Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,586
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

February 5-6 Storm Threat I


Baroclinic Zone

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Because the mid levels are favorable....I'd take a marginal boundary layer of marginal mid levels, any day.

The marginal boundary 32 F dynamic snow bombs are some of my favorites. Love walking around with snow covering all the trees and lamp posts and stuff.

Marginal mid level snow grain crap is thumbsdownsmileyanim.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just absolutely hate the whole ratio obesession that has infiltrated this board....even if it looks good for ratios better than 10:1, you should never DEPEND on it because everything has to work out perfectly.

I think that norlun that hit CT with legit >16:1 ratios has corrupted everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess my reaction to that is " To each his own"?......:arrowhead:

Believe me, you should feel the same.....you have some wiggle room with regard to surface temps because if your mid levels are cold, then that is transferred down via dynamic once the prcipitation rate intensifies....however if your temps in the snow groth region become too warm, then you are simply done....as we saw the last event.

Point of origin is most imortant with regard to precipitation, which is why the notion that cold surface temps favor higher ratios is a fallacy....it's all about the mid levels\snow growth region.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe me, you should feel the same.....you have some wiggle room with regard to surface temps because if your mid levels are cold, then that is transferred down via dynamic once the prcipitation rate intensifies....however if your temps in the snow groth region become too warm, then you are simply done....as we saw the last event.

Point of origin is most imortant with regard to precipitation, which is why the notion that cold surface temps favor higher ratios is a fallacy....it's all about the mid levels\snow growth region.

That is very true. You're correct. Very Cold surface temperatures only take care of the low levels but not the mid-levels.:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is very true. You're correct. Very Cold surface temperatures only take care of the low levels but not the mid-levels.:)

I think that you can get away with surface temps of about 34* with superior mid levels and intense fall rates, but once you hit about 35*, you're gonna be SOL....JMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come to northeast vermont. We had a clipper come through last year with 50-60:1 ratios. At the tail end of this last storm ratios were 25-30:1, it looked like pieces of glass coming down and it was insanely powdery

ratios are cool.. I would like a good old 20:1 ratio storm.. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the mid levels are favorable....I'd take a marginal boundary layer of marginal mid levels, any day.

Yeah for some of you the mid levels will be more favorable this time.

At 0z it's really impossible to pinpoint which model camp is more correct, to be blunt they both kind of don't look great...small errors here and there and even 12 hour progs would show some significant errors if the new RUC was right. It's a draw neither was great.

I'd run with the NOGAPS to be safe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:weenie:

If a met will vouch for that I'll apologize

I've seen 40 or 50 to 1 in perfect LES situations, but 60 to 1 is starting to push it. Maybe you can briefly have that, but the weight of the snow (even perfect feather dendrites) really puts a cap on what ratios you can get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a senior atmospheric sciences major at lyndon state in northeast vermont. We got .12" liquid measure in our precip container after melting and area-wide there was 6-7 inches. We get insane ratios up here with light, low qpf events. Wind and the intensity and the amount of precip play a role. In fact, more qpf often means lower rations and stronger winds compact snow meaning lower ratios.

:weenie:

If a met will vouch for that I'll apologize

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a senior atmospheric sciences major at lyndon state in northeast vermont. We got .12" liquid measure in our precip container after melting and area-wide there was 6-7 inches. We get insane ratios up here with light, low qpf events. Wind and the intensity and the amount of precip play a role. In fact, more qpf often means lower rations and stronger winds compact snow meaning lower ratios.

Know a kid named Matt Nicklis up there? One of my best friends from home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe me, you should feel the same.....you have some wiggle room with regard to surface temps because if your mid levels are cold, then that is transferred down via dynamic once the prcipitation rate intensifies....however if your temps in the snow groth region become too warm, then you are simply done....as we saw the last event.

Point of origin is most imortant with regard to precipitation, which is why the notion that cold surface temps favor higher ratios is a fallacy....it's all about the mid levels\snow growth region.

Great point Ray, you can have an arctic airmass in place with a WAA event, but many times snow growth is le mis due to warming upstairs, give me dynamics in sne anytime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a senior atmospheric sciences major at lyndon state in northeast vermont. We got .12" liquid measure in our precip container after melting and area-wide there was 6-7 inches. We get insane ratios up here with light, low qpf events. Wind and the intensity and the amount of precip play a role. In fact, more qpf often means lower rations and stronger winds compact snow meaning lower ratios.

Alright out of respect for your studies and Will's comment I'll half-apologize for the weenie. Still think it's a bit of a stretch. I've woken up at Jay Peak with some of the lightest fluff this side of Utah covering my car, but 60:1 calculations might have some error involved. Point taken about the snowgrowth in the kingdom though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take that back, RUC would look much more like the NAM than the GFS by early morning.

I double take that back. I should say the RUC in a few hours would more closely support the NAM idea of a stronger southern m/l sw but it's also pointing towards a FASTER solution than the 18z NAM was advertising. So as always a compromise....I think we're going to see the NAM make a leap towards a faster southern system this run much like the GFS, but perhaps just a bit stronger than the GFS.

NAM bias of being too slow FTL.

JMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a senior atmospheric sciences major at lyndon state in northeast vermont. We got .12" liquid measure in our precip container after melting and area-wide there was 6-7 inches. We get insane ratios up here with light, low qpf events. Wind and the intensity and the amount of precip play a role. In fact, more qpf often means lower rations and stronger winds compact snow meaning lower ratios.

What kind of precip container? A heated tipping bucket will undermeasure liquid equivalent by quite a bit...especially with winds and high ratio snows.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Little dead zone banter, 5-10 sat?

Dead serious, not sure why people are not talking about Tuesday, classic LP formation on an artic front, classic stuff, then next weekend, thats a pattern changer, somebody in New England will get 30+ inches of snow over the next 8 days, take that to the bank.

Why stop at 30"? I'm thinking something more like 45 to 55.

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...