Feb 7th snow threat

[NJwx85]

Just now, Paragon said:

It belongs in climate and meteorology too, because it's science.  It's why America is the laughingstock of the rest of the world and backwards in science because it's the only country that bends over to corrupt corporate interests :))

 

I don't have the time to write a substantiated counter argument. Like I said, climate change is a controversial topic and belongs in the political forum or in a special sub-forum dedicated to that topic. 

Agree to disagree.

[Paragon]

4 minutes ago, NJwx85 said:

I don't have the time to write a substantiated counter argument. Like I said, climate change is a controversial topic and belongs in the political forum or in a special sub-forum dedicated to that topic. 

Agree to disagree.

That latter part I do agree with (the subforum thing).

 

However the area of shifting storm tracks and increasing precip and especially the increase in big precip events is a very worthwhile discussion.  It's now been happening for about 20 years or so so we have a nice sample size.  Another 10 years or so and it will be part of the new norms.  Not that I think we're done with the shifting of course, but we have a substantial amount of data to work with.

 

 

[NorthShoreWx]

3 hours ago, NJwx85 said:

Yes I know, more than 80". That's why I said more than double.

The Long Island, Central NJ and city posters have been spoiled the last 15 years and it's not going to be pretty when the correction comes.

We'll deal with it a lot better than you'll deal with it if it doesn't happen.

BTW, your perception of long term climo is unduly skewed by the 70s - 80s.  That was no more normal than the last 20 years have been.  

We've been running about 25% above long term averages.  Real climo...not ersatz climo from haphazard coop records.

[Paragon]

23 minutes ago, NorthShoreWx said:

We'll deal with it a lot better than you'll deal with it if it doesn't happen.

BTW, your perception of long term climo is unduly skewed by the 70s - 80s.  That was no more normal than the last 20 years have been.  

We've been running about 25% above long term averages.  Real climo...not ersatz climo from haphazard coop records.

Ed, what would you say has been a "typical" decade of what our climo is?  70s and 80s were the only decades where NYC was under 20" average snowfall so we have to throw those out, but we probably also have to throw out the decades that averaged 30" or higher.

 

Assuming climo is static- which we all know it isn't

 

 

 

[NJwx85]

18 minutes ago, Paragon said:

Ed, what would you say has been a "typical" decade of what our climo is?  70s and 80s were the only decades where NYC was under 20" average snowfall so we have to throw those out, but we probably also have to throw out the decades that averaged 30" or higher.

 

Assuming climo is static- which we all know it isn't

 

 

 

I would say that the 90's was a fairly normal period. We had a few blockbuster storms but the last fifteen years or so has been outrageously skewed towards well above normal snowfall for the Southern 2/3rds of NJ and Eastern Long Island. My argument is simply that this period has been an anomaly and that eventually over time the long term always reverts back to the mean, following the law of averages. 

I would argue that the mean track is closer to the black line on my image below, however recent trends up until this year were more towards the red line. This has resulted in a shift with regards to the Western extent of accumulating snows which I've attempted to illustrate below.

[NorthShoreWx]

Long term averages make the most sense in a long term stable climate pattern, which I am not sure has existed since the founding of this country, but I'd say here is 32 - 33" and NYC is 28 - 30"

[NJwx85]

3 minutes ago, NorthShoreWx said:

Long term averages make the most sense in a long term stable climate pattern, which I am not sure has existed since the founding of this country, but I'd say here is 32 - 33" and NYC is 28 - 30"

And my argument from the start has been that their is a reason why you only average about 30" and BGM averages over 80".

[NorthShoreWx]

5 minutes ago, NJwx85 said:

And my argument from the start has been that their is a reason why you only average about 30" and BGM averages over 80".

You're really going out on a limb with that argument, eh?

[NJwx85]

Just now, NorthShoreWx said:

You're really going out on a limb with that argument, eh?

Let me know when you want to have a serious conversation without the trolling and bias.

[Paragon]

10 hours ago, NJwx85 said:

I would say that the 90's was a fairly normal period. We had a few blockbuster storms but the last fifteen years or so has been outrageously skewed towards well above normal snowfall for the Southern 2/3rds of NJ and Eastern Long Island. My argument is simply that this period has been an anomaly and that eventually over time the long term always reverts back to the mean, following the law of averages. 

I would argue that the mean track is closer to the black line on my image below, however recent trends up until this year were more towards the red line. This has resulted in a shift with regards to the Western extent of accumulating snows which I've attempted to illustrate below.

Awesome that has been my favorite decade with the most exciting weather lol.

 

I like that you made the graph there, I wish we had something along the lines of HURDAT with Noreaster tracks to see how tracks have changed through the decades.  I mean you can pull up hurricane and TS tracks at a moment's notice we should be able to do the same with noreasters (which is one of the reasons why I feel that storms with a large warning area should be named also.)

Some highlights of the 90s

1991 historic summer

Aug 1991 Hurricane Bob

Oct 1991 Perfect Storm

Dec 1992 Noreaster- still my all time favorite noreaster

Mar 1993 Triple Phaser

1993 historic summer

1993-94 historic winter

1995 historic summer

1995 tropical season

1995-96 historic winter

Jan 1996 Blizzard

1996 TS Bertha

1998 severe wx season

1999 historic summer

1999 TS Floyd

Although the 1997-1999 period was pretty meh aside from severe wx in 1998 (Labor Day tornado within 5 miles of me) and the big heat in 1999 and Floyd in the same year.

 

[NorthShoreWx]

52 minutes ago, NJwx85 said:

Let me know when you want to have a serious conversation without the trolling and bias.

Always up for that.

[bluewave]

6 hours ago, Paragon said:

That latter part I do agree with (the subforum thing).

 

However the area of shifting storm tracks and increasing precip and especially the increase in big precip events is a very worthwhile discussion.  It's now been happening for about 20 years or so so we have a nice sample size.  Another 10 years or so and it will be part of the new norms.  Not that I think we're done with the shifting of course, but we have a substantial amount of data to work with.

 

 

It will be interesting to see how much longer this new increased snowfall pattern along the coast and decreased in the interior lasts.

 

 

 

 

 

[NorthShoreWx]

3 hours ago, bluewave said:

It will be interesting to see how much longer this new increased snowfall pattern along the coast and decreased in the interior lasts.

 

 

 

 

 

I honestly don't think the ISP trend line is as steep as depicted.  The record keeping prior to 2005 was inconsistent with a low side bias due in many cases to not reporting snowfall at all.   Most of it isn't as obvious, but I am 10 miles from ISP and had over 60" in 2003.  They really had 0"?

 

[Stormlover74]

23 minutes ago, NorthShoreWx said:

I honestly don't think the ISP trend line is as steep as depicted.  The record keeping prior to 2005 was inconsistent with a low side bias due in many cases to not reporting snowfall at all.   Most of it isn't as obvious, but I am 10 miles from ISP and had over 60" in 2003.  They really had 0"?

 

Weird. That's definitely wrong.

[Paragon]

1 hour ago, NorthShoreWx said:

I honestly don't think the ISP trend line is as steep as depicted.  The record keeping prior to 2005 was inconsistent with a low side bias due in many cases to not reporting snowfall at all.   Most of it isn't as obvious, but I am 10 miles from ISP and had over 60" in 2003.  They really had 0"?

 

I find all airport numbers suspect.

 

Maybe even moreso now that they're going to use heated runways to keep snow from accumulating there LOL

 

Let's use Brookhaven, their records to back go the 30s I think?  They're scientists so probably keep better records than anyone that works for an airport.

[bluewave]

8 hours ago, NorthShoreWx said:

I honestly don't think the ISP trend line is as steep as depicted.  The record keeping prior to 2005 was inconsistent with a low side bias due in many cases to not reporting snowfall at all.   Most of it isn't as obvious, but I am 10 miles from ISP and had over 60" in 2003.  They really had 0"?

 

 

8 hours ago, Paragon said:

I find all airport numbers suspect.

 

Maybe even moreso now that they're going to use heated runways to keep snow from accumulating there LOL

 

Let's use Brookhaven, their records to back go the 30s I think?  They're scientists so probably keep better records than anyone that works for an airport.

Some of the data was missing for ISP on that site. But the up trend is correct. It's the only site where you can plot multiple locations using the same scale and time frame. You can see a similar up trend using BNL which doesn't have some of the data gaps as ISP. The coast is in the middle of it's snowiest 15-20 year period since modern records began. 

 

 

 

 

 

[CPcantmeasuresnow]

17 hours ago, NorthShoreWx said:

Long term averages make the most sense in a long term stable climate pattern, which I am not sure has existed since the founding of this country, but I'd say here is 32 - 33" and NYC is 28 - 30"

Pretty much on the mark with that. And like the rest of the coast the trend line is definitely up in NYC. The difference is temperatures are much warmer than the averages in the early to mid 1900's which was the last period when averages in NYC were 30 inches but snowfall is at least near the seasonal averages from that time. Of course it's distributed differently now. Concentrated in single large events rather than many smaller events from late November through late March.

[bluewave]

37 minutes ago, CPcantmeasuresnow said:

Pretty much on the mark with that. And like the rest of the coast the trend line is definitely up in NYC. The difference is temperatures are much warmer than the averages in the early to mid 1900's which was the last period when averages in NYC were 30 inches but snowfall is at least near the seasonal averages from that time. Of course it's distributed differently now. Concentrated in single large events rather than many smaller events from late November through late March.

Makes sense since a warmer atmosphere and SST's hold more moisture for bigger snowstorms. Add the record Arctic warmth and low sea ice and you get our modern exceptional snowmaking machine along the coast.

[Paragon]

On 2/9/2018 at 8:33 AM, bluewave said:

Makes sense since a warmer atmosphere and SST's hold more moisture for bigger snowstorms. Add the record Arctic warmth and low sea ice and you get our modern exceptional snowmaking machine along the coast.

Thats correct, we now have a big HR hitter climatology...... you have to hit a grand slam with what chances you get otherwise you'll go (mostly) snowless.  I expect more of the 40/40 type winters or the 10/40 type- very little in between lol.  Which means either a few 1-3" events or one or two big 12+ type events each season with little in between.

[bluewave]

39 minutes ago, Paragon said:

Thats correct, we now have a big HR hitter climatology...... you have to hit a grand slam with what chances you get otherwise you'll go (mostly) snowless.  I expect more of the 40/40 type winters or the 10/40 type- very little in between lol.  Which means either a few 1-3" events or one or two big 12+ type events each season with little in between.

It will be interesting to see if this juiced pattern can eventually produce a 40"-50" snowstorm around the region. We have already had several events with maxes in the 30"-40" range.

[Paragon]

9 minutes ago, bluewave said:

It will be interesting to see if this juiced pattern can eventually produce a 40"-50" snowstorm around the region. We have already had several events with maxes in the 30"+ range.

I think we'd need a very slow moving storm for that, 36 hrs at least?  It's doable but we haven't one of those in awhile.  Colder version of March 1888, Feb 1920 or Feb 1961?

 

edit add Mar 1962 and Dec 1992 to that list.  Long duration storms, if Dec 1992 stalled 50 miles further east who knows how much snow we'd have gotten- we had 3 days of heavy rain and high winds with that.

 

Looking for winter storms with at least 3" LE