Spring Banter & General Discussion/Observations

[eekuasepinniW]

Had about an inch here, but it looks as though the hills on the other side of the lake got more.  My trees are already bare, but those hills are still solidly caked in snow despite being barely 200' higher.

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

3 hours ago, weathafella said:

Never been a fan of lobster....but love New England summers.

I enjoy a good Alaskan crab now and then.....but I've never been to Alaska. 

[Typhoon Tip]

Mmm..  really - I don't know if 'bust' really qualifies. The problem is, models are taken verbatim too often. It needs to be pointed out/reminded from time to time that these 'virtual reproductions' of the atmosphere, out in time, need caveat emptor - subjectivity and analysis before the event - we can argue after the fact/event numbers are in the books why x-y-z model did or did not outline those numbers accordingly, but at the end of the day, ...it's up to the consumer of the models to believe it or not.  ...One should never use the model numbers as black and white. That's not why/what they are there(for).

Until such time as they are proven infallible?  present day technological climate ain't it!

1   the time of year

2   the standard error with these sort of things (if not academically ...certainly by experience) 

3  ...and how #'s 1 and 2 should be factored into model numbers

I would conclude that the blanket statement of 'model bust' isn't really useful.  That whole situation was so marginal under the best circumstances, and yes...models may have tipped onto the colder side of that marginality by a razor margin, but think about it... is it really fair to play the bust card?  Not logically ...that all comes off more as a lightning rod for one's disappointment - seeee, model f'ed it. 

The reality was that any such numbers were hugely suspect leading in, to begin with... a concept that was either poorly understood, or [more likely] elided in lieu of wanting unending blue snow riches.  Phasing in the three above bullet points and then adjusting the models objectively ...probably means the models did what they were capable of here. 

[powderfreak]

1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Mmm..  really - I don't know if 'bust' really qualifies. The problem is, models are taken verbatim too often. It needs to be pointed out/reminded from time to time that these 'virtual reproductions' of the atmosphere, out in time, need caveat emptor - subjectivity and analysis before the event - we can argue after the fact/event numbers are in the books why x-y-z model did or did not outline those numbers accordingly, but at the end of the day, ...it's up to the consumer of the models to believe it or not.  ...One should never use the model numbers as black and white. That's not why/what they are there(for).

Until such time as they are proven infallible?  present day technological climate ain't it!

1   the time of year

2   the standard error with these sort of things (if not academically ...certainly by experience) 

3  ...and how #'s 1 and 2 should be factored into model numbers

I would conclude that the blanket statement of 'model bust' isn't really useful.  That whole situation was so marginal under the best circumstances, and yes...models may have tipped onto the colder side of that marginality by a razor margin, but think about it... is it really fair to play the bust card?  Not logically ...that all comes off more as a lightning rod for one's disappointment - seeee, model f'ed it. 

The reality was that any such numbers were hugely suspect leading in, to begin with... a concept that was either poorly understood, or [more likely] elided in lieu of wanting unending blue snow riches.  Phasing in the three above bullet points and then adjusting the models objectively ...probably means the models did what they were capable of here. 

I wasn't involved in the event being referenced but I think model bust is a fair way to put it.  I think you are looking too much into the psychological reasons of why people say bust, but I mean, if pretty much every model is showing a snow column and a bunch of lift, I think its safe assume you would forecast snow? 

You are talking about adjusting the model outcome though.  The models showed one thing happening (no matter how tentative one thinks it might be) and another thing happened.  

I don't know, I just think saying the models bust with this one is a fair way to put it.  It wasn't just like it was some cracked out NAM run showing something...it was on every model that significant snowfall could occur, and yet left with the highest CoCoRAHS observation of 3" in Maine. 

[Ginx snewx]

 

[eekuasepinniW]

Looks just like here in March 2008.

[dendrite]

A lot of snow, but definitely some weenie drifting. All of the roofs were wind cleared too so that surface area covered by homes fills in around the lawns. 08 looked a little less impressive than that here, but the roof maintained 2-3ft on it all Feb and Mar. Isn't Gander claiming a 70-something inch depth? If so, that would be double what we had in 07-08 and that doesn't look doubly impressive.

[Typhoon Tip]

2 hours ago, powderfreak said:

I wasn't involved in the event being referenced but I think model bust is a fair way to put it.  I think you are looking too much into the psychological reasons of why people say bust, but I mean, if pretty much every model is showing a snow column and a bunch of lift, I think its safe assume you would forecast snow? 

You are talking about adjusting the model outcome though.  The models showed one thing happening (no matter how tentative one thinks it might be) and another thing happened.  

I don't know, I just think saying the models bust with this one is a fair way to put it.  It wasn't just like it was some cracked out NAM run showing something...it was on every model that significant snowfall could occur, and yet left with the highest CoCoRAHS observation of 3" in Maine. 

I have been in and around forums for a decade at this point, and I've become a jaded by this sort of outcome over the years; and it is certainly not as fair as you are making it to impugn modeling on this one. sorry, it's not..  

People DO psycho blame tools and sourcing et al, often, when they had bought in too deeply into designs they constructed to fit what they want.  And there is an emotional component to this - come on man.  

I'll say it again:

the models are not intended to be actual representations of what the atmosphere will do - they offer plausible scenarios to consider. That's why multiple runs, perturbed with varying physics are employed. 

You are right - I am reading into the pyschological reason for all that bust blaming... but it is not "too much".  Because it's true. People got pissed because they didn't get snow - one does not get pissed unless one's expectations were not met.  The only problem is, this situation did not justify setting those  expectation - which admittedly is just the way it looked Meteorologically to me.  I was rolling eyes trying not to get involved, but then when the inevitable happened ...I just couldn't help myself when all that finger pointing got going.   

Perhaps we have a difference of opinion and that's fine.  But, from my perspective..if people approached the usage of the models with the right attitude and understanding of what they are really there for, we wouldn't be having this discussion over a situation that was so marginal that uncertainly was huge going in. 

 

[Hazey]

 

I'd hit that in January. April? Puff puff pass. Just imagine when the pattern flips the script and they get a bunch of sou'easters. Like next week for instance could be dicey.

[klw]

The Goes 16 is just wow:

So so much going on

[eekuasepinniW]

35 minutes ago, klw said:

The Goes 16 is just wow:

So so much going on

Awesome.

I feel like my daily webcam timelapse is unnecessary now.

[Dan76]

3 hours ago, Ginx snewx said:

 

Jebman would have that place looking like palm springs in a matter of hours lol...but holly sh3t

[eekuasepinniW]

My town is installing new LED streetlights and my street was done today.

They are flat on the bottom instead of curved, they are not as bright, they are very directional, and somehow don't throw any light up onto my land. From my slightly elevated vantage point, you cannot see them at all, all you see is a glow on the ground.  I AM IN LOVE.  This is pretty big for night-sky people such as myself.  

I'm super excited about being able to do a star cam shot now.  Before, the damn lights caused so much glare and reflections that it was impossible.

My fear is that people are going to complain about the dullness, and they'll install brighter ones.

[Ginx snewx]

29 minutes ago, eekuasepinniW said:

My town is installing new LED streetlights and my street was done today.

They are flat on the bottom instead of curved, they are not as bright, they are very directional, and somehow don't throw any light up onto my land. From my slightly elevated vantage point, you cannot see them at all, all you see is a glow on the ground.  I AM IN LOVE.  This is pretty big for night-sky people such as myself.  

I'm super excited about being able to do a star cam shot now.  Before, the damn lights caused so much glare and reflections that it was impossible.

My fear is that people are going to complain about the dullness, and they'll install brighter ones.

 Awesome ,I have spent the last 2 years retrofitting work with LEDS, no one has complained yet. 76 K savings a year in KW , labor and new bulbs all for less than standard bulbs thanks to Eversource rebates. Next up fluorescents to LED

[mreaves]

43 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

 Awesome ,I have spent the last 2 years retrofitting work with LEDS, no one has complained yet. 76 K savings a year in KW , labor and new bulbs all for less than standard bulbs thanks to Eversource rebates. Next up fluorescents to LED

I picked up a couple of LEDS that were on sale for a subsidized price of $1.20 each, only to get them home and realize that I have already switched everything in the house over, except for the stupid ceiling fan in our bedroom. That thing takes some size in between standard and those tiny size. 

[ice1972]

Soooooo wut does a weenie have to do to lose the weenie tag......lol....my work around is just to constantly edit one post.....haha.....seriously though it's been months 

[ice1972]

11 hours ago, Ginx snewx said:

 

So great......I can recall several winter seasons in Tahoe region where that kind of depth was the norm.....tremendous.....

[Damage In Tolland]

5 hours ago, ice1972 said:

Soooooo wut does a weenie have to do to lose the weenie tag......lol....my work around is just to constantly edit one post.....haha.....seriously though it's been months 

Send a PM to Dendrite 

[JC-CT]

5 hours ago, ice1972 said:

Soooooo wut does a weenie have to do to lose the weenie tag......lol....my work around is just to constantly edit one post.....haha.....seriously though it's been months 

Hmm. Stop drunk posting at 1am?

[powderfreak]

17 hours ago, dendrite said:

A lot of snow, but definitely some weenie drifting. All of the roofs were wind cleared too so that surface area covered by homes fills in around the lawns. 08 looked a little less impressive than that here, but the roof maintained 2-3ft on it all Feb and Mar. Isn't Gander claiming a 70-something inch depth? If so, that would be double what we had in 07-08 and that doesn't look doubly impressive.

I was thinking that too regarding the roof tops and drifting.  Like when in a city or more urban area the snow blows off all the roof-tops and fills in the small yards and narrow streets.   Take multiple feet off every roof roof and it has to go somewhere.

There's something about seeing pics with 4 feet on a roof that just looks buried.

[Cold Miser]

18 hours ago, Ginx snewx said:

 

lololol.

That is crazy s.hit. Wow at 1:04. How do you even get out of your house when the snow is like that?  I suppose you have to just keep clearing as it falls.
What is the average snowfall for this area per year? 

[Typhoon Tip]

wonder if we'll see some thunder in the area later on... 

[powderfreak]

The snow can melt off now...at least in town.  This is filthy.  Standing water everywhere even on the snowpack.  Frozen ground and high QPF snowpack melting plus rain...fugly.  Mud, snow, grass, water mixture... walking on the snow leaves like 4" of water in your foot prints.  Dog needs a bath every time she goes outside lol.

My buddy sent a picture that showed him and his wife laid down 2x4s to walk on from their front door to their cars as their yard is like shin deep mush/snow/mud.

Hopefully the warmth early in the week will finish this off.

[Baroclinic Zone]

Water is wet.  Few bangers out there too.

[Ginx snewx]

We slot

[CT Valley Snowman]

9 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

We slot

Congrats NJ, NEPA, HRV, NYC

[Cold Miser]

1 hour ago, powderfreak said:

The snow can melt off now...at least in town.  This is filthy.  Standing water everywhere even on the snowpack.  Frozen ground and high QPF snowpack melting plus rain...fugly.  Mud, snow, grass, water mixture... walking on the snow leaves like 4" of water in your foot prints.  Dog needs a bath every time she goes outside lol.

My buddy sent a picture that showed him and his wife laid down 2x4s to walk on from their front door to their cars as their yard is like shin deep mush/snow/mud.

Hopefully the warmth early in the week will finish this off.

North country problems.

[Baroclinic Zone]

.60" of MEH rain today.

5.20" since the 24th of March

[weatherwiz]

Thunder and lightning here in Danbury!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Quincy]

Decent lapse rates for ya, Wiz!