smokeybandit Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 A CNN reporter just asked the DC Mayor why DCA's total was so low compared to all other reports. She basically blew it off saying "it's not our job to measure it there". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ennepe68 Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 A CNN reporter just asked the DC Mayor why DCA's total was so low compared to all other reports. She basically blew it off saying "it's not our job to measure it there". Well really it is not her job. The city has a lot of issues to deal with during the storm evolution and in its aftermath. Someone in EMS will cover it in the post-mortem analysis and it will wind up buried in a report. Overall, Mayor Bowser and company seem to have done fairly well with this event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 A CNN reporter just asked the DC Mayor why DCA's total was so low compared to all other reports. She basically blew it off saying "it's not our job to measure it there". Only in DC would snow measurement issues rise to the national spotlight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gymengineer Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Only in DC would snow measurement issues rise to the national spotlight. It certainly helped that the Post decided to front-page the article about the controversy on their website. It even came up on Face The Nation yesterday morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winterymix Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Losing a snow board during a major event= "It is only a job, I don't care." Out of an entire year, during the 36 hours that it matters, the powers that be put on a disgraceful attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbutts Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 lol, lost the "measuring equipment" aka ruler and then claims that their job performance is not an issue. Pretty depressing that people working in aviation cannot handle a simple task. The responsible party should be relieved of their duties and a competent person installed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodneyS Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I posted about the mismatch between IAD's snow depth and snow total during 2/5-6/10 in this thread earlier. During the storm itself the PNS's noted that the snow measurement was being taken at the Sterling office, not at the airport. I'm pretty sure the 12Z snow depth was still at the airport, hence the big discrepancy. Thanks for the information. Something that's worth remembering is that snow totals from historical storms have to be treated as best estimates that, in some cases, were measured under extraordinarily difficult circumstances. Consider, for example, the Great Blizzard of 1899 (http://www.srh.weather.gov/images/bro/research/pdf/Great_Arctic_Outbreak_1899.pdf), which was measured at about 20 inches in DC. Most of that snow fell in extreme wind and temperatures (19 inches were recorded on 2-12-1899 and 2-13-1899 under blizzard conditions with a temperature range of 4-11 degrees). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 More fuel to the fire. The Red X is the park where I measured snow depth yesterday around 1 pm. I was very thorough, and came up with a medium to high confidence depth of 17.5", mostly in the shade. This was at 57' elevation. The Blue X is where a Cocorahs member measured a 21.9" storm total . This is at 32' elevation and 0.6 miles from my location. The Black X is where a trained spotter measured a storm total of 22.3". It is at 52' elevation and 1.5 miles from my location. I am not sure what my storm total was as I had trouble measuring toward the end, and didn't use a snow board. But I don't see how it can be worse than 20" assuming the 2 spotters followed protocol. I don't see how using snow depth is a legit measurement. It is clear I probably lost 2.5+ from compaction and settling and maybe a touch of melting. But I can't imagine I ever had a snow depth higher than 19". I think there is good evidence that DCA probably got in the 19" range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gymengineer Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 More fuel to the fire. The Red X is the park where I measured snow depth yesterday around 1 pm. I was very thorough, and came up with a medium to high confidence depth of 17.5", mostly in the shade. This was at 57' elevation. The Blue X is where a Cocorahs member measured a 21.9" storm total . This is at 32' elevation and 0.6 miles from my location. The Black X is where a trained spotter measured a storm total of 22.3". It is at 52' elevation and 1.5 miles from my location. I am not sure what my storm total was as I had trouble measuring toward the end, and didn't use a snow board. But I don't see how it can be worse than 20" assuming the 2 spotters followed protocol. I don't see how using snow depth is a legit measurement. It is clear I probably lost 2.5+ from compaction and settling and maybe a touch of melting. But I can't imagine I ever had a snow depth higher than 19". I think there is good evidence that DCA probably got in the 19" range. snow2.PNG Matt-- please look at page 5 of this document when you get a chance: http://www.jhuapl.edu/weather/education/ACON_Files/2010Feb_Report.pdf It's a really good look at what happens to snow depth towards the end of a huge snowstorm. He didn't clear the snowboard after part way through the storm, so you can actually see the compaction/settling happen in the numbers. I'm confident you hit 20" in this storm total if your depth yesterday afternoon was 17.5". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 DCA should use the 19.4" from the spotter in Crystal City assuming he followed protocol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Matt-- please look at page 5 of this document when you get a chance: http://www.jhuapl.edu/weather/education/ACON_Files/2010Feb_Report.pdf It's a really good look at what happens to snow depth towards the end of a huge snowstorm. He didn't clear the snowboard part way through the storm, so you can actually see the compaction/settling happen in the numbers. I'm confident you hit 20" in this storm total if your depth yesterday afternoon was 17.5". Thanks and will do. I also got confirmation from a met in New England who is a skilled measurer that he got 20.5" on 1/12/11 using a snow board and a 6 hour sweep and had 18" depth the next morning. If DCA had a snow depth of 18" yesterday morning how could they have had a storm total of 17.8". The is so much evidence piling up that 19-20" is what they got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeguyfromTakomaPark Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 More fuel to the fire. The Red X is the park where I measured snow depth yesterday around 1 pm. I was very thorough, and came up with a medium to high confidence depth of 17.5", mostly in the shade. This was at 57' elevation. The Blue X is where a Cocorahs member measured a 21.9" storm total . This is at 32' elevation and 0.6 miles from my location. The Black X is where a trained spotter measured a storm total of 22.3". It is at 52' elevation and 1.5 miles from my location. I am not sure what my storm total was as I had trouble measuring toward the end, and didn't use a snow board. But I don't see how it can be worse than 20" assuming the 2 spotters followed protocol. I don't see how using snow depth is a legit measurement. It is clear I probably lost 2.5+ from compaction and settling and maybe a touch of melting. But I can't imagine I ever had a snow depth higher than 19". I think there is good evidence that DCA probably got in the 19" range. snow2.PNG You definitely had 20+. I'm fairly certain we had somewhere between 23 and 25 inches here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mappy Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Thanks and will do. I also got confirmation from a met in New England who is a skilled measurer that he got 20.5" on 1/12/11 using a snow board and a 6 hour sweep and had 18" depth the next morning. If DCA had a snow depth of 18" yesterday morning how could they have had a storm total of 17.8". The is so much evidence piling up that 19-20" is what they got. could drifting have given them a higher snow depth than what they measured? did they measure at all again following the 17.8" measurement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 You definitely had 20+. I'm fairly certain we had somewhere between 23 and 25 inches here. you're in a much better spot than me with latitude and elevation. Between the White House, The 4th and L measurement and the Adams Morgan measurement (taken at 11:20pm), I probably got 20-22" had I been able to measure properly. My apt building - 75' - 12th and K NW 0.6 mi SW - 32', 21.9" - Cocorahs (White House - south Lawn) 1.5 mi E - 52', 22.3" - Trained Spotter (4th and L NE) 1.2 mi NW - 99', 21.0" - NWS Employee (17th and T NW) 2.9 mi SSW - 15', 19.4", Trained Spotter (Crystal City) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 You definitely had 20+. I'm fairly certain we had somewhere between 23 and 25 inches here.Think most of the city was 20+. 20-25 or so seems about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Think most of the city was 20+. 20-25 or so seems about right. LWX pulled the Anacostia measurement (19"), and the White house measurement (21.9") for the final map. Not sure why. I think 20-25" is about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeguyfromTakomaPark Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 LWX pulled the Anacostia measurement (19"), and the White house measurement (21.9") for the final map. Not sure why. I think 20-25" is about right. Really a shame we couldn't get that AM pivot to work out for us, the overnight period was so productive we had a legit shot at 30. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Really a shame we couldn't get that AM pivot to work out for us, the overnight period was so productive we had a legit shot at 30. Yes. though I think we made up for it in the afternoon and evening. I think we did better than the suburbs to our west in the wraparound, as we got into the Baltimore/BWI bands..In reality I think we missed out on maybe 2-4 additional during the lull. I got 1-2" during the dryslot. Maybe we missed out on 3-5". Can't really compare to places like IAD since that is so far west. Even if lull banding had been 15 miles east, I think our final totals are only 2-3" higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 #3 of DC storms I experienced. Not bad! 2/5-6/10 - 22" (Mt Pleasant) Blizzard of 96 - 21" (16th and East-West Highway) "Snowzilla" - 20" (Periphery of downtown) PD2 - 18.5 (Dupont/Kalorama) Dec 2009 - 18.5" (Mt Pleasant) * - I got around 22" in 1983 but that was in Fairfax County Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Its so hilarious how DCA's depth matching its fall is a big deal and they want to add 10-20% to it, but at IAD our depth also matched our fall (29" depth, 29.3" fall) and yet not a god damn peep... It didn't snow as much at DCA. Live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gymengineer Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Its so hilarious how DCA's depth matching its fall is a big deal and they want to add 10-20% to it, but at IAD our depth also matched our fall (29" depth, 29.3" fall) and yet not a god damn peep... It didn't snow as much at DCA. Live with it. What? LOL First of all, 28" is reported depth on the CLI for IAD. Did you mean there was a 29" reported as the snow ended? Second, *no one* is saying DCA's snow was anywhere close to IAD's. The issue was about what the observers admitted themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoast NPZ Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 #3 of DC storms I experienced. Not bad! 2/5-6/10 - 22" (Mt Pleasant) Blizzard of 96 - 21" (16th and East-West Highway) "Snowzilla" - 20" (Periphery of downtown) PD2 - 18.5 (Dupont/Kalorama) Dec 2009 - 18.5" (Mt Pleasant) * - I got around 22" in 1983 but that was in Fairfax County #3 for me personally as well. Jan. 96 - 37" (Front Royal) Feb. 83 - 32" (Warren Co.) Jan. 16 - 28" (Stephens City) 2/5/10 - 27" (Front Royal) Dec. 09 - 22" (Front Royal) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Its so hilarious how DCA's depth matching its fall is a big deal and they want to add 10-20% to it, but at IAD our depth also matched our fall (29" depth, 29.3" fall) and yet not a god damn peep... It didn't snow as much at DCA. Live with it. IAD has has a history of weird measurements too, on both ends low and high. BWI has also had a number of adjustments. We know A LOT more than you on this subject as we have been dealing with it for years. Perhaps live here more than a year before giving us your 2 cents. - Considering you were ok with PHL taking a liquid sample and calling it 30.6", this matter is worth investigating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 IAD has has a history of weird measurements too, on both ends low and high. BWI has also had a number of adjustments. We know A LOT more than you on this subject as we have been dealing with it for years. Perhaps live here more than a year before giving us your 2 cents. You *think* you know a lot. You don't. Go work at an airport and actually take the measurements, then you might know something. I personally took the spotter call from Alexandria, a stone's throw from DCA, which had *less* than the airport on Saturday night. DCA is fine at 17.8". Personally, the most suspect measurement in this storm to me is actually BWI. But whatevs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 IAD has has a history of weird measurements too, on both ends low and high. BWI has also had a number of adjustments. We know A LOT more than you on this subject as we have been dealing with it for years. Perhaps live here more than a year before giving us your 2 cents. - Considering you were ok with PHL taking a liquid sample and calling it 30.6", this matter is worth investigating. Who said I was OK with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 You *think* you know a lot. You don't. Go work at an airport and actually take the measurements, then you might know something. I personally took the spotter call from Alexandria, a stone's throw from DCA, which had *less* than the airport on Saturday night. DCA is fine at 17.8". Personally, the most suspect measurement in this storm to me is actually BWI. But whatevs. I know a lot more than you...You're an ignoramus. You were holed up in Jersey and Elko while we've been dealing with this for years. A stone's throw? Where was the spotter? Do you even know local geography and microclimates? Are you aware there were very localized differences in totals? Focus on learning the nuances of the region here so you can become a better forecaster and leave this stuff to people who are familiar with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
famartin Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I know a lot more than you...You're an ignoramus. You were holed up in Jersey and Elko while we've been dealing with this for years. A stone's throw? Where was the spotter? Do you even know local geography and microclimates? Are you aware there was very localized differences in totals? Focus on learning the nuances of the region here so you can become a better forecaster and leave this stuff to people who are familiar with it. Says the person who doesn't even do this job for a living. Get a life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haudidoody Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 You *think* you know a lot. You don't. Go work at an airport and actually take the measurements, then you might know something. I personally took the spotter call from Alexandria, a stone's throw from DCA, which had *less* than the airport on Saturday night. DCA is fine at 17.8". Personally, the most suspect measurement in this storm to me is actually BWI. But whatevs. Why did that spotter call change from 20" to 17"? I couldn't get less than 18" on any measurement in Old Town after the storm, but whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Says the person who doesn't even do this job for a living. Get a life. This is a hard region to forecast for. Many a met has come in to Sterling and blown forecasts that they should have known better. Study and leave this stuff to the people who have lived here for decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deck Pic Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Why did that spotter call change from 20" to 17"? I couldn't get less than 18" on any measurement in Old Town after the storm, but whatever. Ray has always been a cocky know-it-all. Nothing new here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.