Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,597
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    DAinDC
    Newest Member
    DAinDC
    Joined

NNE Winter Part 3


mreaves

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Event totals: 2.7” Snow/0.12” L.E.

 

Snow was just starting up when we were leaving Stowe yesterday afternoon, and it was very light in intensity at the house through the evening.  I almost cleared the board at midnight last night, but there was only a half an inch or so of accumulation by that point, and it was comprised of such small flakes that there didn’t appear to be much of an issue that stack being crushed by subsequent snowfall.  Indeed the flake size and snowfall intensity must have picked up a bit during the overnight period, because there was 2.7” on the snowboard this morning with some nice high-quality upslope dendrites.  It was still snowing lightly, but I’m not sure how much addition we’ll get because it didn’t feel that robust.  Anyway, the accumulation is already right in the 2-4” range that our BTV NWS point forecast had for us as of yesterday afternoon.  I’m not sure what last night’s Froude Numbers were, but just a couple of miles east of us at the Waterbury Park and Ride, accumulations seemed to be much less, and accumulations I’ve seen so far here in the Champlain Valley seem similar to those as well.

 

Details from the 6:00 A.M. Waterbury observations:

 

New Snow: 2.7 inches

New Liquid: 0.12 inches

Snow/Water Ratio: 22.5

Snow Density: 4.4% H2O

Temperature: 13.3 F

Sky: Light Snow (1-4 mm flakes)

Snow at the stake: 12.0 inches

 

Interesting snowfall distribution around the area... you got over twice as much as the base of Mansfield here on the east side last night. 

 

Jay Peak... 1-2"

Smuggs... 3"

Stowe... 1" (though I need to check 3,000ft to confirm upper number)

Bolton... 3-4"

MRG... 5"

Sugarbush.. 2-7"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it fair to assume that the lack of discussion here concerning Thursday, is a good sign?

 

It could be the Euro has slowed the timing a bit, but again shows a solid hit up here. I haven't seen the GFS or other models yet this morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it fair to assume that the lack of discussion here concerning Thursday, is a good sign?

 

I haven’t had time to look at the models yet or venture into the discussion thread this morning, but in Roger Hill’s early morning broadcast he mentioned preliminary thoughts of 3-6”, 4-8”, or possibly even 5-10” for the event.  If that was the case, it would be nice.  We’re already much more on pace for the typical rate of snowfall that we’re used to seeing for one of these midwinter months around here, and after a third of a month we’re less than three inches away from eclipsing the total snowfall received in January.  Even average snowfall levels would be such a nice reprieve from that strange January pattern.  Hopefully it’s steady as she goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Interesting snowfall distribution around the area... you got over twice as much as the base of Mansfield here on the east side last night.

 

 

It looks like this event isn’t quite done yet; I just checked the J&E Productions Web Cam after clearing the board there this morning, and there’s roughly another inch down with fluffy flakes falling:

 

10FEB14A.jpg

 

I’ll keep an eye on it because it looks like there’s another pulse of moisture coming in:

 

10FEB14A.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Event totals: 2.7” Snow/0.12” L.E.

Snow was just starting up when we were leaving Stowe yesterday afternoon, and it was very light in intensity at the house through the evening. I almost cleared the board at midnight last night, but there was only a half an inch or so of accumulation by that point, and it was comprised of such small flakes that there didn’t appear to be much of an issue that stack being crushed by subsequent snowfall. Indeed the flake size and snowfall intensity must have picked up a bit during the overnight period, because there was 2.7” on the snowboard this morning with some nice high-quality upslope dendrites. It was still snowing lightly, but I’m not sure how much addition we’ll get because it d 8idn’t feel that robust. Anyway, the accumulation is already right in the 2-4” range that our BTV NWS point forecast had for us as of yesterday afternoon. I’m not sure what last night’s Froude Numbers were, but just a couple of miles east of us at the Waterbury Park and Ride, 9accumulations seemed to be much less, and accumulations I’ve seen so far here in the

Champlain Valley seem similar to those as well.[/siz

Details from the 6:00 A.M. Waterbury observations:

New Snow: 2.7 inches

New Liquid: 0.12 inches

Snow/Water Ratio: 22.5

Snow Density: 4.4% H2O

Temperature: 13.3 F

Sky: Light Snow (1-4 mm flakes)

Snow at the stake: 12.0 inches

Froude was 0.4 this morning. Jumps up quickly to 1 at 15z, and then well above by 18z.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Took 12 hr of constant very light snow to accumulate 0.7", with the last few flakes drifting down at 7 this morning. This is about the 4th event this winter with excruciatingly slow accum and a total under 2".   This one was forecast exactly right, even the times - the 6-hr snow tool had Farmington right at 0.7", with that coming 7P thru 7A.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Froude was 0.4 this morning. Jumps up quickly to 1 at 15z, and then well above by 18z.

 

Curious- how does the Froude number affect the Worcester Range? Are the effects less-pronounced, or does it not really apply at all?  Last night, we received 1.5-1.6" on the western side of the Worcester Range (1300')  with relatively blocked flow.  J. Spin came in near double that just a few miles over at lower elevation.

 

Wonder if there are any stats out there about snowfall over this way- it seems like the higher elevations around here should see decent snow, though the true spine of the Greens probably sees something like 30% more snow across the valley (just a guess).  The alpine skiing crowd votes with their feet- and there's far less traffic over here for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious- how does the Froude number affect the Worcester Range? Are the effects less-pronounced, or does it not really apply at all?  Last night, we received 1.5-1.6" on the western side of the Worcester Range (1300')  with relatively blocked flow.  J. Spin came in near double that just a few miles over at lower elevation.

 

Wonder if there are any stats out there about snowfall over this way- it seems like the higher elevations around here should see decent snow, though the true spine of the Greens probably sees something like 30% more snow across the valley (just a guess).  The alpine skiing crowd votes with their feet- and there's far less traffic over here for a reason.

 

I don't think it really applies to the Worcester Range.  They get a lot more snow with eastern flow or SE flow. 

 

The distance between the Worecesters and true Green Mountain Spine is too short to really develop true localized upslope from the westerly direction, or at least that would be my take.  There are a lot of events where the ski resort will pick up 12+ tapering to like 4-6" in town, but with no real increase again in the Worcesters. 

 

And to your guess, I could totally see the Worcester's at 3,000ft+ averaging low 200s, while the true spine a few miles away averages low 300s.  The bulk of that snowfall difference being made up in the large quantity of light fluffy NW flow events the Spine recieves.  The true Spine has a big advantage in anything coming from the west, be it lake effect left-overs, clippers, upslope, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just did a double take on this- Smuggs is now reporting 6-8" overnight.

Oh yeah they updated that at 8am. I've got confirmation from a NWS met skiing there today...4" base and 8" up top. Photos look like its pure Champlain dust. I'm at 3.25" now at 3,000ft as the Froude came up this morning so our upper elevations picked up a bit more from this morning.

I love how localized stuff can be around here...April 1-2 last year we picked up a foot of fluff while Smuggs had 3-4". On Friday we had a solid 3" and Smuggs reported nothing...then today they've got 8" to my 3".

I see a lot on social media questioning how the snow reports between the two can be so different provided we even share the same mountain (Spruce/Sterling) and you can see the trails from one to another....but as Muccilli's Froude Presentation showed, it's all wind/inversion/moisture/location oriented.

It's the same reason why I get a chuckle out of people in other areas who assume a report must be wrong because it's a few inches different *only* 10 miles away...or they talk about it like "no way they got 6" in the next town over while I got 3.5"...we deal with huge differences at times in a span of 2 miles, much less 10-20 miles.

Like right now I could walk through the Notch and come out to 3x the snowfall on the other side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like. We toss the GFS.  glass half full.

fwiw-doesnt seem BTV is buying the euro, at least as of this morning.

 

Hahah yeah for now I would go with a more blended solution, but apparently the 12z has more ensemble support if I heard correctly than in past runs. As for today the streamers have been brining in periodic snow showers here, good for some mood flakes and keeping the cover looking fresh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hahah yeah for now I would go with a more blended solution, but apparently the 12z has more ensemble support if I heard correctly than in past runs. As for today the streamers have been brining in periodic snow showers here, good for some mood flakes and keeping the cover looking fresh.

 like I said, I leave the "science" to you guys.  I wishcast.  and I wish for enough so I can put away my rock skis. 

BTV updated my Pops to 60% for thursday but kept the same forecast discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 18z NAM depicts the final nail in the coffin for VTers this weekend... for the record I highly doubt this will pan out, but am just posting it for sheer entertainment value.  You gotta just laugh at it... I got a good chuckle out of this run.  Mother Nature would have to engineer this type of a system just to mock us in VT, haha. 

 

nam_namer_078_850_temp_mslp_precip.gif

 

nam_namer_084_850_temp_mslp_precip.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it really applies to the Worcester Range.  They get a lot more snow with eastern flow or SE flow. 

 

The distance between the Worecesters and true Green Mountain Spine is too short to really develop true localized upslope from the westerly direction, or at least that would be my take.  There are a lot of events where the ski resort will pick up 12+ tapering to like 4-6" in town, but with no real increase again in the Worcesters. 

 

And to your guess, I could totally see the Worcester's at 3,000ft+ averaging low 200s, while the true spine a few miles away averages low 300s.  The bulk of that snowfall difference being made up in the large quantity of light fluffy NW flow events the Spine recieves.  The true Spine has a big advantage in anything coming from the west, be it lake effect left-overs, clippers, upslope, etc.

 

Nice post, PF.  As I've mentioned once or twice I'm looking to move from my present location.  The new locations matters not, except that it be in a spot for better upslope.  I'm considering the area up your way someplace between the spine and the Worcester Range at decent elevation.

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...