Jump to content

OceanStWx

Meteorologist
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    19,778

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by OceanStWx

  1. OceanStWx
    I was actually curious if you had a specific call you were joking about. Our snowfall stats look great to start the year at GYX, but I would argue strongly that both "big" events were actually pretty shitty forecasts on our part.
  2. OceanStWx
    Deja vu of what? Picking apart a GFS point sounding at 33 F at this range is a fool's errand, regardless of whether or not the pattern supports a cooler scenario. Tossing the GFS thermal field but only to go colder is too simplistic, that's why I posted.
  3. OceanStWx
    Never mind that the GFS bias is still too cold in the low levels in the medium/long range.
  4. OceanStWx
    Chris yes, and also 1998 is a great example of the rippling waves along a pre-set background environment favorable for ice. The primary remained near the Ohio Valley but shortwave energy propagating east along the surface front kept the baggy low pressure near Cape Cod. Never really got into heavy precip rates, and made it one very efficient event.
  5. OceanStWx
    I feel like this is typically the biggest difference between an ice storm and the nuisance events we usually get. In the ice storm scenario we sustain the forcing to produce precip, not just the cold sticking around. Most often though the mid level warm front ends up in CYUL while we are left with drizzle and low clouds just north of the surface warm front. The QPF is going to stick with the mid level forcing, despite what the models may show.
  6. OceanStWx
  7. OceanStWx
    Therein lies the problem. PoP from models are created from QPF. The more QPF the higher the PoP (to a certain extent, it's not like you need 5 inches to get 100% PoP). So even if a model is spitting out a lot of 0.01" amounts, that will translate to a low PoP. And if you blend a bunch of models with 0.01" in different locations, the PoP can go even lower. So you manually need to increase the values. That's usually the failure point in the forecasts.
  8. OceanStWx
  9. OceanStWx
    I dream for the day when I come in to 100% in the grids. I remember one event early in my days here when we may have had less than 15% chance of snow showers and it was just pounding +SN 1"/hr stuff up there. I took webcam screen captures and emailed them out to the staff in a rage. Full Scooter smash.
  10. OceanStWx
    I've been here for 9 years now and we can't seem to get out of the habit of forecast 20-30% chance of snow showers during an upslope event. I stream Pittsburg's, Alex's, and your webcams during winter to make a point.
  11. OceanStWx
    Honestly the forecast 925/850 winds aren't that different between the two events.
  12. OceanStWx
    I've been saying a good place to start is the 11/30 wind event. That should probably be the baseline forecast right now. BDL gusted to 47 mph. Temps and dewpoints got into the lower 60s. Low level lapse rates were about 3C/km (not unstable but not inverted either). Could see the 925 jet crank to a similar level (OKX sampled 52 kt at 12z, but the worst of it was in the afternoon so no obs).
  13. OceanStWx
    Gee, you think we're going to be moving some mass around the mid latitudes?
  14. OceanStWx
    Just gotta give him the old clown emoji from the office account.
  15. OceanStWx
    Exclamations, all caps...
  16. OceanStWx
    What inversion on the GFS? No real hint of one on soundings until about 800 mb.
  17. OceanStWx
    Well it's always best to never buy the hype, but 50 knot gusts with 2.5 days to go in our forecasts is probably one of our all time lead times for a wind event. It's one of the better looking signals I've seen (caveat I haven't done a model reanalysis of 10/30/17 yet).
  18. OceanStWx
    Throw up the sash and air out the house?
  19. OceanStWx
    Pretty amazing loop. There's no pivot. Just a lot of WCB goodies.
  20. OceanStWx
    The saving grace is that the models have not initialized the pack awfully well. I have 13 in my backyard even though I'd have to be in NH to see anything over 12" on that map. The bad news is it's hard to say how much pack the models think we'll lose when it goes to 0 in so many places.
  21. OceanStWx
    I actually really like how you can see the Benchmark SSW/NNE pivots but also the Mid Altantic WSW/ENE bands. And of course my own personal budding weenie Bermuda triangle of disappointment in RI.
  22. OceanStWx
    Too many DIPAs and fell asleep on the keyboard?
  23. OceanStWx
    I ended up clearing twice (7 am CoCoRaHS report and again at 18z). But that last chunk my office was asking for rate reports for SPS purposes. I got 3.9 and 4.8" in two consecutive hours (didn't clear the board after the 3.9" so there was likely compaction and even more than 4.8" in that second hour). When the snow stopped I went back out for the final measurement and the depth on the board had already settled nearly an inch to 8.0" in about an hour. It happens fast.
  24. OceanStWx
    Up to 24.8" on the season. Good enough to knock Kevin down a peg.
  25. OceanStWx
    From what it looks like their 17th CoCoRaHS report was missing liquid (CoCoRaHS staff edited it out), looks like overflow. So that doesn't mean the snowfall amount it wrong like you say. I don't love that snow depth was T before and 48 inches fell and was reported on the ground and the snow depth was then reported as 48.5 without any additional snow.
×
×
  • Create New...