Wave 2, 1/7-8/17 Discussion/OBS

[RU848789]

15 hours ago, CPcantmeasuresnow said:

As of 4 PM, Central Park had measured 4.3" of snow.  As of 7 PM, they measured 5.0", so you're telling me just 0.7" fell in that time span when 0.11" qpf fell. With todays ratios that's impossible.

In that same time span, LGA had 1.7", EWR had 1.5" and JFK had 1.9". But only 0.7" for KNYC? Obviously the Conservancy is asleep at the controls again and no one at the NWS is taking notice or gives a sh!t. Just ridiculous.

This is the most compelling argument for a poor measurement, not the relative amounts from stations vs. CPK, per se.   Places to the north of CPK mostly got 5-6", reports from SI to the SSW (at least on PNS) were <5" (those seem low to me) and it certainly makes sense that CPK is less than LGA to the east (although maybe not 1.9" less) and JFK to the SE.  Also EWR is SW of CPK, not due west, so it's not inconceivable EWR had the same or mabye a little more.  However, that last 0.11 of QPF had to be at least 1.3-1.4" of snow, so at least 5.6-5.7" at 7 pm and then a few tenths more after 7 pm seem likely.  My gut tells me the CPK number should be around 6".    

[nzucker]

6 hours ago, RU848789 said:

This is the most compelling argument for a poor measurement, not the relative amounts from stations vs. CPK, per se.   Places to the north of CPK mostly got 5-6", reports from SI to the SSW (at least on PNS) were <5" (those seem low to me) and it certainly makes sense that CPK is less than LGA to the east (although maybe not 1.9" less) and JFK to the SE.  Also EWR is SW of CPK, not due west, so it's not inconceivable EWR had the same or mabye a little more.  However, that last 0.11 of QPF had to be at least 1.3-1.4" of snow, so at least 5.6-5.7" at 7 pm and then a few tenths more after 7 pm seem likely.  My gut tells me the CPK number should be around 6".    

I think EWR did get a little more than Central Park because my friend in Bridgewater was reporting a heavy snow band while it was still light here in the Bronx. They definitely had the best of the initial banding. 

I live in Hunts Point, between NYC and LGA, and measured a bit over 5". I tend to measure conservatively, but we definitely got a little bit less than areas to the East AND the Southwest...look at the totals across Southern Westchester, they mostly corroborate mine. Pictures of the area also make it obvious that this was NOT an 8" storm.

I think Central Park was probably A LITTLE low in its total. KNYC probably got somewhere between 5.5"-6", but I really don't think their measurement was that bad IN THIS CASE. In the past, they have considerably undermeasured snowfall, especially in small events.

[WeatherFeen2000]

The guys that measure this stuff didn't want to admit this was a 6 inch storm because there wasn't a winter storm warning so you know how big agencies need to cover their back because they're shady like that. My forecast was for 6 inches for knyc and I'm happy I went that high because it was very close if not six inches exactly. I went low for Newark cause it was due southwest with 4.5 but that was a bust. I loved this storm more than anything because it reminded me of the blizzard last year a bit even though it wasn't as long last lasting. I don't mean to bash anyone but I know I'm good at forecasting everyone was bashing at me for saying it'll snow a decent amount meanwhile everyone had us on a 1-3 inches even the night before. Except PB (Paul) he's a good forecaster that I have a lot of respect and of course my boy Anthony. Yanksfan you're still my boy but you said we were going to miss this one. Allsnow great work a bit conservative on this one but not bad overall. I don't know how to get the respect I deserve on this site I almost always get the forecast right yet I'm five posted. I respect everyone yet my discussions get deleted. I really don't get it, I'm thinking about moving my discussion to another forum but I really like this one and I appreciate other posters opinions. Feel free to delete this but I need to get my five posted off because it's not like I post a lot but yesterday during the storm I couldn't even post once and you got guys like ClK or whatever his name is talking about that poor model CFS everyday, annoying everyone on purpose. Moderators please forgive me but you need to get your stuff together we need quality posters like myself respected not bashed and deleted. Otherwise a web site that has potential to be a national forecasting tool could just end up being a hobby for us weather geeks. This site could do great and honestly 9 out of ten times we get the forecasting better than noaa.gov and that should tell you that we can do a lot better work here than we're doing if we just sit and think big and kick ass. We're very passionate here, those forecasters on tv aren't. This is where we have an advantage. 

Have a great day everyone

[RU848789]

On 1/7/2017 at 6:26 PM, PB GFI said:

Just a quick thanks to some of the comments today .

 

I am glad this forecast worked out from the close to 6 at NYC to the 6 to 12  accross Long Island .

The center found the arctic boundary and the 50 miles east it found itself off OBX is about the same it will find itself near the BM

 

The ratio idea worked and thats where the 6 to 12 was derived from.

I will bet a few here did better than the 15 to 1 that was assumed.

 

Its another -EPO derived snowstorm inside an overall hostile background state

 

There may be an MLK weekend threat for the area  as HP is going to show up in E Canada as LP will eject out of the panhandle .

So right in the middle of several AN days there is something that needs to be watched .

 

Closing in on 9 inches in Colts Neck as the back edge swings through .

 

Nice job with the forecast of the two storms last week, especially sticking to your guns (with sound reasoning) on the 2nd storm ending up NW of where it looked to be going a few days before the event.  It's hard to do, but maybe don't engage with everyone who argues with you, especially when their arguments are more emotional than scientific.  Just my two cents.  Glad you're back.  

[PB GFI]

19 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

Nice job with the forecast of the two storms last week, especially sticking to your guns (with sound reasoning) on the 2nd storm ending up NW of where it looked to be going a few days before the event.  It's hard to do, but maybe don't engage with everyone who argues with you, especially when their arguments are more emotional than scientific.  Just my two cents.  Glad you're back.  

Thanks RU ,  I appreciate that . 

[NorthShoreWx]

On 1/8/2017 at 11:57 AM, uncle W said:

maybe they didn't do a six hour measurement and just put the ruler in the ground when ever they felt like...

That could explain the difference. However, they are not supposed to be wiping a board more than once per day, so other sites that are doing so would be the sites that are measuring incorrectly.

In theory, for a storm lasting less than 24 hours, the snow depth at the end of the storm (or the greatest depth of new snowfall if it occurred prior to the end of the snowfall) would be the total accumulation reported.  One exception would be if a board is measured and wiped at midnight, for example (but no more than once per day).  Some of the airport FAA measurements may still be done differently because of the different needs for aviation purposes.

Other than some airport exceptions, the board should not be wiped more than once per day, but most on this forum are probably not compliant.  It's confusing because the standard has changed in recent years, but also it is amusing to read some of the rationalization that sometimes gets posted for doing it wrong.

I suspect there are at least some LI reports in the PNSOKX that included snow on the ground from Friday morning's snowfall in the Saturday total.

While I am wearing my Devil's advocate hat, I get a chuckle when I hear that the temperature readings in the park are unnatural because of all the vegetation.  Concrete, steel, and asphalt is all natural?  Those temperatures may not be representative of the concrete jungle, but they are indeed representative of Central Park.  I don't think the temperature reading over a hot subway grate has any value other than to someone sleeping on it.

[Metsfan]

Finished with 9''. Nice snow bands here on the Island had many hours of 1+ rates.

[RU848789]

51 minutes ago, PB GFI said:

Thanks RU ,  I appreciate that . 

Years of practice, lol, and I'm not very good at not engaging.  I post a lot on an RU sports/football board on the weather, mostly for fun.  There are a couple of meteorology guys on that board, but they don't post much, so I started posting on winter weather and tropical systems (my interests) about 15 years ago.  For many years, people seemed to just appreciate the attempt to provide info, but in the past 3-4 years, the amount of grief I get has become annoying (you suck, you're always wrong, you're a horrible person for wishing death and destruction on people by rooting for snow, etc.), even though I try to make it clear that I don't make my own forecasts, per se - I simply try to take the info from places like the NWS, local media and this board and repackage it in a way that is hopefully helpful.  I know I shouldn't engage some of these folks, but sometimes it's hard not to - my wife once told me that I like to argue for sport, lol.  

As an aside, I've been doing winter weather/tropical emails for a large group at work (about 1000 subscribers), for family/friends (about 100) and on Facebook for years and I never get any grief from those folks (maybe very gentle ribbing, which I have no issue with).  My guess is it's mostly "internet muscles," i.e., the anonymity of message boards seems to embolden some people to say things they'd never say if they knew you, plus a few of them know they can often get a reaction from me (not as much lately, though).  Anyway, thought you might like the insight.  On the plus side, I never thought an RU football board would have 10 page threads on the weather - there are quite a few positive and helpful posters, too.   https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/threads/ot-will-it-snow-on-friday.116563/page-8#post-2563746

[PB GFI]

10 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

Years of practice, lol, and I'm not very good at not engaging.  I post a lot on an RU sports/football board on the weather, mostly for fun.  There are a couple of meteorology guys on that board, but they don't post much, so I started posting on winter weather and tropical systems (my interests) about 15 years ago.  For many years, people seemed to just appreciate the attempt to provide info, but in the past 3-4 years, the amount of grief I get has become annoying (you suck, you're always wrong, you're a horrible person for wishing death and destruction on people by rooting for snow, etc.), even though I try to make it clear that I don't make my own forecasts, per se - I simply try to take the info from places like the NWS, local media and this board and repackage it in a way that is hopefully helpful.  I know I shouldn't engage some of these folks, but sometimes it's hard not to - my wife once told me that I like to argue for sport, lol.  

As an aside, I've been doing winter weather/tropical emails for a large group at work (about 1000 subscribers), for family/friends (about 100) and on Facebook for years and I never get any grief from those folks (maybe very gentle ribbing, which I have no issue with).  My guess is it's mostly "internet muscles," i.e., the anonymity of message boards seems to embolden some people to say things they'd never say if they knew you, plus a few of them know they can often get a reaction from me (not as much lately, though).  Anyway, thought you might like the insight.  On the plus side, I never thought an RU football board would have 10 page threads on the weather - there are quite a few positive and helpful posters, too.   https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/threads/ot-will-it-snow-on-friday.116563/page-8#post-2563746

 

PB GFI is definitely prickly and arrogant, but you have to at least admit he was right about last week. He was adamant about the first storm being a modest event and the 2nd storm coming NW (with good meteorological reasoning about the PNA spike and the speed of the southern stream being faster, allowing it to come further west than anticipated) when all the models were NOT showing that a few days before the storm. His forecast for last week's two snowfalls was nearly perfect. He's back, too.

 

Can`t say I haven`t been  at times /  I am working on that .  

 

But man can`t believe I made the football page . WOW 

 

[RU848789]

2 minutes ago, PB GFI said:

 

PB GFI is definitely prickly and arrogant, but you have to at least admit he was right about last week. He was adamant about the first storm being a modest event and the 2nd storm coming NW (with good meteorological reasoning about the PNA spike and the speed of the southern stream being faster, allowing it to come further west than anticipated) when all the models were NOT showing that a few days before the storm. His forecast for last week's two snowfalls was nearly perfect. He's back, too.

 

Can`t say I haven`t been  at times / working on it  .  

 

But man can`t believe I made the football page . WOW 

 

You're famous!  And don't feel bad, I've been called the same, many times, lol (sometimes true)...

[PB GFI]

2 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

You're famous!  And don't feel bad, I've been called the same, many times, lol (sometimes true)...

 

I just showed this to the guys in the office . They ROARED at prickly and arrogant and not 1 disagreed / DAM . 

[RU848789]

3 minutes ago, PB GFI said:

 

I just showed this to the guys in the office . They ROARED at prickly and arrogant and not 1 disagreed / DAM . 

I know we're deep into banter, so the mods can delete, but that's funny.  Oddly, for me at work, since I manage a large group of people (~25), I've learned to "hide" my arrogance reasonably well (based on actual anonymous feedback), as it doesn't play well with a diverse group in pharma R&D; it does come through on message boards, though.  

By the way, bac2therac is winter warlock over here.  We're yin and yang to a degree - he's the heat miser and I'm the cold/snow miser.  

[PB GFI]

2 hours ago, RU848789 said:

I know we're deep into banter, so the mods can delete, but that's funny.  Oddly, for me at work, since I manage a large group of people (~25), I've learned to "hide" my arrogance reasonably well (based on actual anonymous feedback), as it doesn't play well with a diverse group in pharma R&D; it does come through on message boards, though.  

By the way, bac2therac is winter warlock over here.  We're yin and yang to a degree - he's the heat miser and I'm the cold/snow miser.  

 

Yeh I saw him and Redbank on Friday morning after the 6z NAM came out spike the ball for Saturday yelling bust  because wave 1 was light on Monmouth .

Then they disappeared on the forecast .

Thanks for the defense , I appreciate it .  

 

[bluewave]

On January 8, 2017 at 1:37 PM, jm1220 said:

Some pictures from last night after the snow ended. I'm pretty sure we ended with 8-9", I'll probably go with 8.5". Thankfully Upton dropped the bogus 4.5" total from Island Park. As you can see drifting made measurements tough.

 

Nothing prettier than a snowstorm at the beach.

 

[Rjay]

1 hour ago, RU848789 said:

I know we're deep into banter, so the mods can delete, but that's funny.  Oddly, for me at work, since I manage a large group of people (~25), I've learned to "hide" my arrogance reasonably well (based on actual anonymous feedback), as it doesn't play well with a diverse group in pharma R&D; it does come through on message boards, though.  

By the way, bac2therac is winter warlock over here.  We're yin and yang to a degree - he's the heat miser and I'm the cold/snow miser.  

Meh. The storm is long over.  Banter on.

[RU848789]

1 hour ago, Rjay said:

Meh. The storm is long over.  Banter on.

Hmmm, may just have to report this post as banter, lol...

[uncle W]

4 hours ago, NorthShoreWx said:

That could explain the difference. However, they are not supposed to be wiping a board more than once per day, so other sites that are doing so would be the sites that are measuring incorrectly.

In theory, for a storm lasting less than 24 hours, the snow depth at the end of the storm (or the greatest depth of new snowfall if it occurred prior to the end of the snowfall) would be the total accumulation reported.  One exception would be if a board is measured and wiped at midnight, for example (but no more than once per day).  Some of the airport FAA measurements may still be done differently because of the different needs for aviation purposes.

Other than some airport exceptions, the board should not be wiped more than once per day, but most on this forum are probably not compliant.  It's confusing because the standard has changed in recent years, but also it is amusing to read some of the rationalization that sometimes gets posted for doing it wrong.

I suspect there are at least some LI reports in the PNSOKX that included snow on the ground from Friday morning's snowfall in the Saturday total.

While I am wearing my Devil's advocate hat, I get a chuckle when I hear that the temperature readings in the park are unnatural because of all the vegetation.  Concrete, steel, and asphalt is all natural?  Those temperatures may not be representative of the concrete jungle, but they are indeed representative of Central Park.  I don't think the temperature reading over a hot subway grate has any value other than to someone sleeping on it.

when I did observations I cleaned the board every six hours from when the storm started...at midnight I would change the rain gauge and melt down the accumulation...I also made a measurement of depth and daily fall...official temperatures were taken near Battery Park until 1961...temperatures were a little different than mid Manhattan because it was right near the water...They could have taken obs from the roof of 17 Battery place...

[IrishRob17]

5 hours ago, NorthShoreWx said:

That could explain the difference. However, they are not supposed to be wiping a board more than once per day, so other sites that are doing so would be the sites that are measuring incorrectly.

In theory, for a storm lasting less than 24 hours, the snow depth at the end of the storm (or the greatest depth of new snowfall if it occurred prior to the end of the snowfall) would be the total accumulation reported.  One exception would be if a board is measured and wiped at midnight, for example (but no more than once per day).  Some of the airport FAA measurements may still be done differently because of the different needs for aviation purposes.

Other than some airport exceptions, the board should not be wiped more than once per day, but most on this forum are probably not compliant.  It's confusing because the standard has changed in recent years, but also it is amusing to read some of the rationalization that sometimes gets posted for doing it wrong.

I suspect there are at least some LI reports in the PNSOKX that included snow on the ground from Friday morning's snowfall in the Saturday total.

While I am wearing my Devil's advocate hat, I get a chuckle when I hear that the temperature readings in the park are unnatural because of all the vegetation.  Concrete, steel, and asphalt is all natural?  Those temperatures may not be representative of the concrete jungle, but they are indeed representative of Central Park.  I don't think the temperature reading over a hot subway grate has any value other than to someone sleeping on it.

We've been talking about this for years and you know darn well that most on here aren't measuring correctly. I'd like to think most are doing it as an honest mistake and don't bother to know the correct procedures. That said, I'm sure there are some that get some sort of satisfaction or are insecure and need to have the highest total for whatever reason. 

[NorthShoreWx]

4 hours ago, IrishRob17 said:

We've been talking about this for years and you know darn well that most on here aren't measuring correctly. I'd like to think most are doing it as an honest mistake and don't bother to know the correct procedures. That said, I'm sure there are some that get some sort of satisfaction or are insecure and need to have the highest total for whatever reason. 

My destiny calls and I go.

 

[PB GFI]

On 1/6/2017 at 6:02 AM, redbanknjandbigbasslakepa said:

But this should bring close to an inch of liquid to NYC? Just like the 4-6" of 15-1 the jersey shore was going to get  overnight? SMH.

Just cleaning up some stuff up

 

An inch in NYC ? 

I like 6 from both waves at KNYC. ( that would have meant .4 ) 

 

 

Out on Orient point.  This is .75 to an inch for him and I working off the premise of 15 to 1 .

- 15 at 850 with deepening LP .The VVs look good and that lift and those mid levels support 15 to 1 

 

Not only did you get your forecast wrong , you got mine for wave 2 wrong .

 

Warlock deleted his post , so you at least get credit for leaving this one up. 

I am happy you got 8 

[redbanknjandbigbasslakepa]

You did better than I thought you would. Not great, but good. I liked this one for the jersey coast for awhile because living in Monmouth we like pretty far offshore tracks. I'll grade you a B so far, pretty good ideas but a little overshot. We'all see where it goes. 

 

 

[PB GFI]

4 minutes ago, redbanknjandbigbasslakepa said:

You did better than I thought you would. Not great, but good. I liked this one for the jersey coast for awhile because living in Monmouth we like pretty far offshore tracks. I'll grade you a B so far, pretty good ideas but a little overshot. We'all see where it goes. 

 

 

 

-EPO patterns have been kind to us .

[redbanknjandbigbasslakepa]

The weekend could be our best shot at a glaze event in Monmouth in some time due to string high dense low level cold and light overturning WAA. 

[PB GFI]

8 minutes ago, redbanknjandbigbasslakepa said:

The weekend could be our best shot at a glaze event in Monmouth in some time due to string high dense low level cold and light overturning WAA. 

 

The High is there , we need to see how much energy ejects out with the first wave . The Euro and UKMET pushed out .5 yesterday- since then the models have backed off some  .