SnoSki14 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 it really isn't that uncommon. I will agree that recent March's have had less snow, so perhaps there is a trend. First half of March is like first half of December to me, but recently we've seen more snow in first half of December versus March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 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 More sharing options...
pazzo83 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 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 More sharing options...
Heisy Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 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 More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 A lot of hitters on the GEFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTWeatherFreak Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 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 More sharing options...
bluewave Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 The UKMET looks midway between the GFS and CMC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RU848789 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 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 More sharing options...
bluewave Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 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 More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doorman Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 simple ... if it looks like....smells like....tastes like..... a snowstorm its probably a SNOWSTORM!!!! http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/medr/medr500.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDMK6GLI Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 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 More sharing options...
nyblizz44 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 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 More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 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 More sharing options...
green tube Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 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 More sharing options...
Heisy Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 EURO looks mighty tasty at 120! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 12z Euro is looking better at H5 out west than the GFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisy Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 It looks like it is even phasing with the leftover low down south! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 you regularly express a lot of frustration with 12-15hr storms... but 95% of our storms are done in under 15 hours. I have a major desire for a long duration event Just give me one 36 hour storm and I'll be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Euro is going to show a blockbuster storm, not necessarily a snow storm for our region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisy Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Check this out, it is phasing with the energy down south, a bomb is likely on its way here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisy Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 It also looks like it might usher in the cold in tiome, look at SE canada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyblizz44 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 It also looks like it might usher in the cold in tiome, look at SE canada These moments of anticipation are some of my favorites when we are tracking a possible Biggie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisy Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Awesome ridge out west, this baby I might keep digging...allowing cold to build in. Remember, some classic March storms start out as rain as the low continues to bomb, then goes over to snow and dumps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisy Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Yeah this is going to go inland, it actually phases too much lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 The low is already sub 996mb over the TN Valley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Yeah this is going to go inland, it actually phases too much lol... You need to let this play out, it's going to be forced south of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green tube Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Bottom line it's uncommon getting snowfall by mid March. What more is there to say. locally, in the last 35 years there's been 18 snowfalls of 2"+ from March12 onward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag3 Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Yeah this is going to go inland, it actually phases too much lol... I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsentropicLift Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Over running precip from hell. R/S line right a long route 80 hour 150. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.