Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

Winter Banter Thread - Part 2


IsentropicLift

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Interesting article on Central Park snowfall measurement before the 1990's.

 

http://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/perspective/14009/snowfall-measurement-flaky-history

 

Official measurement of snowfall these days uses a flat, usually white, surface called a snowboard (which pre-dates the popular winter sport equipment of the same name). The snowboard depth measurement is done ideally every 6 hours, but not more frequently, and the snow is cleared after each measurement. At the end of the snowfall, all of the measurements are added up for the storm total. 

 

NOAA’s cooperative climate observers and thousands of volunteers with the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow (CoCoRaHS), a nationwide observer network, are trained in this method. This practice first became standard at airports starting in the 1950s, but later at other official climate reporting sites, such as Manhattan’s Central Park, where 6-hourly measurements did not become routine until the 1990s.

Earlier in our weather history, the standard practice was to record snowfall amounts less frequently, such as every 12 or 24 hours, or even to take just one measurement of depth on the ground at the end of the storm.

You might think that one or two measurements per day should add up to pretty much the same as measurements taken every 6 hours during the storm. It’s a logical assumption, but you would be mistaken. Snow on the ground gets compacted as additional snow falls. Therefore, multiple measurements during a storm typically result in a higher total than if snowfall is derived from just one or two measurements per day.

That can make quite a significant difference. It turns out that it’s not uncommon for the snow on the ground at the end of a storm to be 15 to 20 percent less than the total that would be derived from multiple snowboard measurements.  As the cooperative climate observer for Boulder, Colorado, I examined the 15 biggest snowfalls of the last two decades, all measured at the NOAA campus in Boulder. The sum of the snowboard measurements averaged 17 percent greater than the maximum depth on the ground at the end of the storm. For a 20-inch snowfall, that would be a boost of 3.4 inches—enough to dethrone many close rivals on the top-10 snowstorm list that were not necessarily lesser storms!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article on Central Park snowfall measurement before the 1990's.

http://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/perspective/14009/snowfall-measurement-flaky-history

Official measurement of snowfall these days uses a flat, usually white, surface called a snowboard (which pre-dates the popular winter sport equipment of the same name). The snowboard depth measurement is done ideally every 6 hours, but not more frequently, and the snow is cleared after each measurement. At the end of the snowfall, all of the measurements are added up for the storm total.

NOAA’s cooperative climate observers and thousands of volunteers with the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow (CoCoRaHS), a nationwide observer network, are trained in this method. This practice first became standard at airports starting in the 1950s, but later at other official climate reporting sites, such as Manhattan’s Central Park, where 6-hourly measurements did not become routine until the 1990s.

Earlier in our weather history, the standard practice was to record snowfall amounts less frequently, such as every 12 or 24 hours, or even to take just one measurement of depth on the ground at the end of the storm.

You might think that one or two measurements per day should add up to pretty much the same as measurements taken every 6 hours during the storm. It’s a logical assumption, but you would be mistaken. Snow on the ground gets compacted as additional snow falls. Therefore, multiple measurements during a storm typically result in a higher total than if snowfall is derived from just one or two measurements per day.

That can make quite a significant difference. It turns out that it’s not uncommon for the snow on the ground at the end of a storm to be 15 to 20 percent less than the total that would be derived from multiple snowboard measurements. As the cooperative climate observer for Boulder, Colorado, I examined the 15 biggest snowfalls of the last two decades, all measured at the NOAA campus in Boulder. The sum of the snowboard measurements averaged 17 percent greater than the maximum depth on the ground at the end of the storm. For a 20-inch snowfall, that would be a boost of 3.4 inches—enough to dethrone many close rivals on the top-10 snowstorm list that were not necessarily lesser storms!

Which is why 96 is still king. LGA recorded a 24 inch depth at the end of the storm. There was less than an inch on the ground when the blizzard began. The airport also reported 24 inches from the blizzard as the snowfall total.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article on Central Park snowfall measurement before the 1990's.

 

http://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/perspective/14009/snowfall-measurement-flaky-history

 

Official measurement of snowfall these days uses a flat, usually white, surface called a snowboard (which pre-dates the popular winter sport equipment of the same name). The snowboard depth measurement is done ideally every 6 hours, but not more frequently, and the snow is cleared after each measurement. At the end of the snowfall, all of the measurements are added up for the storm total. 

 

NOAA’s cooperative climate observers and thousands of volunteers with the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow (CoCoRaHS), a nationwide observer network, are trained in this method. This practice first became standard at airports starting in the 1950s, but later at other official climate reporting sites, such as Manhattan’s Central Park, where 6-hourly measurements did not become routine until the 1990s.

Earlier in our weather history, the standard practice was to record snowfall amounts less frequently, such as every 12 or 24 hours, or even to take just one measurement of depth on the ground at the end of the storm.

You might think that one or two measurements per day should add up to pretty much the same as measurements taken every 6 hours during the storm. It’s a logical assumption, but you would be mistaken. Snow on the ground gets compacted as additional snow falls. Therefore, multiple measurements during a storm typically result in a higher total than if snowfall is derived from just one or two measurements per day.

That can make quite a significant difference. It turns out that it’s not uncommon for the snow on the ground at the end of a storm to be 15 to 20 percent less than the total that would be derived from multiple snowboard measurements.  As the cooperative climate observer for Boulder, Colorado, I examined the 15 biggest snowfalls of the last two decades, all measured at the NOAA campus in Boulder. The sum of the snowboard measurements averaged 17 percent greater than the maximum depth on the ground at the end of the storm. For a 20-inch snowfall, that would be a boost of 3.4 inches—enough to dethrone many close rivals on the top-10 snowstorm list that were not necessarily lesser storms!

this explains many measurements of past storms...Example January 11-14th 1964...12.5" was measured after the storm with a 13" snow depth...no snow was on the ground when it started...What you saw is what you got...this is why I started a snow depth chart to track snow depths...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this explains many measurements of past storms...Example January 11-14th 1964...12.5" was measured after the storm with a 13" snow depth...no snow was on the ground when it started...What you saw is what you got...this is why I started a snow depth chart to track snow depths...

 

If we raised pre-1990's snowfall seasons by 17%, then there would be more 50"+ seasons like we have been seeing recently. 1947-1948 would be close to 1995-1996.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is why 96 is still king. LGA recorded a 24 inch depth at the end of the storm. There was less than an inch on the ground when the blizzard began. The airport also reported 24 inches from the blizzard as the snowfall total.

 

The geographic coverage of the heavy snow with that one was what made it so extraordinary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This winter hasn't been the same without Earthlight in here. The guy knows his stuff.  Yeah I can check out his thoughts on his website, but loved when he gave his instantaneous PBP thoughts for upcoming storms.  We still have some good guys here, so I'm not knocking anybody else, but missing Earthlight is HUGE for this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been on the dividing line with most of the storms this winter. Places to the north, west, and east have gotten 12+ storms. None of my totals have been over 8 inches and yet I've had a solid snowpack for almost a month that'll probably last into March. Pretty awesome if you ask me. This is probably one of the better back end seasons I can remember (granted, I'm only 26). If the euro is on to something on the 25th no one should complain about this winter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doing a PBP on this site is like the guy who buys for the coffee fund at my job, thankless... If you don't tell people what a model says its "nam?" "Any word on GFS". "Eruo"? Blah blah. U tell people what a model says... May God help you if it's not 12+" of snow

Ive been trying to delete the silly sh*t but im gonna ask stormtracker for a raise and combat pay soon. Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doing a PBP on this site is like the guy who buys for the coffee fund at my job, thankless... If you don't tell people what a model says its "nam?" "Any word on GFS". "Eruo"? Blah blah. U tell people what a model says... May God help you if it's not 12+" of snow

It's insane, If you tell them what the model is showing and they don't like it because it's not enough snow they violently attack you. It's crazy. Plus now certain posters inflate the totals to what they want to see, say rain is snow and post it as gospel, as if that is what the model is really showing. Just unreal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's insane, I'd you tell them what the model is showing and they don't like it because it's not enough snow they violently attack you. It's crazy. Plus now certain posters inflate the totals to what they want to see, say rain is snow and post it as gospel, as if that is what the model is really showing. Just unreal

Yea I'll just stop tellin people unless it's good news so I'm not dubbed a downer.. I love snow as much as anyone here but I'm not some 16 year old who can't face what a model is showing, a more mature response to the nam would have been.. " hey it's the nam at 60hrs, let's see how this plays out" instead of stringing up the pbps by their neck lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea I'll just stop tellin people unless it's good news so I'm not dubbed a downer.. I love snow as much as anyone here but I'm not some 16 year old who can't face what a model is showing, a more mature response to the nam would have been.. " hey it's the nam at 60hrs, let's see how this plays out" instead of stringing up the pbps by their neck lol

A more mature person will just look at the damn model themselves and go about their day.  :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea I'll just stop tellin people unless it's good news so I'm not dubbed a downer.. I love snow as much as anyone here but I'm not some 16 year old who can't face what a model is showing, a more mature response to the nam would have been.. " hey it's the nam at 60hrs, let's see how this plays out" instead of stringing up the pbps by their neck lol

I don't get it. Yet another flame war and trolling fest because you and isentropic merely stated what the NAM showed, it wasn't even a forecast. Smh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...