Guest Pamela Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 They may be "mailing it in"...but at least they are now in the ballpark...and huge errors seem to be a thing of the past. I only live 15 miles away...and many times we have been in fairly decent agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeatherX Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 They may be "mailing it in"...but at least they are now in the ballpark...and huge errors seem to be a thing of the past. Courtesy of weather boards like this one, hopefully. Nothing pisses me off more than an official NWS climo reporting station with shoddy records..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 I only live 15 miles away...and many times we have been in fairly decent agreement. William, didnt Islip keep shoddy records in the past also and theyve done much better in the last half dozen years or so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 William, didnt Islip keep shoddy records in the past also and theyve done much better in the last half dozen years or so? Yes, that is correct. A 15 - 20 inch snowstorm in December 2003 was recorded as a "trace", for example. There has been improvement over the last 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Could you provide a link where you got this? My site is not updating because of the computer issues at the moment. i would like to add the link to my blog. I'm on my phone right now but google "earl barker regional snowfall" and you'll get the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Yes, that is correct. A 15 - 20 inch snowstorm in December 2003 was recorded as a "trace", for example. There has been improvement over the last 5 years. I think Farmingdale recorded 20" in that one. Northport had 21" Must've been one hell of a cut off out by Islip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cut Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Check carefully some of the observers stats though William. I have noticed over the last few years there are some perfect 10:1 ratios on snow measurement, which leads me to believe the observer is simply mailing it in...... Wait a minute, you don't mean to tell me that someone in Bridgeport is not taking their job's seriously .... come on!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cut Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 I only live 15 miles away...and many times we have been in fairly decent agreement. Ya, but your 15 minutes is south and over water!!!! and gains no altitude (probably, I am not completely familiar with topo where you are). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Ya, but your 15 minutes is south and over water!!!! and gains no altitude (probably, I am not completely familiar with topo where you are). Actually gains 170 feet...Bridgeport vs Port Jeff snowfall...let's just say it's a complicated relationship... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Actually gains 170 feet...Bridgeport vs Port Jeff snowfall...let's just say it's a complicated relationship... hahaha. Actually, arent you closer to New Haven than Bridgeport, William? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 hahaha. Actually, arent you closer to New Haven than Bridgeport, William? Negative.... the CT coast bends a little more sharply northeastward as one heads east of BDR...then straightens out again east of Yale... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edge Weather Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Thanks, but just so you know the link that you posted before was from the 6z run, the 18z run just came out and it is very similar, but just a little less accumulation. But it is amazing how similar it really is. I'm on my phone right now but google "earl barker regional snowfall" and you'll get the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Negative.... the CT coast bends a little more sharply northeastward as one heads east of BDR...then straightens out again east of Yale... Ahhh ok, you're really close to Mt Sinai arent you? Looks like that area has a slight elevation (220 feet or so.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 From the map I just looked at, looks like the Rocky Point - Shoreham - Wading River area is where the north shore makes its closest approach to New Haven, and that's where it would be closer to there than Bridgeport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthlight Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Thanks, but just so you know the link that you posted before was from the 6z run, the 18z run just came out and it is very similar, but just a little less accumulation. But it is amazing how similar it really is. The link is the same for both off hour runs (06/18z)...so if your cache wasn't cleared or the image wasnt updated yet it would show 06z. But I refreshed and mines the same, so I guess mine had updated. Looks good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Ahhh ok, you're really close to Mt Sinai arent you? Looks like that area has a slight elevation (220 feet or so.) The towns border one another. Of course, down at the beach you are at sea level, then as you drive south you generally are moving uphill...the high point in Port Jefferson is 270' a.s.l., I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeatherX Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Wait a minute, you don't mean to tell me that someone in Bridgeport is not taking their job's seriously .... come on!!!!!! If you look back through the years and what is actually required of weather observers, it's a tough job. I suppose doing it well would require that job to be a 24/7 effort if you think about it. I guess I was a little bit harsh in my assessment, but when the errors are glaring it just annoys me. But then again, I wouldn't be able to do it better than anyone else..... And let's not forget, it gon' snow...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 The towns border one another. Of course, down at the beach you are at sea level, then as you drive south you generally are moving uphill...the high point in Port Jefferson is 270' a.s.l., I think. So there you might get the reverse scenario from here, which is, maybe in a borderline case it was mixing right near the sound and all snow in the hills to the south-- although I dont know how much of a difference 270' would make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 So there you might get the reverse scenario from here, which is, maybe in a borderline case it was mixing right near the sound and all snow in the hills to the south-- although I dont know how much of a difference 270' would make. It's possible...when I was younger, I might have investigated such possibilities...in recent years, 24 hours is not sufficient for one day.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 If you look back through the years and what is actually required of weather observers, it's a tough job. I suppose doing it well would require that job to be a 24/7 effort if you think about it. I guess I was a little bit harsh in my assessment, but when the errors are glaring it just annoys me. But then again, I wouldn't be able to do it better than anyone else..... And let's not forget, it gon' snow...... I know some of the problems at JFK are due to them measuring from a roof top-- I hope they dont do that a Bridgeport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 It's possible...when I was younger, I might have investigated such possibilities...in recent years, 24 hours is not sufficient for one day.... I know what you mean lol-- if we could get rid of all the nasty sulfur dioxide and greenhouse warming of Venus, that would be the perfect place to retire to. Each venusian day = something like 240 earth days lol. As a matter of fact, their day is longer than their year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 So there you might get the reverse scenario from here, which is, maybe in a borderline case it was mixing right near the sound and all snow in the hills to the south-- although I dont know how much of a difference 270' would make. Given its a very sharp increase and not a gradual one, not much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I know what you mean lol-- if we could get rid of all the nasty sulfur dioxide and greenhouse warming of Venus, that would be the perfect place to retire to. Each venusian day = something like 240 earth days lol. As a matter of fact, their day is longer than their year. I believe the surface temperature is 800 F...and the air pressure is such that it would crush virtually anything...make's Hell sound tolerable in comparison.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I believe the surface temperature is 800 F...and the air pressure is such that it would crush virtually anything...make's Hell sound tolerable in comparison.... Yup, thats from the GHG and the sulfur dioxide. I think whomever called it "Earth's Twin" was being sarcastic. Although, if one could ditch the poisonous gasses, it might be different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 It would be nice if NYC could get enough to join the seasonal 60 inch snowfall club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris L Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I believe the surface temperature is 800 F...and the air pressure is such that it would crush virtually anything...make's Hell sound tolerable in comparison.... And we think 100 is hot on Earth.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 And we think 100 is hot on Earth.... I wonder what kind of thermometers we would use there lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeatherX Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 I know some of the problems at JFK are due to them measuring from a roof top-- I hope they dont do that a Bridgeport. I don't know what the Bridgeport guy does....sometimes the report is spot on and other times it's clearly mailed in. I think the market for automated sensors beyond what we have now is interesting.....That's right up your alley Alex, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Yup, thats from the GHG and the sulfur dioxide. I think whomever called it "Earth's Twin" was being sarcastic. Although, if one could ditch the poisonous gasses, it might be different. They are deemed "twins" only because the diameters are very similar... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 They are deemed "twins" only because the diameters are very similar... Yup, in every other way theyre opposite lol. I've always wondered what caused their evolution to proceed so differently, considering theyre each other's closest planetary neighbors and close to the same diameter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.