OSUmetstud Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 65.39" throughout the 00s ('00-'01 - '09-'10) IMBY...~3" above long term avg. there's been an upswing in snow from the lakes over the last few decades. There's a paper out about it. Not sure if it's due to global warming...measurement techniques...hemispheric patterns...or a combination of the three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Well, employing that logic, I'll look forward to my couple of Miller B-East oak obliterators this spring. Saying we are due, doesn't mean saying that it will happen on a certain date or time...it just means that it will happen sooner or later. '06-'07 was bound to happen sooner rather than later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 i wonder what the worst indicies for BUF are. Strong Nino and +AO? The problem is LES is so tough to predict...we've had good winter in bad patterns because we got "lucky". I would think that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Saying we are due, doesn't mean saying that it will happen on a certain date or time...it just means that it will happen sooner or later. '06-'07 was bound to happen sooner rather than later. We're due for a Feb '69....in which I see 3' and Kev smokes cirrus. lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 I would think that. the problem is I think almost all correlations would be weak...for temps it be fine...but LES doesn't always play by the rules. Look at 2001-2002...132" in a really awful winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 the problem is I think almost all correlations would be weak...for temps it be fine...but LES doesn't always play by the rules. Look at 2001-2002...132" in a really awful winter. I could get 30" more inches, and still be on par with one of the most infamous winters in east coast lore, '01-'02. That sums up the current situation quite nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 We're due for a Feb '69....in which I see 3' and Kev smokes cirrus. lol. Feb '69 was probably more meteorologicaly anomalous than 1978 lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Feb '69 was probably more meteorologicaly anomalous than 1978 lol That's ok...I'll settle for '78. I'm starting to like Scooter's whole "due" logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 the problem is I think almost all correlations would be weak...for temps it be fine...but LES doesn't always play by the rules. Look at 2001-2002...132" in a really awful winter. Yeah LES is fickle for sure. '01-'02 for a while had a deep trough in the GL region. I remember Pit being like 10F one day and we were 35F trying to advect cold on a wsw wind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 I could get 30" more inches, and still be on par with one of the most infamous winters in east coast lore, '01-'02. That sums up the current situation quite nicely. same with me...We haven't had a sub-50" winter since 1949. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Someone with the numbers should post where winters have gone after being so futile for so long. Ryan posted some stuff last month and it wasn't pretty, my guess is it's even less pretty at this later date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Yeah LES is fickle for sure. '01-'02 for a while had a deep trough in the GL region. I remember Pit being like 10F one day and we were 35F trying to advect cold on a wsw wind. awesome pattern for one week..the rest of the winter was **** lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 That's ok...I'll settle for '78. I'm starting to like Scooter's whole "due" logic. Just remember...I don't like that word per se, because in weather...the word "due" sometimes does not apply...but you understand what I mean. Just like some say we are due for another 1938. These storms may have happened twice in 20 yrs and then maybe did not come about for another 200 years. So saying we are due, is not a good argument..but we know it's coming eventually. Tell the people living near the Merrimack river about 1-100yr floods. They happened back to back in 2006 and 2007...lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Just remember...I don't like that word per se, because in weather...the word "due" sometimes does not apply...but you understand what I mean. Just like some say we are due for another 1938. These storms may have happened twice in 20 yrs and then maybe did not come about for another 200 years. So saying we are due, is not a good argument..but we know it's coming eventually. Tell the people living near the Merrimack river about 1-100yr floods. They happened back to back in 2006 and 2007...lol. I was attending UML for both of those....that was nuts. Portions of N campus were game over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 And who knows..next winter could suck..and then the next 3 may be ridiculous. Climo works in mysterious ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Scott (Messenger), I'll dig up my local stats pertaining to that, later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKpowdah Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Hey Sam (or anyone), give a quick run down in your opinion as to how increased solar can help keep the AO +. I want to see if it agrees with my thinking. I think the connection is that increased solar activity destroys ozone....? The temperature in the stratosphere is directly related to the concentration of ozone as that reaction with UV is the only mechanism for heating that layer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 We're due for a Feb '69....in which I see 3' and Kev smokes cirrus. lol. I'd love that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 I'd love that Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Why? For your meltdown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 For your meltdown Thankfully that kind of a pattern happens once every 200 years so we don't have to worry about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dabize Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 I'd love that You must be referring to the second storm that month I fear that Kevin would have been too busy still digging out from Mayor Lindsay's snowstorm on Feb 11th to notice. In Northern Westchester, we got 27" and were still showshoeing out to the nearest road, so we barely noticed that we missed out on that storm.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 I think the connection is that increased solar activity destroys ozone....? The temperature in the stratosphere is directly related to the concentration of ozone as that reaction with UV is the only mechanism for heating that layer. That's the simple version that I know of as well. I've seen folks get into the deeper understanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powderfreak Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 And who knows..next winter could suck..and then the next 3 may be ridiculous. Climo works in mysterious ways. Yeah I've been afraid we are "due" for several clunkers in a row given the ridiculous snowfall in general over the past 10-12 years. I mean every station in New England is averaging a pretty significant higher amount of snow in the 2000s so far over the long term 50-100 year averages. The local spot up here BTV is averaging like 24" more since 2000-2001 to the present, than they are from 1900 to the present. I'm pretty sure Will said its similar at ORH (maybe not as high, but noticably higher than long term climo). The problem is we all remember the fun and crazy events and think we are due for those type of storms, but we forget about all the crap-tastic patterns and seasons. I mean the 1920s, 1930s and 40s were horrible for snowfall if I remember my snowfall climo. Look at the max snowfall seasons at BTV... 3 of the top 5 seasons occurred since 2000-2001 which is impressive for a place that has records since 1884! The law of averages says we may be due for quite a few clunkers. SEASONAL SNOWFALL EXTREMES BY RANK MAXIMUM / SEASON MINIMUM / SEASON 1) 145.4 1970-71 1) 31.3 1912-13 2) 132.0 1886-87 2) 32.0 1904-05 3) 129.0 2010-11 3) 38.3 1928-29 4) 122.5 2000-01 4) 38.7 1926-27 5) 120.2 2007-08 5) 39.2 1990-91 6) 116.9 1992-93 6) 39.6 1979-80 7) 113.5 1887-88 7) 40.4 1988-89 8) 111.6 1965-66 8) 40.7 1948-49 9) 108.9 1971-72 9) 42.0 1902-03 10) 107.2 1993-94 10) 43.0 1903-04 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Yeah I've been afraid we are "due" for several clunkers in a row given the ridiculous snowfall in general over the past 10-12 years. I mean every station in New England is averaging a pretty significant higher amount of snow in the 2000s so far over the long term 50-100 year averages. The local spot up here BTV is averaging like 24" more since 2000-2001 to the present, than they are from 1900 to the present. I'm pretty sure Will said its similar at ORH (maybe not as high, but noticably higher than long term climo). The problem is we all remember the fun and crazy events and think we are due for those type of storms, but we forget about all the crap-tastic patterns and seasons. I mean the 1920s, 1930s and 40s were horrible for snowfall if I remember my snowfall climo. Look at the max snowfall seasons at BTV... 3 of the top 5 seasons occurred since 2000-2001 which is impressive for a place that has records since 1884! The law of averages says we may be due for quite a few clunkers. SEASONAL SNOWFALL EXTREMES BY RANK MAXIMUM / SEASON MINIMUM / SEASON 1) 145.4 1970-71 1) 31.3 1912-13 2) 132.0 1886-87 2) 32.0 1904-05 3) 129.0 2010-11 3) 38.3 1928-29 4) 122.5 2000-01 4) 38.7 1926-27 5) 120.2 2007-08 5) 39.2 1990-91 6) 116.9 1992-93 6) 39.6 1979-80 7) 113.5 1887-88 7) 40.4 1988-89 8) 111.6 1965-66 8) 40.7 1948-49 9) 108.9 1971-72 9) 42.0 1902-03 10) 107.2 1993-94 10) 43.0 1903-04 The 30s and 40s were a lousy decadal regime too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 You must be referring to the second storm that month I fear that Kevin would have been too busy still digging out from Mayor Lindsay's snowstorm on Feb 11th to notice. In Northern Westchester, we got 27" and were still showshoeing out to the nearest road, so we barely noticed that we missed out on that storm.......... A true weenie would notice...sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Yeah I've been afraid we are "due" for several clunkers in a row given the ridiculous snowfall in general over the past 10-12 years. I mean every station in New England is averaging a pretty significant higher amount of snow in the 2000s so far over the long term 50-100 year averages. The local spot up here BTV is averaging like 24" more since 2000-2001 to the present, than they are from 1900 to the present. I'm pretty sure Will said its similar at ORH (maybe not as high, but noticably higher than long term climo). The problem is we all remember the fun and crazy events and think we are due for those type of storms, but we forget about all the crap-tastic patterns and seasons. I mean the 1920s, 1930s and 40s were horrible for snowfall if I remember my snowfall climo. Look at the max snowfall seasons at BTV... 3 of the top 5 seasons occurred since 2000-2001 which is impressive for a place that has records since 1884! The law of averages says we may be due for quite a few clunkers. SEASONAL SNOWFALL EXTREMES BY RANK MAXIMUM / SEASON MINIMUM / SEASON 1) 145.4 1970-71 1) 31.3 1912-13 2) 132.0 1886-87 2) 32.0 1904-05 3) 129.0 2010-11 3) 38.3 1928-29 4) 122.5 2000-01 4) 38.7 1926-27 5) 120.2 2007-08 5) 39.2 1990-91 6) 116.9 1992-93 6) 39.6 1979-80 7) 113.5 1887-88 7) 40.4 1988-89 8) 111.6 1965-66 8) 40.7 1948-49 9) 108.9 1971-72 9) 42.0 1902-03 10) 107.2 1993-94 10) 43.0 1903-04 You want an area due for terrible stretch, take a look at Dendrite's 6 year run. He avgs like 70"\season and over that 6 year span is around 100". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dabize Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 A true weenie would notice...sorry. OK - now I see why he is WOTY. And to think that I date my weeniedom from that February, and missed out (4" vs 36") on the storm in question. Kevin has me beat a mile........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Scott (Messenger), I'll dig up my local stats pertaining to that, later. The following seasons were held to single digits in every month through January IMBY: 1958-'59- 15.5" through the end of January and ended with 52.7" 1962-'63- 21.4" through the end of January and ended with 52.9" 1968-'69 (lol)- 12.8" through the end of January and ended with 86.5" 1979-'80- 6.6" through the end of January and ended with current record for futility with 19.9" 1985-'86- 15.9" through the end of January and ended with 33.2" 1988-'89- 5.6" through the end of January and ended with the 2nd most futile total of 20.3" 1991-'92- 10.6" through the end of January and ended with 4th most futile total on record of 26.6" 1994-'95- 8.2" through the end of January and ended up with the 3rd most futile total on record of 22.5" 1996-'97- 18.4" through the end of January and ended up with 63.5" on the season. Salvaged by the best storm of my life 2006-'07- 3.5" through the end of January and ended up with 34.5" Best season is 1968-'69 with 86.5" Worst is 1979-'80 with 19.9" Mean season is 41.3" My seasonal total currently stands at 6.5" and is doubtful to change much from now until month's end; if that is indeed the case, then that would render 1979-'80, 1988-'89, 1994-'95 and 2006-'07 as the best indicators of where we may be headed with a mean snowfall of 24.3" IMBY. Horrific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 OK - now I see why he is WOTY. And to think that I date my weeniedom from that February, and missed out (4" vs 36") on the storm in question. Kevin has me beat a mile........... As do I, which makes sense since I won in 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.