allgame830 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 A little bit of topic but relevant... thoughts on NYC public schools being closed Wednesday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Again pay attention to the tracks of the upper air lows and where they close off. I’m not concerned with whether the run shows me getting 12” or 18”. The mid level lows track in a very favorable way for the NYC area, and the surface low heads ENE from South Jersey. That’s what matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hudsonvalley21 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 4 minutes ago, snywx said: Some spoiled people in here.. 0z 3k NAM is weather porn for 99% in this subforum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NortheastPAWx Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Just now, allgame830 said: A little bit of topic but relevant... thoughts on NYC public schools being closed Wednesday? Highly likely if models don't budge. They'd be taking a big risk on the PM side if they don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ericjcrash Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 1 minute ago, jm1220 said: Again pay attention to the tracks of the upper air lows and where they close off. I’m not concerned with whether the run shows me getting 12” or 18”. The mid level lows track in a very favorable way for the NYC area, and the surface low heads ENE from South Jersey. That’s what matters. I'm worried about a funky layer with onshore flow. Rates like this should overcome it if it exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmillz25 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 1 minute ago, jm1220 said: Again pay attention to the tracks of the upper air lows and where they close off. I’m not concerned with whether the run shows me getting 12” or 18”. The mid level lows track in a very favorable way for the NYC area, and the surface low heads ENE from South Jersey. That’s what matters. Yup and lower heights helped tick it east a bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dino Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 is that 24"+ at JFK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Just now, Ericjcrash said: I'm worried about a funky layer with onshore flow. Rates like this should overcome it if it exists. Soundings would be nice to look at, don’t have access to that now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherbear5 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 2 minutes ago, Dino said: is that 24"+ at JFK? Around 30" it seems in all of Nassau almost LOL. its unbelievable. Basically throws what looks like training convection over that area... except its snow in the convection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingbaus Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 I don't know why people are complaining It looks like well over a foot for NYC metro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allgame830 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 3 minutes ago, NortheastPAWx said: Highly likely if models don't budge. They'd be taking a big risk on the PM side if they don't. Thanks.. my wife is a teacher at a NYC public school and I keep telling her they will close with current forecast! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ericjcrash Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Just now, kingbaus said: I don't know why people are complaining It looks like well over a foot for NYC metro. Look at depth change.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 7 minutes ago, Enigma said: 00z NAM erily similar to Dec 2000 snowstorm. Alot of people are bringing up that storm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triniiphone Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Don’t get nam’d by the nam y’all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJO812 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 1 minute ago, allgame830 said: Thanks.. my wife is a teacher at a NYC public school and I keep telling her they will close with current forecast! I'm telling my gf also Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snywx Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 0z 3k NAM ( New Algorithm) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 11 minutes ago, Enigma said: Btw...check out historical 12 in. snow events in NYC and you will realize that in March, the odds are against 6+ in events. Absolutely and I still don't expect anything historic. A foot of snow in NYC and the Newark area in March is uncommon. I should think 4-8 would be a major score, ten even better. More than that would actually be a major, major deal. I fully expect that the storm will have mixing issues, probably a lot of sleet, no matter what is being depicted right now, I think that's what will happen when tomorrow's models show up. Northern areas will not taint as much. But I would love to see a big storm in March of a foot or more, and this one up to now seems like it has the potential. But so did last March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 NAM clearly over-doing it. Most important thing to take away is that there shouldn't be any huge shifts in the corridor of major snow. I have a high suspicion that many on this board are going to get some PL with this setup. I'd cut most totals on the NAM in half due to taint and PL. Many of you have very short memories...it was only a year ago that we were all expecting 12+ only to be awoken by pouring PL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 1 minute ago, snywx said: 0z 3k NAM ( New Algorithm) That seems pretty reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 8 minutes ago, allgame830 said: Thanks.. my wife is a teacher at a NYC public school and I keep telling her they will close with current forecast! It's too early to say. After last March they may not be so inclined to pull the trigger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 16 minutes ago, Enigma said: 00z NAM erily similar to Dec 2000 snowstorm. Different time of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 RGEM is great for NJ, but LI dry slots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purduewx80 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 thicknesses were much much warmer with the march system last year and were the first clue that it wouldn't be snow. warming aloft eventually showed up. i'm not really seeing anything close to sleet so far in any fcst soundings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJwx85 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 6 minutes ago, snywx said: 0z 3k NAM ( New Algorithm) Accounts for white rain and sleet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 15 minutes ago, jm1220 said: Again pay attention to the tracks of the upper air lows and where they close off. I’m not concerned with whether the run shows me getting 12” or 18”. The mid level lows track in a very favorable way for the NYC area, and the surface low heads ENE from South Jersey. That’s what matters. How much do you think will end up being sleet as currently depicted? My understanding is these models can't distinguish frozen precip that well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snywx Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 0z RGEM is amazing for the interior... Taints & dry slots city eastward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastonSN+ Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 1 minute ago, NJwx85 said: RGEM is great for NJ, but LI dry slots. How about coastal CT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Just now, purduewx80 said: thicknesses were much much warmer with the march system last year and were the first clue that it wouldn't be snow. warming aloft eventually showed up. i'm not really seeing anything close to sleet so far in any fcst soundings. That's good to hear, but can they still show up in the upcoming models? Would really love to see a decent March storm for a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 1 minute ago, snywx said: 0z RGEM is amazing for the interior... Taints & dry slots city eastward Really? It looks like the dry slot only reaches central Long Island. The city looks good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherbear5 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 1 minute ago, Enigma said: NAM clearly over-doing it. Most important thing to take away is that there shouldn't be any huge shifts in the corridor of major snow. I have a high suspicion that many on this board are going to get some PL with this setup. I'd cut most totals on the NAM in half due to taint and PL. Many of you have very short memories...it was only a year ago that we were all expecting 12+ only to be awoken by pouring PL. Where are you concerned about a significant amount of sleet? This doesn't strike me as a sleet kinda storm... doesn't really strike me as any kind of ice kinda storm. The only warm layer is at the surface, save for initially on the 3K NAM where there's. Bit of a sneaky warm layer. seems to me it rain, snow or some mix thereof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.