Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,607
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

January 23rd-24th Storm Threat


Rjay

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, UlsterCountySnowZ said:

3-6" of sleet would be potentially extremely dangerous with high wind... however I would still agree the coast is the bigger story potentially 

Nothing is showing this. How do you get 3 inches of sleet from 1.00 of qpf?  It's more like 1-2 of sleet at best. The nam always has way to much qpf 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 659
  • Created
  • Last Reply
12 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

Nothing is showing this. How do you get 3 inches of sleet from 1.00 of qpf?  It's more like 1-2 of sleet at best. The nam always has way to much qpf 

I've always thought the average sleet to liquid ratio was about 2-3/1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

Nothing is showing this. How do you get 3 inches of sleet from 1.00 of qpf?  It's more like 1-2 of sleet at best. The nam always has way to much qpf 

People are really exaggerating. The storm is 90% rain for everyone...this has nothing in common with Feb 2007 or Mar 2007 despite many people mentioning them. Surface temps were in the teens and low 20s for those storms; the whole column was MUCH colder. Sleet will have a hard time being formed in this storm due to the depth of the warm layer, and the surface is marginal for accumulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, nzucker said:

People are really exaggerating. The storm is 90% rain for everyone...this has nothing in common with Feb 2007 or Mar 2007 despite many people mentioning them. Surface temps were in the teens and low 20s for those storms; the whole column was MUCH colder. Sleet will have a hard time being formed in this storm due to the depth of the warm layer, and the surface is marginal for accumulations.

I really can't disagree with this at all. We had cold high pressure locked in for all those storms. This airmass is equivalent to late march 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

Even at 2-3 ratio the nam always over does qpf 

It's not only that.  It's overdoing the frozen precip as well IMO.  You have a really strong easterly flow and a pretty large warm nose.  If you couple that with surface temps that are at the freezing point or just above, I don't see this being a big issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

Nothing is showing this. How do you get 3 inches of sleet from 1.00 of qpf?  It's more like 1-2 of sleet at best. The nam always has way to much qpf 

I was analyzing the 3knam specifically.. which is 2" of LE sleet NOT 1" for a decent chunk of LHV..... Sleet is NOT 1:1 otherwise it would be rain... it's 2 or 3:1 ratio... making 2" of LE 4-6" of sleet...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

Nothing is showing this. How do you get 3 inches of sleet from 1.00 of qpf?  It's more like 1-2 of sleet at best. The nam always has way to much qpf 

Nothing is showing this?.... nobody's predicting the nams correct, certainly not me, just discussing what it shows... I don't get how simple discussion always turns such harsh criticism towards posters... I DID NOT MAKE THE NAM, just discussing it... same way I'll discuss the models that show mostly all rain... it's what we do on here correct?

Also asking how someone gets 3" and then saying it's more like 1-2" is fairly petty don't you think? Lol... but I'll play along 

34oejog.jpg

 

Sorry if you don't like what it shows... but the nam run I was referring to does indeed show 3-6" of sleet across a large portion of LHV... despite its validity 

 

im also 1000% certain if any model were printing out 2" of pure sleet for your area or NYC it would have no issue being the topic of discussion 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, UlsterCountySnowZ said:

Nothing is showing this?.... nobody's predicting the nams correct, certainly not me, just discussing what it shows... I don't get how simple discussion always turns such harsh criticism towards posters... I DID NOT MAKE THE NAM, just discussing it... same way I'll discuss the models that show mostly all rain... it's what we do on here correct?

Also asking how someone gets 3" and then saying it's more like 1-2" is fairly petty don't you think? Lol... but I'll play along 

34oejog.jpg

 

Sorry if you don't like what it shows... but the nam run I was referring to does indeed show 3-6" of sleet across a large portion of LHV... despite its validity 

 

im also 1000% certain if any model were printing out 2" of pure sleet for your area or NYC it would have no issue being the topic of discussion 

When the NAM is all alone, it never merits much discussion. 

Additionally, you CANNOT just rip and read from models to make a forecast. You have to look at the overall set-up. This storm has a weak high moving well east of Maine (not to the north as in classic storms), 700-800mb is torched, and the surface low is over West Virginia. How many significant winter events has the metro had w an SLP over West Virginia? How about with an SLP in that location and surface temps near 40F?

The correct answer is none.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, nzucker said:

When the NAM is all alone, it never merits much discussion. 

Additionally, you CANNOT just rip and read from models to make a forecast. You have to look at the overall set-up. This storm has a weak high moving well east of Maine (not to the north as in classic storms), 700-800mb is torched, and the surface low is over West Virginia. How many significant winter events has the metro had w an SLP over West Virginia? How about with an SLP in that location and surface temps near 40F?

The correct answer is none.

I've never once said the metro area had a shot at wintery precip... ever... lol... a warm tongue at 700-800, while 850 and up to 700/ are all below 0.. Is sleet.. which is what the nam discussion was about... again... NOT A FORCAST... a discussion...

 

and if I recall... I believe the NYC blizzard last year was the nam leading the pack from hr 84... all alone... should it not have received some merit? Just countering your talking points... I DO NOT think the nams correct... only discussing it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rtd208 said:

I think to much emphasis is being put on the frozen aspect and not enough on the wind and coastal flooding aspect which could be a huge story with this.. Heavy rain will also be an issue as well.

I agree... but there aren't any posters from NYC or Long Island really discussing anything  about it... I'm more concerned with possibility of frozen obviously hence my centered discussions, if someone would like to talk about the coastal impacts that's fine too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm starting worry about Freeport and Linderhust. 

This is from Upton's adf.

A strong coastal storm will likely cause 2 successive high tide
cycles of minor coastal flooding Sunday Night into Monday
Night...with potential for moderate coastal flooding for southern
and eastern bay and beachfront communities of LI with the Monday
evening high tide. The moderate coastal flood potential will
increase if the slower coastal low movement (stronger ene winds
Mon eve) comes to fruition...with even a low potential for major
flood thresholds to be reached in the most vulnerable communities
such as Lindenhurst and Freeport. A coastal flood watch has been
issued to address this moderate flood threat. Minor coastal
flooding could linger for the southern and eastern bay areas for
the Tuesday morning high tide cycle as well.

An ensemble of guidances is showing potential for surge to build to
2 to 3 ft Mon am...and 3 1/2 to 4 1/2 ft by Monday evening.

The highest threat for coastal impacts will be for flood prone
locales along the south shore bays of LI/NYC...eastern bays of
LI...lower NY/NJ harbor including tidally affected rivers...and
western Li Sound.

The other concern will be for widespread dune erosion and localized
washovers at Atlantic ocean beaches from elevated waters levels
and an east to west sweep of 8 to 12 ft surf Mon into Tue.


 

Low potential but there's a chance.  A major flood would do significant damage to the area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

new NAM is very close to a stall  Like I mentioned this afternoon.  

If it's already showing it being 'that' close, it should be expected to happen.   Models have historically been slow to catch up to stalls. 

slower and colder will continue to be the trend, eventually it may not even get as far north as currently projected.  The CAD is most likely still being under-forecasted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nzucker said:

When the NAM is all alone, it never merits much discussion. 

Additionally, you CANNOT just rip and read from models to make a forecast. You have to look at the overall set-up. This storm has a weak high moving well east of Maine (not to the north as in classic storms), 700-800mb is torched, and the surface low is over West Virginia. How many significant winter events has the metro had w an SLP over West Virginia? How about with an SLP in that location and surface temps near 40F?

The correct answer is none.

It is? Take a peek at the 0z RGEM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...