Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,588
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

March 2-4th ... first -NAO anchored storm perhaps in years


Typhoon Tip

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
23 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

The Catskills are going to get destroyed.  Feet for those hill towns at 2,000ft there SW of ALB. 

They won't lose any to rain, IMO.  Should start as pretty much snow there in the high terrain of NY.

Agreed. The same thing happened in March 10. 40”+ above 2k.

what are your thoughts for the southern greens? Im thinking a foot is a good call for Stratton/mt snow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't under-sell the elevational aspect of this event either... I think everyone goes to heavy snow if that firehose develops as modeled BUT there's a big difference between 34F pounding snow and 31F pounding snow. 

Sure they both will accumulate but one is going to be a heck of a lot more efficient.  I could see DIT or 1,000ft elevations doing 1"/hr snowfall at 31-32F while places under 500ft are doing a half inch per hour (on 0.1" liquid in the tipper per hour) at 34F.  That type of difference adds up throughout an event like this with big QPF.

Something where the top of Blue Hill has twice as much as anyone else in E.MA just because of the extra 500ft of elevation and temps there just that extra 1C cooler, aiding in accumulation processes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

Agreed. The same thing happened in March 10. 40”+ above 2k.

what are your thoughts for the southern greens? Im thinking a foot is a good call for Stratton/mt snow

8-12" were my thoughts for the SVT ski areas of Mt Snow, Stratton, Bromley area.  Tough one as I think they'll snow easier than other areas because of the high elevation there and east flow orographic enhancement will lead to additional cooling from forced ascent.  I still think ratios will be pretty pasty and 8:1 with 1.0-1.4" QPF (snow growth doesn't look that good, TBH) but if they are ripping aggregates it could change.  I could see them going bigger though...if someone put up a 16" spot at 3,000ft that wouldn't be a huge surprise if the best moisture conveyor belt is a bit north of where its progged right now on the consensus (ie an RGEM type solution).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DomNH said:

I'm a little surprised even  high end chance map is  <1'' of snow for most inside 495. 

Well im not buying a warning snow for much of eastern mass, esp Ne mass at the moment. Its Certainly possible thou, there high end products are meh

I believe NW CT could also over perform nicely along w berks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

Well im not buying a warning snow for much of eastern mass, esp Ne mass at the moment. Its Certainly possible thou, there high end products are meh

I believe NW CT could also over perform nicely along w berks

Why especially NE Mass?

I feel like they'd have the best chance at getting the dynamic cooling machine going?  NE flow into that area?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

Isn't Tolland where I-84 levels out there for a bit before it heads back NE? 

Not that it matters as Ryan is obviously highlighting the high terrain in NE CT (its clear what he's trying to show viewers), its just funny if you aren't really sure where your town is?

tolland.jpg

Thank you for being able to read a map. I thought I was alone, even when I highlighted it plain as day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

Why esp Ne mass?

I feel like they'd have the best chance at getting the dynamic cooling machine going?  NE flow into that area?

There is less forcing in that area except maybe on CMC Lol

Now im seeing trends that End this earlier as well, and Thats a ugly combo when your banking on accums W this airmass

Now if you want to say forcing will trend stronger then what you say has more merit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

I wouldn't under-sell the elevational aspect of this event either... I think everyone goes to heavy snow if that firehose develops as modeled BUT there's a big difference between 34F pounding snow and 31F pounding snow. 

Sure they both will accumulate but one is going to be a heck of a lot more efficient.  I could see DIT or 1,000ft elevations doing 1"/hr snowfall at 31-32F while places under 500ft are doing a half inch per hour (on 0.1" liquid in the tipper per hour) at 34F.  That type of difference adds up throughout an event like this with big QPF.

Something where the top of Blue Hill has twice as much as anyone else in E.MA just because of the extra 500ft of elevation and temps there just that extra 1C cooler, aiding in accumulation processes.

I tend to agree with this in general, but the bulk of whatever snow falls outside of western SNE should happen after dark which should help mitigate accumulation issues. 

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...