Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,586
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Summer Banter & General Discussion/Observations


CapturedNature

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Jesus H at the temps in Southern VT right now as it is precipitating very hard...Flood Advisory and Warning issued with heavy rain pivoting through there.

Granted most of that terrain is 1,500ft and above, with a good deal of them in the 2,000ft range. 

Looks like Florida, MA and Savoy are down to 42F too.  The Florida, MA obs are good today... 2.3" of rainfall at daytime temps <45F on June 6th.

temps.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dendrite said:

I love how threadex instantly updates. 2nd latest 40s max on record for ORH.

Early June has seen a lot of turds recently looking at the ORH threaded extremes. It's filled with post-2000 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Early June has seen a lot of turds recently looking at the ORH threaded extremes. It's filled with post-2000 years.

It's funny. We seem to have no problem achieving record low maxes, but low mins are exceedingly rare. GW seems to have more of an effect on the mins than the maxes. It's not like we're ripping off numerous 100s in the 2000s. It seems we're "dewier" more than anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dendrite said:

It's funny. We seem to have no problem achieving record low maxes, but low mins are exceedingly rare. GW seems to have more of an effect on the mins than the maxes. It's not like we're ripping off numerous 100s in the 2000s. It seems we're "dewier" more than anything.

Well with GHG warming, the temps that get affected the most are minimums...particularly during winter.

Though there is also some UHI that is partly responsible for the mins being harder to achieve as well. Many airports have more development around them than years ago...and we know that more development means it gets harder to decouple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, dendrite said:

It's funny. We seem to have no problem achieving record low maxes, but low mins are exceedingly rare. GW seems to have more of an effect on the mins than the maxes. It's not like we're ripping off numerous 100s in the 2000s. It seems we're "dewier" more than anything.

NASA/DOE identified cloud cover and moisture response to GW as a source of significant uncertainty in modeling.  For the last 10+ years there have been numerous field campaigns with these types of observations in mind, usually administered through the ARM program.  A lot of it is cool multisensor work, (radars, lidars, and radiometers) to get a sense of the full evapotranspiration cycle.  

10 years ago back in the summer of 07 we participated in an experiment called CLASIC analyzing cloud formations as a function of surface moisture in SW OK with all sorts of aircraft mounted lidars... it was a great period for our radars with crazy amounts of precip in the S Plains but standing water in the fields made the analysis difficult... not exactly representative at any rate of normal conditions.  Suffice to say however that in our short sample it appeared that ponding at the surface begets clouds ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, radarman said:

NASA/DOE identified cloud cover and moisture response to GW as a source of significant uncertainty in modeling.  For the last 10+ years there have been numerous field campaigns with these types of observations in mind, usually administered through the ARM program.  A lot of it is cool multisensor work, (radars, lidars, and radiometers) to get a sense of the full evapotranspiration cycle.  

10 years ago back in the summer of 07 we participated in an experiment called CLASIC analyzing cloud formations as a function of surface moisture in SW OK with all sorts of aircraft mounted lidars... it was a great period for our radars with crazy amounts of precip in the S Plains but standing water in the fields made the analysis difficult... not exactly representative at any rate of normal conditions.  Suffice to say however that in our short sample it appeared that ponding at the surface begets clouds ;)

Pretty cool. Makes you wonder how much of an effect the poor agricultural practices of the 1800s/early 1900s had on the climate record. Obviously the dust bowl led to some insane stretched of record heat in the plains, but I'm sure it contributed to drier conditions across much of the CONUS....which opens the way for larger temperature ranges and more record high maxes and low mins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Pretty cool. Makes you wonder how much of an effect the poor agricultural practices of the 1800s/early 1900s had on the climate record. Obviously the dust bowl led to some insane stretched of record heat in the plains, but I'm sure it contributed to drier conditions across much of the CONUS....which opens the way for larger temperature ranges and more record high maxes and low mins.

Which if true, would also distort the precipitation records in the early/mid 20th century...i.e., the late 20th century/early 21st century precip increases that have been disproportionately higher in the eastern U.S. may be a little more representative of the baseline climate than the much drier period before that.

 

And for the temps you're right about the dust bowl...the 1930s saw extreme high maxes and low mins that no other decade can match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Which if true, would also distort the precipitation records in the early/mid 20th century...i.e., the late 20th century/early 21st century precip increases that have been disproportionately higher in the eastern U.S. may be a little more representative of the baseline climate than the much drier period before that.

 

And for the temps you're right about the dust bowl...the 1930s saw extreme high maxes and low mins that no other decade can match.

Interesting point.   I'd assume the greater relative contribution of synoptic scale precipitation toward the seasonal averages in the east reduces variability associated with surface moisture somewhat, but the mesoscale contribution could definitely be affected.  Later Spring/early Summer diurnally driven convection would seem to be particularly prone to manmade disturbance, though we saw plenty of complaints from chasers in the 2012-2014 period about not being able to get a half decent updraft W of I-35 even in April and May.   And when your upstream areas are hotter and dryer, you'd be more prone to EML advection and associated CIN, on top of whatever direct, local impacts that Ag water management practices were having.

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...