Stormlover74 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 12:52 AM, Snow88 said: Cips has feb 15,1996 as number 1analog Wasn't a clipper but favored the coast Http://www.raymondcmartinjr.com/weather/1996/16-Feb-96.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyblizz44 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 12:52 AM, Snow88 said: Cips has feb 15,1996 as number 1analog Interesting NWS shows 9.9 inches CPK during that storm (15 Feb 1996). NAM isnt sounding so stupid now http://www.erh.noaa.gov/okx/climate/almanacs/nycfeb.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mophstymeo Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 1:01 AM, nyblizz44 said: Interesting NWS shows 9.9 inches CPK during that storm (15 Feb 1996). NAM isnt sounding so stupid now http://www.erh.noaa.gov/okx/climate/almanacs/nycfeb.htm Before we uncork the champagne, let's see what the late night / early morning guidance says. As Mike Masco tweeted, "You're throwing the 18z at me?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternLI Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Somewhat OT, but Pamela illustrates very nicely why I'm usually interested in these types of systems. Also, just to add, 2004-05 is number 2 for snowfall here behind 95-96. It was a fantastic snow year out this way. There are only 2 years where I grew tired of snow, and those were them. The 18z runs were enough to keep this interesting, 3 days out you'd think we should start seeing some agreement soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEG NAO Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 1:13 AM, EasternLI said: Somewhat OT, but Pamela illustrates very nicely why I'm usually interested in these types of systems. Also, just to add, 2004-05 is number 2 for snowfall here behind 95-96. It was a fantastic snow year out this way. There are only 2 years where I grew tired of snow, and those were them. The 18z runs were enough to keep this interesting, 3 days out you'd think we should start seeing some agreement soon. Have to pay attention for a couple reasons both the NAM and GFS showed a more robust system along with the GEFS increasing its precip amounts since 12Z - when they are all doing this at the same time its something to take notice of......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 12:37 AM, nyblizz44 said: As a writer I can tell you Pamela you should very seriously consider beginning a weather blog. Style is reticent, informed, accurate.In short, your credibility will attract an audience. Thank you for sharing the knowledge. Thank you NyBlizz...thank you very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle W Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 12:52 AM, Snow88 said: Cips has feb 15,1996 as number 1analog there was snow on 2/14 and 2/16-17, 1996...I think the second one wasn't a clipper ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormlover74 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 1:43 AM, uncle W said: there was snow on 2/14 and 2/16-17, 1996...I think the second one wasn't a clipper ... Yeah it was a coastal..I don't recall the 14th storm(central park got 2") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternLI Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 1:19 AM, NEG NAO said: Have to pay attention for a couple reasons both the NAM and GFS showed a more robust system along with the GEFS increasing its precip amounts since 12Z - when they are all doing this at the same time its something to take notice of......... I agree, plus, even though I put very very little stock in them. You can add the newest sref to that list Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 SREF has the low moving near the bm. Nice hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robPAwx Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 00z NAM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYY_2 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYY_2 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 0Z NAM is 3 to 5 area wide. 6 Plus in NWNJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delijoe Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 2:58 AM, PB GFI said: 0Z NAM is 3 to 5 area wide. 6 Plus in NWNJ Southern and coastal areas might be a bit warm reading this verbatim but yeah... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 12:57 AM, Plfdwxdude said: Wasn't a clipper but favored the coast Http://www.raymondcmartinjr.com/weather/1996/16-Feb-96.html 01/30-31 1984 was in there yesterday, I believe that was a snow event here but not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle W Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 3:14 AM, SnowGoose69 said: 01/30-31 1984 was in there yesterday, I believe that was a snow event here but not sure. I think it was rain and snow mixed with no accumulations... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjay Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 2:50 AM, Doorman said: wpc-3.gif 1013 mb down to 1008 mb with a 3 day window http://www.hpc.ncep.noaa.gov/basicwx/99fwbgus.gif http://www.hpc.ncep.noaa.gov/medr/9jhwbg_conus.gif Clipper...A light snowfall looks possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 3:14 AM, SnowGoose69 said: 01/30-31 1984 was in there yesterday, I believe that was a snow event here but not sure. The snow event on the penultimate day of January 1984 saw an inch or two in NYC & L.I. and up to 4 inches in Westchester. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 3:11 AM, delijoe said: Southern and coastal areas might be a bit warm reading this verbatim but yeah... No rain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCSNOWMAN2020 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I hear from other board...oz gfs ..not good ..if you want snow ..I'm not giving up yet. ..let's see what tomm shows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle W Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 3:25 AM, Pamela said: The snow event on the penultimate day of January 1984 saw an inch or two in NYC & L.I. and up to 4 inches in Westchester. I checked the local climate data I have for 1984 and 0.6" fell on the 30th-31st... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjay Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 4:16 AM, Doorman said: g.gif http://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/models/gfs/2015011900/gfs_mslp_pcpn_frzn_us_13.png Still a light snowfall possible. I just don't understand why anyone looks at the NAM...ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB GFI Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 The American models just suck. The NAM is just an over blown piece of garbage and the GFS showed nothing at 12z. 2 to 4 at 18z and nothing again at 0z. Forecasting would be better off if the US models didn't exist. They are garbage. Manic and are devoid of any continuity. Sue me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 4:40 AM, Rjay said: Still a light snowfall possible. I just don't understand why anyone looks at the NAM...ever. The models are struggling just a bit with this event; not uncommon when an eastbound mid latitude cyclone begins to fill as it approaches the mountains and attempts to transfer energy to an ocean storm...sort of with that "Omega Block" like pressure pattern. As Lee Van Cleef noted in Escape From New York..."we're going to give him a little more time...just to make sure". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WintersGrasp Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 4:50 AM, PB GFI said: The American models just suck. The NAM is just an over blown piece of garbage and the GFS showed nothing at 12z. 2 to 4 at 18z and nothing again at 0z. Forecasting would be better off if the US models didn't exist. They are garbage. Manic and are devoid of any continuity. Sue me. The American models, or any models for that matter, can't be trusted.....at the very least when they make a big change from one model run to the next. Even the NWS has given their convective feedback.....I mean feedback.....regarding the lack of run to run continuity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Canadian very slow to bring moisture into the region; still basically dry at 0z Thursday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pamela Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 5:00 AM, Pamela said: Canadian very slow to bring moisture into the region; still basically dry at 0z Thursday. Canadian does not look terribly edifying through 77 hours...just some snow showers...but you have to factor in that all the models are ingesting essentially the same 0z data; consequently, the range of solutions is probably not going to be terribly broad...as the algorithms which are at the heart of numerical modeling aren't all that varied from model to model...while things like basic equations of state are obviously not subject to compromise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winterwx21 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 On 1/19/2015 at 5:07 AM, Pamela said: Canadian does not look terribly edifying through 77 hours...just some snow showers...but you have to factor in that all the models are ingesting essentially the same 0z data; consequently, the range of solutions is probably not going to be terribly broad...as the algorithms which are at the heart of numerical modeling aren't all that varied from model to model...while things like basic equations of state are obviously not subject to compromise. Canadian looks like a coating of snow Wednesday night with a decent batch of snow showers moving through. Nothing like the NAM, but at least a little something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mophstymeo Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Flurries it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.