Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,610
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

March 12/13/14 Blizzard/Winter Storm/WWA etc


Bostonseminole
 Share

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Yes.

Yeah so your clearing times really exacerbated the measuring differences. A quick 8” in 90 mins on a clear board won’t settle much. Throw that 8” on top of 20” of already existing fluff and it’s compaction city. You should document your measurements in a blog post if you haven’t already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I'm sorry, Tom is a smart kid, but in a large event like that, peak depth is not an accurate assessment of snowfall....want to know what Is? The amount of snow that FELL from the sky...no $hit.

If they want peak storm depth, then ask for that.

That's always been my argument.  SnowFALL and SnowDEPTH are two different things.  If they were meant to be the same, then we'd just measure depth all the time.  I want to know both snowfall and the depth.... they are independent of each other though.   Sort of like if it snows all night long but the depth doesn't change much because of compression, that's fine but you aren't getting the variable of finding out how much snow actually fell out of the sky.  If I have to wipe 3" off my car in the morning but the depth didn't change elsewhere, it still snowed 3" that night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

That's always been my argument.  SnowFALL and SnowDEPTH are two different things.  If they were meant to be the same, then we'd just measure depth all the time.  I want to know both snowfall and the depth.... they are independent of each other though. 

I mean there is probably a fair chance that sea scroll era measurements were just depth increases. I sincerely doubt some knickered colonist was clearing a patch every 24 hours to measure new snow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why I have an official board, for the official measurements...and I have a personal one, that I clear half of every hour or so, and leave the other side alone for the entire event... strictly for my personal data analysis, but the board is what I report... I have been back and forth with people who argue with me about how much actually feel, because they are measuring from a driveway or heated car hood, but fail to grasp the nws board cleaning process.. btw, the difference in all the measurements are sometimes substantial, sometime not, ratio dependant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@IrishRob17 @40/70 Benchmark,

That is correct, I am not advocating for the once per day observation -- which is much different than capturing the maximum snowfall for the 24 hour period.

Ray, to be clear, I am merely presenting the guidelines as they currently stand, which states that non-airport measuring should be maximum snowfall for the 24 hour period. I am not advocating that the 6-hr clearing is necessarily a bad method. I just think congruence with historical records is important and we never should have added the option for 6hr clearing in the 1998-2012 period.

Per my discussion with Matt who works with the NJ climatologist, there was extensive debate among the people on the panel for this 6hr - maximum snowfall issues. Interestingly enough, the person who pushed most for the 6-hr method was the same person who reversed his thinking and signed off on the return to the maximum snowfall method.

Snow measuring is an inexact science; there are arguments for both methods.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, tamarack said:

Wow!  A shout-out to my old home town - lived there 1950-71.  Wonder if that reading came from the Smoke Rise section, which includes the town's highest elevations.  (We lived near West Fayson Lake @ 700'.)  Anyway, an excellent discussion - thanks.

I've been recording my wx obs at 9 PM since 1/1/76, and continued to do so after joining cocorahs in 8/09.  So my board-clearings come at those 2 times.  (For the current storm it was 9.0" at 9 PM and 5.0" at 7 AM, and for this time at least, the gain in depth - 23" to 37" - was equal to the sum of the 2 measurements.)

No it came from your old area fayson lakes . I believe the actual road was cliff trail 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete Bouchard answered my messages about Ray (WHY does this only allow for a 92KB picture!?  Ugh.  I'll copy and paste) - 

"Ahh...the old school measuring method. According to the NWS Chat boards, they thought it was overdone.  Eric Fisher presumed he measured the snow from the previous storm? (Don't know where he got that info.) I asked on the board whether they would accept it, and they said since he wasn't Skywarn, they would omit it. Then it was posted again this morning before they again struck it from the list.  Honestly, I can see how he could get 31. It's a tried and true method! And the RIGHT way to measure snowfall."  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete Bouchard on his 5pm broadcast while showing the totals graphic with Methuen as the highest said: "The real jackpot, 31in in Wilmington. Old school measurement of 6 hours of snow, clear the board. 6 hours of snow, clear the board. It was discounted by some."  I guess he checks in on this board or contacted Taunton to know about the 6 hour clearing method you used but nice shoutout to Ray anyway. By his tone it sounded like he was buying the 31

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TheSnowman said:

Pete Bouchard answered my messages about Ray (WHY does this only allow for a 92KB picture!?  Ugh.  I'll copy and paste) - 

"Ahh...the old school measuring method. According to the NWS Chat boards, they thought it was overdone.  Eric Fisher presumed he measured the snow from the previous storm? (Don't know where he got that info.) I asked on the board whether they would accept it, and they said since he wasn't Skywarn, they would omit it. Then it was posted again this morning before they again struck it from the list.  Honestly, I can see how he could get 31. It's a tried and true method! And the RIGHT way to measure snowfall."  

Well there we go. You got to it before me 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dendrite said:

Ray's going to have to join the Pete B fan club now. He's hanging pics of him in his old HS locker as we speak.

Lol yeah he does get a lot of bashing on here but I don't think he is terrible. First winter watching him and have noticed a warm, anti-snow bias but his delivery on TV is one of the best

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BombsAway1288 said:

Pete Bouchard on his 5pm broadcast while showing the totals graphic with Methuen as the highest said: "The real jackpot, 31in in Wilmington. Old school measurement of 6 hours of snow, clear the board. 6 hours of snow, clear the board. It was discounted by some."  I guess he checks in on this board or contacted Taunton to know about the 6 hour clearing method you used but nice shoutout to Ray anyway. By his tone it sounded like he was buying the 31

That's awesome. Good for him.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TheSnowman said:

That's my Snowstorm Present for Ray haha!  

 

Did he say Ray's Name?  I gave bomb the whole name.  

He didn't meantion him by name and by seeing what you posted just before me answers how he found out about it, but he definitely thinks it legit by his "discounted by some" tone and the fact that he said it on-air

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

28 minutes ago, TheSnowman said:

That's my Snowstorm Present for Ray haha!  

 

Did he say Ray's Name?  I gave bomb the whole name.  

Lol once again Pete B mentioned it this time saying "Some controversy regarding the top spot. After speaking to someone who is close to the reporter of the 31 in Wilmington" he then said the same thing about the 6 hour clearing method saying "this is the right way to measure snow" and "the NWS said 'what? 31in is too high' but I think it's good and very close to the 28.3 report Methuen." Lol this is getting hysterical. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8" of new upslope on top of the 7" from yesterday. Very light snow right now, but models have it ramping up again from around 03z to 12z, yielding another 0.5-0.75" of LE. Then it tapers to flurries and light snow showers tomorrow during the day before another round tomorrow night?

Snow growth has been kind of cruddy with lots of small rimed flakes and even pellets at times. Unlike a lot of these upslope events though, there's some good weight to the snow thanks to the deep moisture layer wrapping around our storm.

I'm not buying the 35" storm total report from Woodford. I drove through there today en route to do an errand in Bennington (which was almost a costly mistake as I pulled over to a parking area on the side of route 9 that hadn't been plowed in several hours to let someone pass and got stuck, but luckily I was able to weasel my way out of it). Yes, they have a lot of snow like I do, but I find it hard to believe that there would be a 20" gradient in less than 5 miles at pretty much the exact same longitude and similar elevation. They were west of the meso band that nailed areas just west of I-91 like I was and radar returns haven't been that much different there. Maybe they have a little more, but not 20" more.

Meanwhile Bennington had only about 2-3" that was melting in the March sun angle with temps near 32-33° F. I came back via Williamstown and N. Adams as 9 and 8/100 are tough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wxmanmitch said:

8" of new upslope on top of the 7" from yesterday. Very light snow right now, but models have it ramping up again from around 03z to 12z, yielding another 0.5-0.75" of LE. Then it tapers to flurries and light snow showers tomorrow during the day before another round tomorrow night?

Snow growth has been kind of cruddy with lots of small rimed flakes and even pellets at times. Unlike a lot of these upslope events though, there's some good weight to the snow thanks to the deep moisture layer wrapping around our storm.

I'm not buying the 35" storm total report from Woodford. I drove through there today en route to do an errand in Bennington (which was almost a costly mistake as I pulled over to a parking area on the side of route 9 that hadn't been plowed in several hours to let someone pass and got stuck, but luckily I was able to weasel my way out of it). Yes, they have a lot of snow like I do, but I find it hard to believe that there would be a 20" gradient in less than 5 miles at pretty much the exact same longitude and similar elevation. They were west of the meso band that nailed areas just west of I-91 like I was and radar returns haven't been that much different there. Maybe they have a little more, but not 20" more.

Meanwhile Bennington had only about 2-3" that was melting in the March sun angle with temps near 32-33° F. I came back via Williamstown and N. Adams as 9 and 8/100 are tough. 

Glad you’re enjoying it there. Just out of curiosity, what do you do up there?Do you work out of your house? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...