Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,608
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Vesuvius
    Newest Member
    Vesuvius
    Joined

January 29/30 snow event


TauntonBlizzard2013

Recommended Posts

Just now, SR Airglow said:

Damn - was hoping they got into some banding overnight. Thanks though!

Wawa will have their chances...they may do pretty well in these events coming up this week...their elevation will help on these southerly flow advection events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 976
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Wawa will have their chances...they may do pretty well in these events coming up this week...their elevation will help on these southerly flow advection events.

You think elevation helps on Thursday? I’ve noticed the snow maps have higher amounts in hills and less in valley and on the coast 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Baroclinic Zone said:

Damn!  That band was/is intense.  Just got to the office.  The most efficent little buggers accumulating.  Was 3-4" 90min ago when I left the house.  Gotta be pushing 6" now.  Roads are atrocious.  About as bad as you'll ever see for a minor event.  Most untouched.   School was not cancelled or delayed.

I'm  not sure that you can label it a "minor event" at surprise 4-6".

My brother said the roads around Boston are an absolute traffic disaster.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great storm where synoptics helped on supplement the models.  That convection to the east wreaked havoc on them.  ML Fronto ftw.

Pleasantly surprised at how this overperformed.  BOX did underplay it a bit but they did have low % for the higher totals so they were there.  They should have put up Advisories though when the banding became apparent over RI and upgraded Bristol/Plymouth counties to Warnings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Yeah it was more the QPF the models were horrendous with...they did get most of the key features correct which is why we kept saying "hold on, don't be a QPF queen just yet...there's midlevel banding sig showing up".....but then as you said, they stubbornly refused to eventually spit out the goods from a QPF standpoint. Then we started doubting ourselves....maybe the dry air was too much? Maybe the convection robbing moisture was real? Maybe, maybe, maybe....until we mostly caved and said "ok, maybe this really is only a 1-3 inch event for E/ESE MA and RI/SE CT"....when in reality, we had it right the first time, but we have so much confidence in NWP guidance to get the QPF right once we get inside 24 hours.

Yup.. this is my personal demon. 

I'm sure all other Mets experience this ... but, usually at some point along a given saga of modeling leading to some interest in the charts, at some point or the other along those travails of uncertainty I will voice an internal monologue, if not even inform others, a description of events what will ultimately transpire, perfectly... 

It's after that point in time, that the f-up kicks in :) Things just get skewed ,,, obscured by unrelenting guidance and/or other's salient arguments et al ... eroding and eroding until that 'perfect' call is completely obliterated.  

Knowing when to stick with one's convictions - that's been my bane over the years.  I just did this same damn antic with the ice storm the other day... I warned people ad nauseam not to bite on any guidance with that tuck junk and what did I do ?   not 12 hours before the first 27 F knife cut into the thermometer house clear down to NW RI I was telling people how the models would probably not be that wrong that close in, and some times the conventional wisdom has to step aside ... 

WRONG!

In this case, I'm sure we all saw the 1.5 deg lat/lon rule in effect at some point or the other, but threw hands because the models were unrelentingly stalwart in their 0 QPF.  That's amazing ... to be THAT specifically wrong about one key specific aspect.  It's like the models scored a 90 on the test but everybody fails?  almost comical really...  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Baroclinic Zone said:

Great storm where synoptics helped on supplement the models.  That convection to the east wreaked havoc on them.  ML Fronto ftw.

Pleasantly surprised at how this overperformed.  BOX did underplay it a bit but they did have low % for the higher totals so they were there.  They should have put up Advisories though when the banding became apparent over RI and upgraded Bristol/Plymouth counties to Warnings.

Yeah... I don't like to get into the habit of carping on NWS staff... As Oceanwx will attest, they are sort of understaffed these days and the increasing reliance on automation and so forth (too) isn't helping.   Get a computer to make the human distinction (which this required...) with the intuition/synoptics is a tall order... So, they have some operational limitations in some scenarios that probably didn't/doesn't parlay well in all instances.. 

That said, when I read their statement yesterday that someone excerpt for the forum here ... they seemed to be very model-reliant... Like almost entirely.. I thought at the time they were not discussing ... perhaps then not considering, any of the other deeper args with mid level forcing and the stuff we're recapitulating here. All of which was evident yesterday.  

Still in the end, ... heh..there's no crystal ball.  I am not going to sit here and say that never in history of the world has a v-max traversed 1.5 deg lat/lon SE of a point and nothing happened there.   Certainty in the business ... it's the path of least resistance to a destination of greatest regret. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CTValleySnowMan said:

It was clearly an overperformer for many, not sure why you're trying to call people out on this area being this far NW when the general idea of it being snowier was correct for most areas from the 84 corridor and points SE. We were always on the edge with this and waking up to a white ground and snow falling is somewhat of a vicotory.    

Just calling out one individual in particular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Yup.. this is my personal demon. 

I'm sure all other Mets experience this ... but, usually at some point along a given saga of modeling leading to some interest in the charts, at some point or the other along those travails of uncertainty I will voice an internal monologue, if not even inform others, a description of events what will ultimately transpire, perfectly... 

It's after that point in time, that the f-up kicks in :) Things just get skewed ,,, obscured by unrelenting guidance and/or other's salient arguments et al ... eroding and eroding until that 'perfect' call is completely obliterated.  

Knowing when to stick with one's convictions - that's been my bane over the years.  I just did this same damn antic with the ice storm the other day... I warned people ad nauseam not to bite on any guidance with that tuck junk and what did I do ?   not 12 hours before the first 27 F knife cut into the thermometer house clear down to NW RI I was telling people how the models would probably not be that wrong that close in, and some times the conventional wisdom has to step aside ... 

WRONG!

In this case, I'm sure we all saw the 1.5 deg lat/lon rule in effect at some point or the other, but threw hands because the models were unrelentingly stalwart in their 0 QPF.  That's amazing ... to be THAT specifically wrong about one key specific aspect.  It's like the models scored a 90 on the test but everybody fails?  almost comical really...  

Absolutely. I think working in a team environment can really help in this regard...

I'd give yourself more credit on the ice-storm. You at least raised all the red flags, lowering confidence on the torch the models were advertising... Throwing out the flags again is something that can produce more favorable results in a team environment where everyone can put their heads together and dig into the "caution" aspects. I think it's easier to lose conviction when its just "you" --as in one person-- versus short term guidance. This at least, has been my problem...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, weathafella said:

Shocked!   Over performer for sure!

My first post on this storm will be to admit I underestimated it... from NWS maps and almost all TV/public forecasters, seems I was not alone. We all sometimes rely on models too much.

Awesome stuff this morning, great flakes and decent rates. Also definitely has a feel of ocean enhancement here in Boston.

When I get a chance later today, I want to go back and see what models had a best handle of these features (from Box AFD): "For much of the overnight, the precip was separated into two distinct bands the furthest W, with an area of deformation associated with a weak closed H7 low. While the further E was associated with the H92-H85 LLJ convergence. These two have finally joined forces as the H7 low shifted E and is now a focused f-gen band across mainly SE MA and RI."

I know ORH and CTRain and others mentioned the H7 low, and Ray mentioned it on his blog. Curious what models had a best handle, not just qpf output (which generally was terrible even 0z last night) but the evolution of banding features we had overnight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, wxsniss said:

My first post on this storm will be to admit I underestimated it... from NWS maps and almost all TV/public forecasters, seems I was not alone. We all sometimes rely on models too much.

Awesome stuff this morning, great flakes and decent rates. Also definitely has a feel of ocean enhancement here in Boston.

When I get a chance later today, I want to go back and see what models had a best handle of these features (from Box AFD): "For much of the overnight, the precip was separated into two distinct bands the furthest W, with an area of deformation associated with a weak closed H7 low. While the further E was associated with the H92-H85 LLJ convergence. These two have finally joined forces as the H7 low shifted E and is now a focused f-gen band across mainly SE MA and RI."

I know ORH and CTRain and others mentioned the H7 low, and Ray mentioned it on his blog. Curious what models had a best handle, not just qpf output (which generally was terrible even 0z last night) but the evolution of banding features we had overnight.

I thought the GFS did well with it. RAP too. NAM also showed it, but really kept the best QPF with the more low level WAA. Classic model bias there. But it goes above H7. You want the good frontogenic forcing to help induce lift in the DGZ, which was above H7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listen not one to say this usually, but NWS behind the 8 ball this storm. Once reports and radar indicated heavy snow warnings should have flew, also they totally missed the coastal flooding. Tough forecast but once the nut busted they need to get things right. 5am this morning people's phones should have been buzzing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SouthCoastMA said:

you had a feeling forecasts were going to bust low when that mid level band was already setting up to the NW around 8pm last night. 

Yeah I was kind of surprised how much I was snowing in that band...the worry was dry air in the midlevels...but I was going to town at like 9-10pm already in that band. That boded well for the rest of the stuff that would come in later during the event. I still didn't think this would happen though...not this much of a bust. I was thinking "oh maybe someone gets lucky with 4" or so."...not 8-9" lollis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

Listen not one to say this usually, but NWS behind the 8 ball this storm. Once reports and radar indicated heavy snow warnings should have flew, also they totally missed the coastal flooding. Tough forecast but once the nut busted they need to get things right. 5am this morning people's phones should have been buzzing

Yea. That happens with okx alot on busted forecasts in either direction...Always lagging behind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ORH_wxman said:

Yeah I was kind of surprised how much I was snowing in that band...the worry was dry air in the midlevels...but I was going to town at like 9-10pm already in that band. That boded well for the rest of the stuff that would come in later during the event. I still didn't think this would happen though...not this much of a bust.

Agreed..this was a bigger bust than normal. I was thinking maybe 3-5" was in the cards or maybe a spot 6" as opposed to the 2-4" the NWS had

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...