uncle W Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 That would be historical to have a historical east coast storm in a historically snowless winter. There were three winters with one big snowfall during a well below average snow season... 1875-76...11.0" storm...18.3" for the season... 1912-13...11.4" storm...15.3" for the season... 1994-95...10.8" storm...11.8" for the season... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEG NAO Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 There were three winters with one big snowfall during a well below average snow season... 1875-76...11.0" storm...18.3" for the season... 1912-13...11.4" storm...15.3" for the season... 1994-95...10.8" storm...11.8" for the season... you forgot the Feb 11 - 12 83 HECS up until that storm the winter was very similar to this one so far.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEG NAO Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 HPC does not even mention this threat and their maps show no storm PRELIMINARY EXTENDED FORECAST DISCUSSION NWS HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL PREDICTION CENTER CAMP SPRINGS MD 400 AM EST SUN FEB 12 2012 VALID 12Z THU FEB 16 2012 - 12Z SUN FEB 19 2012 USED AN EVEN BLEND OF THE 00Z/12 ECMWF AND 12Z/11 ECENS MEAN FOR THE PRELIMINARY FRONTS AND PRESSURES FOR DAYS 3 THROUGH 7. THE EUROPEAN CENTRE GUIDANCE CONTINUES TO BE THE MOST STABLE OF THE GLOBAL NUMERICAL SOLUTIONS AT THE MEDIUM RANGE...OFFERING AT LEAST SOME PROMISE THAT A RELIABLE SIGNAL LIES WITHIN ITS CONFINES. THE GFS...GEFS MEAN...AND GEM GLOBAL ALL BREAK FROM THE SPLIT FLOW CHARACTERISTIC OF THIS ENTIRE COLD SEASON...WITH A SUSPICIOUSLY CLEAN LOOKING POSITIVE PNA PATTERN BY MID PERIOD. THE EUROPEAN CENTRE SOLUTIONS HONOR THE SPLIT THROUGH THE FORECAST. CISCO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle W Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 you forgot the Feb 11 - 12 83 HECS up until that storm the winter was very similar to this one so far.. Central Park has 7.2" so far...1982-83 had 9.6" besides the Feb. Hecs...1994-95 had 1" besides their Feb. storm...1875-76 had their storm in February also...1912-13 got off to a good start with their storm Christmas eve... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJHurricane Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Just took a look at the 18z GFS Individual Ensembles, and most of the individual members are much more amplified than the operational. A few have sub 980 mb lows 100 miles east of NJ. However, the ones that do look warm. Not sure if I buy that considering the low would be strong enough to generate its own cold air through dynamic cooling. gonna go out on a limb here and say that the ground of weenielandia is littered with broken branches and the broken bones of weenies who keep going out on limbs supported by individual ensemble members that show the most favorable solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 gonna go out on a limb here and say that the ground of weenielandia is littered with broken branches and the broken bones of weenies who keep going out on limbs supported by individual ensemble members that show the most favorable solution. I posted the 18z GEFS and stated what they showed, which included a couple individual members showing a large Nor'Easter impacting the region. Is there a problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthShoreWx Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 gonna go out on a limb here and say that the ground of weenielandia is littered with broken branches and the broken bones of weenies who keep going out on limbs supported by individual ensemble members that show the most favorable solution. Another reason why the endless drone of leafblowers never stopped this winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBG Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 The more skilled mets on this Board seem to think we'll be KU-free this winter. I hope, but doubt, they're wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 The more skilled mets on this Board seem to think we'll be KU-free this winter. I hope, but doubt, they're wrong. Most winters are KU free winters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 There was a KU, so this winter doesn't count as KU free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 There was a KU, so this winter doesn't count as KU free. Counting the Oct storm is pushing it I would think. I know 2012 won't be KU free because on 21 Dec 2012 we are going to have the KU to end all KUs. Literally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBG Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 There was a KU, so this winter doesn't count as KU free. Only for the "early winter" supplement. October 29, 2011 was not a KU storm in the sense of being 10+" in three KU cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CooL Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 i hope i am not the only one that doesnt think a KU pattern is going to settle in next week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Only for the "early winter" supplement. October 29, 2011 was not a KU storm in the sense of being 10+" in three KU cities. Fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isotherm Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Only for the "early winter" supplement. October 29, 2011 was not a KU storm in the sense of being 10+" in three KU cities. Doesn't matter. It produced significant, major, and historic snows just inland from the big cities, better than most mid winter storms would produce. We had 4-8" just 20 minutes outside of Philly here, 15"+ fell in NW NJ, and well over 2 feet in interior SNE. Many KU events were not 10"+ in DCA, NYC and BOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Doesn't matter. It produced significant, major, and historic snows just inland from the big cities, better than most mid winter storms would produce. We had 4-8" just 20 minutes outside of Philly here, 15"+ fell in NW NJ, and well over 2 feet in interior SNE. Many KU events were not 10"+ in DCA, NYC and BOS. While many were not in all three, most "winter" events WERE 10"+ in at least one of those... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simpsonsbuff Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I had a power outage from October 29... and I officially live in city limits of NYC... Though not in Manhattan. I don't remember another winter storm delivering a power outage here. I'm sure there have been though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isotherm Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 While many were not in all three, most "winter" events WERE 10"+ in at least one of those... Agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgwp96 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Doesn't matter. It produced significant, major, and historic snows just inland from the big cities, better than most mid winter storms would produce. We had 4-8" just 20 minutes outside of Philly here, 15"+ fell in NW NJ, and well over 2 feet in interior SNE. Many KU events were not 10"+ in DCA, NYC and BOS. im surprised it didnt rank higher, never seen a storm with so much disruption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBG Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 im surprised it didnt rank higher, never seen a storm with so much disruption. I may be wrong but I think the KU standards are 10+ inches in 3 of these cities:Washington DC Baltimore MD Philadelphia PA New York NY Boston Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgwp96 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I may be wrong but I think the KU standards are 10+ inches in 3 of these cities: Washington DC Baltimore MD Philadelphia PA New York NY Boston no heres the scale How the NESIS value is calculated where n is the snowfall category, which can take one of four values: 4 for snowfalls > 4" and <10" 10 for snowfalls >10" and <20" 20 for snowfalls >20" and <30" 30 for snowfalls > 30" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 KU and NESIS aren't "precisely" the same. NESIS is objective, KU is subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 im surprised it didnt rank higher, never seen a storm with so much disruption. Well when you've got heavy wet snow falling on trees still covered with leaves... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcutter Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 what are the other variables? (the "A" and the "P") *not that i would know what to do with them but i was just curious no heres the scale How the NESIS value is calculated where n is the snowfall category, which can take one of four values: 4 for snowfalls > 4" and <10" 10 for snowfalls >10" and <20" 20 for snowfalls >20" and <30" 30 for snowfalls > 30" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgwp96 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Well when you've got heavy wet snow falling on trees still covered with leaves... which is why it makes it even more rare than a 2ft storm. how many storms had 6-20 inches of snow fall with trees still holding the majority of their leaves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absolute Humidity Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I believe their A accumulation and P population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgwp96 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 what are the other variables? (the "A" and the "P") *not that i would know what to do with them but i was just curious An is the area in square miles having snowfall greater than or equal to the category specified by n Amean is 73,981, which is the mean area in square miles that received more than 10" of snow, based on a NCDC study of 30 snowstorms between 1956 and 2000. Pn is the population in the area receiving snowfall greater than or equal to the category specified by n (taken from the 2000 U.S. Census) Pmean is 30,333,000, which is the mean population affected by snowfall >10" in the 13 northeastern states, based on the same storm sample as Amean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcutter Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 thanks An is the area in square miles having snowfall greater than or equal to the category specified by n Amean is 73,981, which is the mean area in square miles that received more than 10" of snow, based on a NCDC study of 30 snowstorms between 1956 and 2000. Pn is the population in the area receiving snowfall greater than or equal to the category specified by n (taken from the 2000 U.S. Census) Pmean is 30,333,000, which is the mean population affected by snowfall >10" in the 13 northeastern states, based on the same storm sample as Amean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 which is why it makes it even more rare than a 2ft storm. how many storms had 6-20 inches of snow fall with trees still holding the majority of their leaves? I realize that, but NESIS of course only factors in accumulation and population. KU is a bit more subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattinpa Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 GFS looks like it is trying to phase, but just not there yet at hr. 159. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.