jm1220 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 2 minutes ago, weatherlogix said: the others were worse....which was why I quoted the word "right" I can’t think of one model that did well here. All at one point or another had 1”+ liquid as snow area wide (except maybe GFS but it was right for a bad reason). No model had a dry slot coming in and subsidence besides that from a mega band. The GFS thermals were definitely off when the intensity went up. The GFS had mostly rain here and we didn’t have mostly rain. One caution flag I saw that may have been a factor was a lack of lift in the DGZ I noticed on HRRR soundings here and it being dry above 500mb. But its radar and QPF were always heavy and pivoted the dry slot well before getting here. And no NJ mega band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchel Volk Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 I left work at beaver street at five, it was still a mix, walked one block it was S+ and a slight accumulation. By the time in ten minutes I got to city hall, s+ with about 2”. Now in Cobble Hill Brooklyn and there is about 4-5”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 27 minutes ago, RU848789 said: Any reports from New Brunswick? Just curiuos - also, I think there's an official station there - any idea how to check that? Thanks. Well Piscataway had 9-10, I'm guessing NB had more. I'm driving my son in to RU tomorrow the parking lots will be a mess. Schools in town closed I wouldn't be surprised if there were big differences in Woodbridge TWp itself. I'm betting the section of Colonia by the old Potter's Crossing had more. its very close to SCotch Plains and S Plainfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 2 minutes ago, jm1220 said: I can’t think of one model that did well here. All at one point or another had 1”+ liquid as snow area wide (except maybe GFS but it was right for a bad reason). No model had a dry slot coming in and subsidence besides that from a mega band. The GFS thermals were definitely off when the intensity went up. The GFS had mostly rain here and we didn’t have mostly rain. One caution flag I saw that may have been a factor was a lack of lift in the DGZ I noticed on HRRR soundings here and it being dry above 500mb. But its radar and QPF were always heavy and pivoted the dry slot well before getting here. And no NJ mega band. radar actually showed me just outside the yellow bands, which I am led to believe are the heavy ones. They were bike riding distance to my west. Yet SI to my east did better. Strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeS Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 11 minutes ago, riverrat said: I can verify, 20" here in mountain view section. Have 4 trees down in my yard. Ugh. If it makes you feel any better I still don't have power from last Friday's storm and now that I'm staying at my parents house a tree fell across the street and has blocked us in the cul-de-sac lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psv88 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 How many people thought islip would get more than white plains? 5.8” at islip as of 6:50, so probably 7” or so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 22 minutes ago, nzucker said: We didn't have much rain here, but it just didn't accumulate well until the rates got REALLY heavy later in the afternoon. Staten Island and Southern Brooklyn/Queens lost a lot more to rain. Though even Bay Ridge, my old stomping grounds, had like 5". I actually think UHI was the biggest factor here. LGA was the lowest report at 1.7", and they have the worst UHI in the entire City. Staten Island has the least urban footprint, and they had 8"...the Bronx is in the middle and had 5-6". Bay Ridge, though far south, is really residential and did decently too, better than much of Midtown Manhattan well to the north. I think also the system tracked west of the models. Usually the heaviest snow falls 20-40 miles west of where you think it will and it did again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 4 minutes ago, North and West said: The prelim to show the gradient. . Yup. I'm right in that light blue shade by a hair. Tell ya what, this is worse in terms of cutoff than 2/6/10 over here, and that's no BS. I just don't care as much anymore. Getting too old for this.Looks like Sewaren and Perth Amboy had 1-3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 8 minutes ago, jm1220 said: I can’t think of one model that did well here. All at one point or another had 1”+ liquid as snow area wide (except maybe GFS but it was right for a bad reason). No model had a dry slot coming in and subsidence besides that from a mega band. The GFS thermals were definitely off when the intensity went up. The GFS had mostly rain here and we didn’t have mostly rain. One caution flag I saw that may have been a factor was a lack of lift in the DGZ I noticed on HRRR soundings here and it being dry above 500mb. But its radar and QPF were always heavy and pivoted the dry slot well before getting here. And no NJ mega band. The models often did show on snowmaps a tiny area near the Arthur Kill with a lot less. Thought it was noise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 You can see the UHI in PHL too on that map. I think they only reported 2 or 3 at the airport Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North and West Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Yup. I'm right in that light blue shade by a hair. Tell ya what, this is worse in terms of cutoff than 2/6/10 over here, and that's no BS. I just don't care as much anymore. Getting too old for this.Looks like Sewaren and Perth Amboy had 1-3.This storm seemed wonkier than 2/6/2010. That one had such a clean gradient, which we were on the wrong side of for.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edubbs83 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 After 5”-6” here in Jericho it’s been raining for the past hour. May not even need to shovel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGoose69 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Just now, Edubbs83 said: After 5”-6” here in Jericho it’s been raining for the past hour. May not even need to shovel. The High Res RGEM actually did show rajn as the system pulled away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.I.Pete Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 8" in Port Jeff Station. Still coming down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snywx Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 15 minutes ago, SnowGoose69 said: I think also the system tracked west of the models. Usually the heaviest snow falls 20-40 miles west of where you think it will and it did again The heaviest snows were always progged to be west of the river. It shouldn't be much of a surprise to anyone. I just think alot of people on here got burned by those snow maps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzucker Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 22 minutes ago, SnowGoose69 said: I think also the system tracked west of the models. Usually the heaviest snow falls 20-40 miles west of where you think it will and it did again Yeah, the actual track was probably more similar to yesterday's 12z/18z NAM, which freaked everyone out, rather than the colder 0z models that showed a massive snowstorm for NYC metro. That final tick back east may have been fictitious. Just shows how far we have to go in forecasting. The Euro had 13-14" for NYC, and the RGEM showed 50mm QPF as all snow..Central Park ends up with 2.5" and the outer boroughs end up with 6-8". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherlogix Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 2 minutes ago, SnowGoose69 said: The High Res RGEM actually did show rajn as the system pulled away what about the hours of rain i (woodmere) had throughout the day today? I'm pretty sure the GFS insisted on it until last night - run after run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowshack Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 2 minutes ago, L.I.Pete said: 8" in Port Jeff Station. Still coming down. Same here in Wading river. About 8.5” and still accumulating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian5671 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Big mess here-got about 8 inches in 4 hrs...trees down everywhere-schools all closed tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Just now, North and West said: This storm seemed wonkier than 2/6/2010. That one had such a clean gradient, which we were on the wrong side of for. . I had to drive 30 minutes to the snow in that one. I only have to drive 7-10 minutes to nearly a foot in this one. That's some gradient. And I wanna say, people gave me a lot of noise just for reporting what I saw unfolding with my own eyes. And not just me. That really needs to stop. You aren't one of the offenders by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jm1220 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 One last burst of snow outside. Surfaces beginning to be coated again. And I disagree about just being fixated on snow maps. Models last night trended much colder and SE, with plentiful moisture and cold air except marginally at the surface. The Euro last night had 1.5” QPF where I am and expected about 1” liquid to fall as snow because it thought some initially may be lost to rain from the warm boundary layer. All other layers were below freezing. North and west where much more fell had less QPF in that run (but all of it as snow so it expected a few more inches there). The hi res Canadian also burned us again, consistently showing 9-12” of snow run after run. No model showed anything like what ended up happening today. Models at least had strong rates in the late afternoon areawide which didn’t happen here except for maybe an hour. Subsidence zones are always a risk in nor’easters, but this is an extreme case more like Feb 2006. The dryslot also was expected to remain offshore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjay Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 1 hour ago, weatherlogix said: look at the radar - it might not be completely done....lets see if that comes down as snow or rain or as you said light precip under stronger echoes Temp up to 36 with low end mod snow. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 11 minutes ago, snywx said: The heaviest snows were always progged to be west of the river. It shouldn't be much of a surprise to anyone. I just think alot of people on here got burned by those snow maps. They were more than just west of the river though. I think eastern portions of NNJ didn't expect to do so poorly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherlogix Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 1 minute ago, Rjay said: Temp up to 36 with low end mod snow. Lol thats the same as rain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjay Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Just now, weatherlogix said: thats the same as rain Yep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobalt Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 While not awfully similar, this storm sort of reminds me of the March 6th 2013 storm for you folks in NYC. Despite rates in a really dynamic storm (got thundersnow in that too), many areas in DC itself didn't top 1" or 2". Pretty sure the storm dropped 1" QPF on DCA, and 1" QPF on Dulles Airport, but only 0.1" and like 3" fell respectively, despite heavy snow. Like I said, not a direct comparison, just details I thought matched up with this storm. Especially the heat island and lack of heavy snowfall accumulations in urban areas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherlogix Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 1 minute ago, Rjay said: Yep thats been my day...i am sooo effing pissed i stayed home from work today for zero reason...ugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetbulbs88 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 45 minutes ago, jm1220 said: I can’t think of one model that did well here. All at one point or another had 1”+ liquid as snow area wide (except maybe GFS but it was right for a bad reason). No model had a dry slot coming in and subsidence besides that from a mega band. The GFS thermals were definitely off when the intensity went up. The GFS had mostly rain here and we didn’t have mostly rain. One caution flag I saw that may have been a factor was a lack of lift in the DGZ I noticed on HRRR soundings here and it being dry above 500mb. But its radar and QPF were always heavy and pivoted the dry slot well before getting here. And no NJ mega band. Agree 100%. There was one run of the HRRR this morning that cut totals back to around 7 in the city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpruf Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 2 minutes ago, jm1220 said: One last burst of snow outside. Surfaces beginning to be coated again. And I disagree about just being fixated on snow maps. Models last night trended much colder and SE, with plentiful moisture and cold air except marginally at the surface. The Euro last night had 1.5” QPF where I am and expected about 1” liquid to fall as snow because it thought some initially may be lost to rain from the warm boundary layer. All other layers were below freezing. North and west where much more fell had less QPF in that run (but all of it as snow so it expected a few more inches there). The hi res Canadian also burned us again, consistently showing 9-12” of snow run after run. No model showed anything like what ended up happening today. Models at least had strong rates in the late afternoon areawide which didn’t happen here except for maybe an hour. Subsidence zones are always a risk in nor’easters, but this is an extreme case more like Feb 2006. Thank you JM. People respect you here so you won't get the grief I got for saying the same thing was unfolding over here. We got about 4.5 but when they are telling you to expect 12+ when your own eyes tell you it isn't possible any longer because it just isn't unfolding that way you shouldn't be criticized. People kept telling me stop whining because I was reporting that the storm was underperforming here. I can't report on what it did ten miles to my west because I wasn't there for chrissakes. I could see by about 2 pm that it wasn't gonna happen here. In the end I'm glad because the 4-5 of cement we got is a pain in the neck and causing all sorts of mayhem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snywx Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 3 minutes ago, weatherpruf said: They were more than just west of the river though. I think eastern portions of NNJ didn't expect to do so poorly. subsidence brother.. Anyone directly east of that band was skunked. Happens in all the big ones you just never know where till it actually sets up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.