Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,600
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

march 5-7 potential heavy rain event


earthlight

Recommended Posts

I got six from that norlun event in 2009, and i remember the bitter cold temps for a few days after that storm. Its been a very long time that i have not seen 2 inches of snow in febuary, in a nut shell this febuary has suck imby. As we go foward into march nate its over, nina has taken over and just pre-pare for a very wet spring....

Yes, I remember that we had several mornings in the single digits in early February 2009, but Dobbs Ferry only had 3.5" from the Norlun and then 1.5" from the SW flow event later in the month. February 2009 was a poor snow month for Westchester County after a reasonably snowy December and January....finished with 45" that winter with the 10" storm on March 2nd our biggest for 08-09.

February 2011 wasn't terrible for me...I had 8" with the overrunning event and 2" with the 2/2 SW flow event; that's probably slightly below average snowfall but not terrible after a blockbuster January. I understand it was worse for those further south, especially in Central NJ that got split by the two events.

Most of our snowy Marches have come in La Niña...1956, 1960, 1967, 1996, etc...I understand the discouragement given that the last few winters have ended on a sour note, but I'm not completely prepared to surrender. With Canada being well below average in temperature and an active storm track, I can't rule out one or two more snowfalls. Our climatology is perhaps a bit different, but I think it would be rare for either of us to see our final accumulating snow on 2/21. Even last winter we had an inch or two in March, and we've had several Marches with 15" or more, including 2004.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 317
  • Created
  • Last Reply

LOL, really? extrapolating nam precip at 84 hours? this model has a terrible qpf bias as it is, let alone being pretty much a random number generator after 48 hours.

gfs just came in not that wet with its new run.

:lol: did you even read what I wrote? I said its hard to tell what kind of QPF would result but that the low is in a good position and that the simulated radar is impressive. WHO CARES HOW MUCH QPF OUTPUT IT SHOWS NOW.....again, I'm looking at important factors like the positioning and tilt of the trough.

You cann't compare the GFS with the NAM since the solutions are different as someone already stated but with the intensity of the precip its showing, one could argue that the eventual QPF should have been higher than what it shows. The GFS is more progressive than the NAM which is resulting in some of differences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bring on summer and the dry season, cold and rainy does nothing for me. Unfortunately, its nina spring, so we will be stuck in this pattern through April, maybe beyond.

we saw how using blanket nina climo worked for this january

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah these temps are pretty impressive today. I'm 26.5F with a light NLY wind under full sun in early March. :snowman:

11 am obs.

HUDSON VALLEY

CITY SKY/WX TMP DP RH WIND PRES REMARKS

NEWBURGH SUNNY 21 -4 33 N12G18 30.66F WCI 9

MONTGOMERY SUNNY 21 0 39 VRB5 30.65S WCI 15

POUGHKEEPSIE SUNNY 20 -3 36 NE6 30.68F WCI 12

ALBANY SUNNY 15 -6 39 N6 30.71S WCI 6

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you're looking into the longer range, there is some potential for some warmer temps/torch around Day 10 as indicated by the global ensembles this morning.

Talk about a miserable lack of blocking, that trough just settled into Greenland/Baffin Island and got stuck. Really been a Jekyll+Hyde winter, tale of two winters. Who could have imagined an H5 map that progressive looking in December?

We'll see if this is a long-term trend towards the blocky pattern ending or just a brief interlude. It may depend on whether El Niño comes back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it looks quite a bit like two previous runs of the GFS from a couple of days ago that slammed NW NJ but it has the precip a little further east and colder than the GFS. Has mixed precip and maybe accumulating snows into NW NJ.

hmmm.. 12Z euro is very interesting at 96 and 102.. it actually has accumulating snow not too far west of NYC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yea, it is actually extremely good for inland areas, but i wonder if the QPF is overdone.. it looks cold enough for a heavy wet snow from the mid hudson valley northward.

Even Allentown is cold enough for snow. Text soundings I have show over .50" of qpf as snow for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think for most of our region, heavy rain looks to be the primary threat. I went after the Euro for its < 0.75" QPF totals on the 00z run and I'm going to stick to my guns and say its suspect because of the large run to run differences. Of course I love its solution in many ways but we shouldn't hug this run because quite frankly, its a big outlier especially with regards to temperature profiles.

Question for the mets? Does the GFS still have a progressive bias? I wonder if that's part of the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the important thing to remember is that the GFS showed a very similar solution twice already a couple of days ago. One thing I have learned from reading the models over the years is that it is not particularly easy for two different models to produce two very similar solutions for the same potential event on different runs on different days. Often when this happens there is something to it. Also, the Euro is by far the best model is this time range. What interests me the most is the potential for possibly heavy snow on the far NW fringe of this system, especially if the precipitation is really that heavy, possibly there would be dynamic cooling as well. This could be really interesting.

I still think for most of our region, heavy rain looks to be the primary threat. I went after the Euro for its < 0.75" QPF totals on the 00z run and I'm going to stick to my guns and say its suspect because of the large run to run differences. Of course I love its solution in many ways but we shouldn't hug this run because quite frankly, its a big outlier especially with regards to temperature profiles.

Question for the mets? Does the GFS still have a progressive bias? I wonder if that's part of the problem.

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...