ORH_wxman Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 That is very wrong. My first question would be what is that based on? Crappy coop data? NCDC also at one time had ORH listed at 61" for avg snowfall because they included snowfall totals such as 4.9" in 1997-1998 as valid. It didn't take me a lot of detective work to figure out the data was junk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 You can use the "smell test" too. Logan airport averages 43.7". One would doubt a location at similar latitude and west of the 128 belt averages just 4.3" more per year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Yeah Steve doesn't know what he is talking abotu with Natick...how would he know anything about snow retention there by driving through the town after a month in which nobody had any snow? It retains snow fine...it's not ORH, but most places aren't. But it west of the criticial 128 belt. They average around high 50s like a few of the more knowledgable E MA posters already said. lol like thats the first time in 58 years I have been in that area, it's Ok but the original point being severe downgrade from Winter Hill but link to hard snow data? Lots of assumptions made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoarfrostHubb Posted December 28, 2014 Author Share Posted December 28, 2014 My first question would be what is that based on? Crappy coop data? NCDC also at one time had ORH listed at 61" for avg snowfall because they included snowfall totals such as 4.9" in 1997-1998 as valid. It didn't take me a lot of detective work to figure out the data was junk. Yeah. I really don't believe that number. I assume it is a bad coop feed or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Lol, were there any predictions here I think Boston gets 31.5" Orh 48" Ray 40" and Kev around 38" Odds currently favor below normal annual amounts thanks to that wonderful study Kevin kept citing this a.m from the folks at Taunton I think all over 50 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold Miser Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 If I get above 30 in my area I would be greatly surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian5671 Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 If I get above 30 in my area I would be greatly surprised. If BDR sees 20, I would be shocked as well. (1 inch YTD) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 If I get above 30 in my area I would be greatly surprised.Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold Miser Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Good luck You see much less than that even? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 You see much less than that even?I see it's Dec 28th and I normally average 44 inches Jan to March Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 lol like thats the first time in 58 years I have been in that area, it's Ok but the original point being severe downgrade from Winter Hill but link to hard snow data? Lots of assumptions made. The most reliable coop near Natick is probably Bedford...its about 10 miles northeast of town. http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ma0535 E MA is pretty devoid of good coop data unfortunately. Beford, Reading, and Blue Hill are pretty much it when it comes to decent snow data outside of Logan Airport. The old Walpole coop was decent, but the newer one has been less reliable. But having forecasted for central and eastern MA for roughly a decade now, you get a very good sense of what the snow averages are and where the critical demarcation lines are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 lol like thats the first time in 58 years I have been in that area, it's Ok but the original point being severe downgrade from Winter Hill but link to hard snow data? Lots of assumptions made. Nothing is assumed. It's fact, not opinion. I average 62-63".....Logan averages 44".....it doesn't cake a rocket scientist to see that Natick is probably more analogous to my area, than to KBOS. If you want my hard data, be my guest and go add up all over the coop totals on the Utah site. The Natick COOP data, like many in the area, is pretty compromised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Nothing is assumed. It's fact, not opinion. I average 62-63".....Logan averages 44".....it doesn't cake a rocket scientist to see that Natick is probably more analogous to my area, than to KBOS. If you want my hard data, be my guest and go add up all over the coop totals on the Utah site. The Natick COOP data, like many in the area, is pretty compromised. Co-op data sucks, curious what data do you derive your own facts from. Not being snarky just wondering how facts are determined,snowfall variance over 1/2 mile around here is huge, but that's elevation. I have a hard time believing hard numbers without substantial long term data. Being specific within an inch at your exact house and stating it as fact is a stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Co-op data sucks, curious what data do you derive your own facts from. Not being snarky just wondering how facts are determined,snowfall variance over 1/2 mile around here is huge, but that's elevation. I have a hard time believing hard numbers without substantial long term data. Being specific within an inch at your exact house and stating it as fact is a stretch. His numbers come from the Reading coop near him...it's a notoriously reliable coop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 His numbers come from the Reading coop near him...it's a notoriously reliable coop.how near? Yea good records although they are missing some notable years like 94 95 96 11 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 how near? I dunno, 5 miles? It's pretty close. He's just west of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 I dunno, 5 miles? It's pretty close. He's just west of them.he's lucky. North Foster is 5 from me but much higher snow probably 5-7 per year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 he's lucky. North Foster is 5 from me but much higher snow probably 5-7 per year Yeah that area has some decent elevation changes. N Foster coop is like 640 feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorEastermass128 Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 I dunno, 5 miles? It's pretty close. He's just west of them.Then I probabaly average about 60" on the dot. Not too shabby for being near the city Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Logan is 43.7" and that may even be a bit low knowing Logan's measuring issues at times. I don't see the issue of Natick or even Ray. Coops sometimes aren't reliable, but the reliable ones are pretty darn good. Hell Blue Hill is just over 60". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Logan is 43.7" and that may even be a bit low knowing Logan's measuring issues at times. I don't see the issue of Natick or even Ray. Coops sometimes aren't reliable, but the reliable ones are pretty darn good. Hell Blue Hill is just over 60". As in any science...you analyze the data and make your best expert judgement. Analyzing the data includes determining which data is good and which isn't. It can take a lot of trial and error and experience looking at the data and forecasting for the area. Having kept tabs on local snowfall measurements (including those on this board) and having to write reports for clients at the end of the season on snowfall amounts...I feel pretty comfortable with my numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Logan is 43.7" and that may even be a bit low knowing Logan's measuring issues at times. I don't see the issue of Natick or even Ray. Coops sometimes aren't reliable, but the reliable ones are pretty darn good. Hell Blue Hill is just over 60".what issue? Just asked a specific question,he is lucky having a good coop nearby,. Blue Hill is way higher than anything nearby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 As in any science...you analyze the data and make your best expert judgement. Analyzing the data includes determining which data is good and which isn't. It can take a lot of trial and error and experience looking at the data and forecasting for the area. Having kept tabs on local snowfall measurements (including those on this board) and having to write reports for clients at the end of the season on snowfall amounts...I feel pretty comfortable with my numbers. can you repost your excellent maps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 what issue? Just asked a specific question,he is lucky having a good coop nearby,. Blue Hill is way higher than anything nearby You sounded very skeptical of those numbers at first...but it seems now you are satisfied with the data presented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 As in any science...you analyze the data and make your best expert judgement. Analyzing the data includes determining which data is good and which isn't. It can take a lot of trial and error and experience looking at the data and forecasting for the area. Having kept tabs on local snowfall measurements (including those on this board) and having to write reports for clients at the end of the season on snowfall amounts...I feel pretty comfortable with my numbers. I QC'd data for over 1.5 yrs so yes, I agree. I don't have a hard sheet of snow numbers, but knowing the climo...they make sense re. Natick, Ray, etc. Snow is the worst metric to measure accurately, but we can gather a good idea anyways. I'll probably do my best to keep tabs here. I only had a few years of stuff in Dorchester. That got lost when my HD crashed, but I can always figure it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 You sounded very skeptical of those numbers at first...but it seems now you are satisfied with the data presented.my skepticism lies in inexact areas where data is missing and sparse,local nuisances like elevation,shadowing, longitude,latitude even in half mile increments can be huge. Saying it's a fact within 1-2 inches is a stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 my skepticism lies in inexact areas where data is missing and sparse,local nuisances like elevation,shadowing, longitude,latitude even in half mile increments can be huge. Saying it's a fact within 1-2 inches is a stretch.That is a pretty persnickety perpective towards things.....I mean, Reading COOP averages 62-63"....I'm 5 miles from Reading, the terrain is flat here on this portion of the cp, so elevation is not really a factor, and ORH averages high 60's.....rudimentary interpolation. I'm obviously need similar to the next town over, which is of a similar elevation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 That is a pretty persnickety perpective towards things.....I mean, Reading COOP averages 62-63"....I'm 5 miles from Reading, the terrain is flat here on this portion of the cp, so elevation is not really a factor, and ORH averages high 60's.....rudimentary interpolation.guess you missed the other posts where I address your particular luck at having a good Coop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 guess you missed the other posts where I address your particular luck at having a good CoopGuess you incurred a bout of amnesia since concluding your last post by stating that it "was a stretch to claim that avg for mby was a fact" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 Guess you incurred a bout of amnesia since concluding your last post by stating that it "was a stretch to claim that avg for mby was a fact"with incomplete data and variance in location unless you kept data at your house it's an assumption, simple science really. Yes I believe you average 58-65 per year but unless you can show me hard data your 1-2 range is an assumption Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.