Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,588
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

March 12 -14 Potential Storm


NEG NAO

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Bottom line it's uncommon getting snowfall by mid March. What more is there to say.

 

For JFK it happens on average at least once every other year and sometimes back to back years during

the snowier period recently. The later October snows have been the real rarity in recent years

compared to past history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im pretty sure that  is what i said.   Obviously 5% is way low, for a March day on average.  

 

There is a difference between reported snow and accumulated snow.  If you look at the graph, the "chance of at least some snow on the ground" (which would reflect accumulated snow) is less than 10% by mid March.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I keep mentioning the "split" of the waves, this is what I mean. Note how the one piece heads east and ends up forming the eventual low...

 

 

 

Check out yesterday's 12z EURO, & the 00z EURO before that to see what happens if they don't split...

 

We could still cash in on a snowstorm as long as the lead wave remains kind of weak...the GGEM shows what happens if that lead wave is too strong (inland). Unless the EURO goes way against the grain, it looks like this is what the models want to see happen, which means we will likely not see that "MECS/HECS" the old EURO runs were showing, but we could still cash in on a solid snowstorm (especially you guys up north)

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I keep mentioning the "split" of the waves, this is what I mean. Note how the one piece heads east and ends up forming the eventual low...

x.gif

Check out yesterday's 12z EURO, & the 00z EURO before that to see what happens if they don't split...

We could still cash in on a snowstorm as long as the lead wave remains kind of weak...the GGEM shows what happens if that lead wave is too strong (inland). Unless the EURO goes way against the grain, it looks like this is what the models want to see happen, which means we will likely not see that "MECS/HECS" the old EURO runs were showing, but we could still cash in on a solid snowstorm (especially you guys up north)

Could that short wave hook up with the closed low in the southern stream and create a bigger system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What point are you trying to make? It'd be just as inaccurate as saying statistically March 13th is 0.4F warmer than March 12th just because that's what the averages show (made up example). We don't do that, and we also don't believe there to be a statistically significant peak on March 17th vs. March 10th...

 

 

No point other to show the frequency of snowfall on various dates throughout the year. You realize we get more snow in

February here even though the temperature is warmer than January. Not sure why this is a surprise to anyone.

bluewave - I generally respect your posts, but you're flat out wrong on this.  The historical record has not been long enough to have March snow falling when it should fall climatologically - the peak is absolutely an anomaly.  I've probably forgotten more about stats than 99% of the people on this board have ever known, but, please, trust me when I say that the mid-March peak is a statistical anomaly.  We've only ever had a few large snowstorms in mid-March, meaning we don't have enough robustness in the data to see the true statistical probability of large mid-March snowstorms. I'd guess we'd need 1000+ years of data to get the dozens of March snowstorms we'd need to truly have enough data to demonstrate my point. 

 

A similar example is having the coldest day ever in NYC being on Feb 9th, when, climatologically, it's a couple of degrees colder in early January - below 0F days are so infrequent that it's easy for the records to stray from climatology.  If we had 10,000 years of temp data, I can guarantee you that our coldest day would almost certainly have been in early January.  Beware of ascribing root causes when you have small, statistically insignificant datasets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bluewave - I generally respect your posts, but you're flat out wrong on this.  The historical record has not been long enough to have March snow falling when it should fall climatologically - the peak is absolutely an anomaly.  I've probably forgotten more about stats than 99% of the people on this board have ever known, but, please, trust me when I say that the mid-March peak is a statistical anomaly.  We've only ever had a few large snowstorms in mid-March, meaning we don't have enough robustness in the data to see the true statistical probability of large mid-March snowstorms. I'd guess we'd need 1000+ years of data to get the dozens of March snowstorms we'd need to truly have enough data to demonstrate my point. 

 

A similar example is having the coldest day ever in NYC being on Feb 9th, when, climatologically, it's a couple of degrees colder in early January - below 0F days are so infrequent that it's easy for the records to stray from climatology.  If we had 10,000 years of temp data, I can guarantee you that our coldest day would almost certainly have been in early January.  Beware of ascribing root causes when you have small, statistically insignificant datasets. 

 

Those are for small snowfall events 1/2 to 3" inch and above. There are too few very big blockbuster storms

this time of year to chart in a meaningful way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:

The storm is still so far out, who cares about these kind of details? 72 hours out from the last storm, models had a crushing hit for just about everyone. Then the PV got roid rage and the storm was crushed south.

BINGO! Only a matter of time now before the sun angle arguments commence as well. By monday we'll know whether this is going to be a nice big storm or run of the mill storm. Until then enjoy your weekend

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:

 

The storm is still so far out, who cares about these kind of details? 72 hours out from the last storm, models had a crushing hit for just about everyone. Then the PV got roid rage and the storm was crushed south.

While that is exactly what happened with the last storm obviously the atmo. is a changing beast & the situation here is an entirely different one. Not only isnt there a crushing PV but , as evidenced by the GFS, you wont even need a full phase to produce a snowstorm here. Variety of options on the board. But just because we took a hit last week doesnt mean our take on this storm ,with its unique weather variables, should be affected. Every storm is a different relationship- if you will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While that is exactly what happened with the last storm obviously the atmo. is a changing beast & the situation here is an entirely different one. Not only isnt there a crushing PV but , as evidenced by the GFS, you wont even need a full phase to produce a snowstorm here. Variety of options on the board. But just because we took a hit last week doesnt mean our take on this storm ,with its unique weather variables, should be affected. Every storm is a different relationship- if you will

There's a lot that can go wrong for this without a large PV. The systems can phase early, leading to a massive cutter and us being warm sectored or in torrential rain. Or the progressive pattern can shear out the waves and cause a miss or weak storm. Having sheared out storms has been a common problem this winter-we have been given help by the SE Ridge so that many of these have hit us, although we have had no blockbuster type storms due to the flow's progressivity (Feb 13th may be an exception). This might work out for us, but I see the coast vs. inland, what does probability mean, and other types of bickering quite premature for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All areas are 0.50-0.75" QPF this run and it's in and out in about 12-15 hours. Height of the storm is morning through mid day Wednesday. Verbatim it's a 4-8" snowfall. I'd much rather take my chances with a more explosive setup at H5.

  you regularly express a lot of frustration with 12-15hr storms... but 95% of our storms are done in under 15 hours.

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...