OceanStWx

No official for Bellingham and Foxboro, but you can get Franklin from the coop data here: https://w2.weather.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=box

I mean the Logan report is going to be the number for BOS climate purposes. But the observer is new from the old Winthrop coop. What kind of problems they are having with measurements I have no idea though. Either the site is super close to the water, or they've just messed up the measurements a few times. Upon further review, it's not great guys. You thought Winthrop was a tough location to measure, just keep heading down the peninsula to the tip.

The home course advantage sure helps, but I have been able to shoot in the 70s away from Spring Meadows, and I'm particularly proud of a 39 on the front 9 at Belgrade Lakes. It physically pained me to walk away from that one after 9, but it was my wife's bridal shower and we couldn't be late. My favorite round was a quick 9 holes I played after a mid at Spring Meadows. Shot a 36 (+1) with two birdies, and only 10 putts.

So we lock 27:1 ratios in for Thursday morning now?

I mean at least MSV did hit 1/4SM +SN briefly. That's not a bad sign.

Banks got pretty high even in Portland after this last event, so I can only imagine what it's like for places that haven't lost all the snow a couple times this winter.

Congrats Dianedrite?

Unfortunately there are no ASOS/AWOS reporting precip between there are BUF/PHL.

That's an interesting battle tonight, the HRRR vs. the NAM. They both have a similar look at the current time but diverge pretty good by tomorrow morning.

And that's around the time that Bufkit accumulates 1, 1.6, and 0.8" over a 3 hour stretch.

2"/hr may be a stretch, but 1" is definitely doable between 06-12z depending on where in SNE you are located. There is a pretty good crosshair signal briefly for most Bufkit locations.

Well one of the models doing it is the NAM which is giving you some of the most snow. Gotta play with fire sometimes.

I mean the models that mix you mix you because of a warm layer between 900 and 800 mb, not boundary layer temps. So I don't think the water was ever a factor really.

NNE weenies matter too.

Hey for tamarack it's still a miss!

You don't say. But a false alarm rate over 50% is just as bad if not worse than a probability of detection of 80 or 90%. GYX has the same FAR for warnings as watches this year (35%), frankly that's terrible.

A warning or advisory is 80% confidence, so some of them are bound to bust. And scrambling to CYA is hardly an upgrade because instead of 5" you might see 6". 1/20 was a way worse forecast (for the general public too) than the possibility that BOX would have to upgrade a high end advisory to warning.

I mean as a really rough first guess they have some value over a 10:1 because they factor in max temp in the column, but overall just meh. So much more goes into the ratios than that, and forecasting high ratios is pretty fraught with traps too. As a for example: BDL at 12z Monday has a max temp of about -2C below 500 mb. That means your Kuchera ratio is 12:1. Higher than climo normal. But inspecting the sounding and the DGZ is unsaturated. Any QPF will accumulate at 12:1 that hour, even though it is highly unlikely it would actually produce ratios that high.

What do you know about verification? Verification is only having a warning out when criteria is met. So as long as they issue before half the zone reaches an average of 6" it's a hit. It may not be a good forecast, but that's different than verification.

I have to say those Kuchera maps, or any snow maps for that matter, are just not great. Clear stripe of warning snowfall through SNE. Actually breaking down lift, RH, and temps in Bufkit and the same NAM would struggle to 4". There is good lift over BDL between 03-07z, but definite drying concerns after that.

Ryan doing naked snow angels outside the studio.

The HRRR and NAM 3km simulated reflecitivity are both a good match for the current radar. But the HRRR has the best accumulation well to the north of the hi-res NAM.

Kind of locked into Jackson for family reasons (we're going for a wedding and that's where everyone will be). I hadn't thought about splitting our Yellowstone time between areas of the park, but that certainly could be done (and honestly may help defray some of the cost). I've got a pretty good list going of potential hikes/sights to see., but some stuff is going to have to get cut just because of time. I feel like I could spend weeks in either place already.

It really IS other short term guidance. It poor man's ensemble that includes the hi-res NAM, ARW, NMM, and NSSL WRF. So it gives a good idea of what the hi-res models are doing, but also comes with QPF caveats that hi-res models come with (e.g. too much terrain influence at times).

Samesies.