NNJ area, that area has the highest uncertainty and could bust either way. High confidence for all of CT at the moment. 

02_26.23_jdj_snowfall_forecast_update.thumb.jpg.1b73981746fc89337d458ec3a3774764.jpg02_26.23_jdj_tri_state_snowfall_forecast_update.thumb.jpg.7cd14fb1b7c9f4526000542e3e4ca3d9.jpg

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sey-Mour Snow said:

I prefer to call it pound town . Hrrr looks sweet! 

I'm starting to think the jackpot zone in this will be across southern Connecticut. It kind of makes sense based on where guidance is developing/tracking the secondary low. You can see the precip shield starting to fall apart pretty quickly towards eastern CT. Best lift traverses southwest/coastal Connecticut and thermal profile supports all snow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

I'm starting to think the jackpot zone in this will be across southern Connecticut. It kind of makes sense based on where guidance is developing/tracking the secondary low. You can see the precip shield starting to fall apart pretty quickly towards eastern CT. Best lift traverses southwest/coastal Connecticut and thermal profile supports all snow. 

Not on the Nams. Hrrr?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, The 4 Seasons said:

No change for CT but we did add some text for NW CT to highlight the potential for the highest amounts and possibly 8" or more locally. For The tri-state i brought the ranges south a bit to include LI and northern NYC for 2-4, then 1-2/0-1 south of there and in the southern city. 

Looking at bufkit the DGZ looks pretty high up and quite narrow with modest lift, so snow growth doesnt look to be the best. The uvv does look to be somewhat centered in the DGZ, so its not horrible like some storms weve see. 12Z runs were showing close to 10:1 at the shore and 12-13 well inland, so about average. I'm pretty much using just 10:1 everywhere. With these systems approaching from the W with an easterly flow and warming mid levels we usually don't have have the best ratios but that may be offset by some heavy rates near the snow/mix or snow/rain line near the shore. 

I'm definitely worried a bit about NYC/LI/NNJ area, that area has the highest uncertainty and could bust either way. High confidence for all of CT at the moment. 

02_26.23_jdj_snowfall_forecast_update.thumb.jpg.1b73981746fc89337d458ec3a3774764.jpg02_26.23_jdj_tri_state_snowfall_forecast_update.thumb.jpg.7cd14fb1b7c9f4526000542e3e4ca3d9.jpg

Wouldn't have it any other way that NYC is near the line between an impressive and practically no snow event. Your map looks good and I agree about that 1-2" notch you made into southern NYC. I'm hoping to make it to 4" IMBY. Anymore than that would be a big win. 

HRRR looked awesome though, hopefully that's close to reality. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Not on the Nams. Hrrr?

IDK...even looking back at the 18z NAMs I think the idea makes sense. The secondary is awfully far south and I guess it's a question of how far north the strongest fronto can get. also, it seems like the northern edge of the precip shield gets chewed away pretty quickly. Ton of dry air up at 500 and have to wonder if that is quickly seeping downward. 

I'm thinking like 5-8'' for SW CT and along the shoreline to about the River with 3-5'' from northern Litchfield county elsewhere. I'll post map in a bit to illustrate. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

IDK...even looking back at the 18z NAMs I think the idea makes sense. The secondary is awfully far south and I guess it's a question of how far north the strongest fronto can get. also, it seems like the northern edge of the precip shield gets chewed away pretty quickly. Ton of dry air up at 500 and have to wonder if that is quickly seeping downward. 

I'm thinking like 5-8'' for SW CT and along the shoreline to about the River with 3-5'' from northern Litchfield county elsewhere. I'll post map in a bit to illustrate. 

Wide variety of solutions depending on the model synoptics you are using to base your assumptions on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Grinder whatever these guys said 

ahh gotcha. 

If I'm understanding correctly would be 500mb. You can see the main shortwave as it ejects through the Missouri Valley into the Ohio Valley it just gets shredded apart. The spawning secondary low helps to blossom some precipitation but the shield just gets eroded away quickly. Overall, the degree of lift actually looks pretty meh outside of the initial WAA push. Even seems to be quite a bit of subsidence...almost like shortwave subsidence in a way with the initial shortwave energy passing east and approaching shortwave from the west (which even seems to help generate light stuff through the morning). 

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...