March 20th-22nd Not So Suppressed Storm Obs

[Cfa]

9 hours ago, ncforecaster89 said:

Left Central Park around 11 pm...with 7" on the ground.   Subsequently, drove E via Queensboro bridge and onto Long Island expressway.  From Queens onward, the snow rates continued to increase.   Traffic accidents and white-out conditions brought traffic to a halt on the expressway.   

Finally, I stopped to record the incredible conditions at a gas station parking lot in Hauppauge, NY...just N of Islip.   

Here's a very brief video of what I observed:

 

Wow, I go to that gas station all the time. Never seen it look like that, honestly.

[Brasiluvsnow]

12 minutes ago, weatherpruf said:

Likely people are moving towards an eye on spring; breaks are underway or coming up, Passover and Easter, spring cleaning, getting the fishing gear ready, planning the garden.....these are the things that make having four seasons interesting. I loved this storm but it has seemed like a long winter despite the dull Feb ( I did do ok in that mid Feb storm ), with the first snowfall coming in Dec this year. 

PRUF as much as that sounds good and I think we are all ready for Spring even myself who loves the snow and am done with winter. I believe it is far from the truth because had this storm really busted I have little doubt that those same milk carton people would have been fixtures on this site yesterday and today. I am not saying that you or anyone else did not do well with this storm or another , what I am saying is the people who blew this and were ragging and who posted a lot on Wednesday are are currently AWOL and should at least have the stones to admit they were wrong and give props to the many not just the two I mentioned that nailed this storm,,,,,but I say good luck with that. Happy weekend all !

[Snowshack]

9 hours ago, ncforecaster89 said:

Left Central Park around 11 pm...with 7" on the ground.   Subsequently, drove E via Queensboro bridge and onto Long Island expressway.  From Queens onward, the snow rates continued to increase.   Traffic accidents and white-out conditions brought traffic to a halt on the expressway.   

Finally, I stopped to record the incredible conditions at a gas station parking lot in Hauppauge, NY...just N of Islip.   

Here's a very brief video of what I observed:

 

Nice video.   Love times like that and looking at them memorialized helps me get through the summer!

[Capt. Adam]

Maybe not the 12"-20" from DC to NYC some models predicted, but the widespread 6"-12" with locally higher amounts certainly came to fruition.  Great storm for anytime, exceptional storm for March and for those that got in the band with great rates from Suffolk down into Monmouth and Ocean counties.  Eastern PA did well early. 

 

[RU848789]

4 hours ago, Capt. Adam said:

Maybe not the 12"-20" from DC to NYC some models predicted, but the widespread 6"-12" with locally higher amounts certainly came to fruition.  Great storm for anytime, exceptional storm for March and for those that got in the band with great rates from Suffolk down into Monmouth and Ocean counties.  Eastern PA did well early. 

 

Here's the NWS Eastern Region map, which is pretty similar.  Is there anyone on this planet who can show me where the source map is on the Eastern Region or NWS webpage?  I see this map get generated for various storms and posted by people, yet it's apparently unfindable from the site or google (I get the graphic from google, but not where the graphic is located).  Also, Mt. Holly has the map below, but Upton doesn't appear to have a map on their winter weather page, yet clearly Upton's data are in this Eastern Region page.  It's all a bit annoying. 

[bluewave]

31 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

Here's the NWS Eastern Region map, which is pretty similar.  Is there anyone on this planet who can show me where the source map is on the Eastern Region or NWS webpage?  I see this map get generated for various storms and posted by people, yet it's apparently unfindable from the site or google (I get the graphic from google, but not where the graphic is located).  Also, Mt. Holly has the map below, but Upton doesn't appear to have a map on their winter weather page, yet clearly Upton's data are in this Eastern Region page.  It's all a bit annoying. 

Someone else asked the same question on twitter.

Unfortunately, these are generated on an experimental graphics server that is on the internal NWS network. I cannot access it from outside the office. You can try the NWS Enhanced Data Display (EDD) preview.weather.gov/edd/ The display is pretty flexible/customizable.

12:54 PM - 20 Mar 2018

[IrishRob17]

21 hours ago, SnowGoose69 said:

I had no idea they changed the rules on that.  I thought you were supposed to clear the board every 6 hours.  I always wonder what airports do with those hourly measurements.  I assume measure in a different place because I’ve seen SNINCR 2/5 one hour then next hour I see SNINCR 2/6 so they must be measuring the total on the ground in a different spot (I would hope),

http://www.nws.noaa.gov/os/coop/reference/Snow_Measurement_Guidelines.pdf

[sn0w]

26 minutes ago, IrishRob17 said:

http://www.nws.noaa.gov/os/coop/reference/Snow_Measurement_Guidelines.pdf

Bothers me that clear typos can make it out to be published on official docs...literally one proof read should find this (see yellow highlight)...it would really bother me if that signature below was mine, but that's just me...

Cue grammar police, stickler, who cares....yada yada yada

 

[IrishRob17]

2 minutes ago, sn0w said:

Bothers me that clear typos can make it out to be published on official docs...literally one proof read should find this (see yellow highlight)...it would really bother me if that signature below was mine, but that's just me...

Cue grammar police, stickler, who cares....yada yada yada

 

Your right...

[sn0w]

17 minutes ago, IrishRob17 said:

Your right...

I see what you did their....lol

[RU848789]

31 minutes ago, IrishRob17 said:

http://www.nws.noaa.gov/os/coop/reference/Snow_Measurement_Guidelines.pdf

I find those guidelines to be a bit confusing at times.  First off they say that "if required to take observations every 6 hours" (for contract employees) you can clear the board at those times.  That, to me, implies it should be ok for Joe Q. Public to do the same (if it's good enough for the NWS/FAA, why not everyone).   

Second, they talk about measuring the max snowfall at the end of the storm, where possible, prior to melting and compaction Per their example: "Snow begins to fall at 10:00 a.m., accumulates to 4.2 inches by 3:00 p.m. and then stops. Ideally, this is when you should measure the snow. The snow begins melting and settling such that by your observation the next morning you only have 2.6 inches of snow on your snow board. The correct number to report for your 24-hour snowfall is 4.2 inches - the accumulation prior to melting and settling." 

That makes sense, but there's no allowance for melting/compaction that occur in a snow to rain/sleet to snow scenario, like we had on 3/7, where got about 3.5" of snow, then a bunch of sleet and rain, which compacted the snow to 2" in depth; it then changed back to heavy snow and the final depth was 8.5" (with 6.5" of new snow on top), but IMO 10" of snow accumulated in two parts (3.5" and 6.5").  If the event had ended after 3.5" of snow and just rain fell afterwards, you'd get to count the 3.5", but the fact that the storm didn't end and changed to  means you can't count that the 3.5" as part 1.  Maybe this is all too picky, but wondering what others think.  

[JerseyWx]

21 hours ago, SnowGoose69 said:

I had no idea they changed the rules on that.  I thought you were supposed to clear the board every 6 hours.  I always wonder what airports do with those hourly measurements.  I assume measure in a different place because I’ve seen SNINCR 2/5 one hour then next hour I see SNINCR 2/6 so they must be measuring the total on the ground in a different spot (I would hope),

Yep, and it's for the better IMO.  Measuring every six hours just isn't natural to me, and it inflates totals.  As for the hourly measurements, I guess it's just for archives and so they have a concrete figure regarding "inch per hour" rates.

[RU848789]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

Someone else asked the same question on twitter.

Unfortunately, these are generated on an experimental graphics server that is on the internal NWS network. I cannot access it from outside the office. You can try the NWS Enhanced Data Display (EDD) preview.weather.gov/edd/ The display is pretty flexible/customizable.

12:54 PM - 20 Mar 2018

Thanks, but I've never been able to figure out how to make a snowfall map from that site and frankly, I shouldn't have to.  The NWS ought to simply provide the map in some easy to find location on each CWAs winter page and also on the Eastern Region page.  

[IrishRob17]

14 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

I find those guidelines to be a bit confusing at times.  First off they say that "if required to take observations every 6 hours" (for contract employees) you can clear the board at those times.  That, to me, implies it should be ok for Joe Q. Public to do the same (if it's good enough for the NWS/FAA, why not everyone).   

Second, they talk about measuring the max snowfall at the end of the storm, where possible, prior to melting and compaction Per their example: "Snow begins to fall at 10:00 a.m., accumulates to 4.2 inches by 3:00 p.m. and then stops. Ideally, this is when you should measure the snow. The snow begins melting and settling such that by your observation the next morning you only have 2.6 inches of snow on your snow board. The correct number to report for your 24-hour snowfall is 4.2 inches - the accumulation prior to melting and settling." 

That makes sense, but there's no allowance for melting/compaction that occur in a snow to rain/sleet to snow scenario, like we had on 3/7, where got about 3.5" of snow, then a bunch of sleet and rain, which compacted the snow to 2" in depth; it then changed back to heavy snow and the final depth was 8.5" (with 6.5" of new snow on top), but IMO 10" of snow accumulated in two parts (3.5" and 6.5").  If the event had ended after 3.5" of snow and just rain fell afterwards, you'd get to count the 3.5", but the fact that the storm didn't end and changed to  means you can't count that the 3.5" as part 1.  Maybe this is all too picky, but wondering what others think.  

There's no lack of confusion when it comes to these rules, that's for sure, mainly because they brought in he 6 hour clearing rule and then did away with it IMO

[EasternLI]

12 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

I find those guidelines to be a bit confusing at times.  First off they say that "if required to take observations every 6 hours" (for contract employees) you can clear the board at those times.  That, to me, implies it should be ok for Joe Q. Public to do the same (if it's good enough for the NWS/FAA, why not everyone).   

It doesn't make sense to me. NWS/FAA clear a board every 6 hrs. Yet everyone else isn't supposed to do that because it might inflate totals? How is that logical?

3 minutes ago, IrishRob17 said:

There's no lack of confusion when it comes to these rules, that's for sure, mainly because they brought in he 6 hour clearing rule and then did away with it IMO

It sounds like the airports still do it that way, though?

[JerseyWx]

14 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

I find those guidelines to be a bit confusing at times.  First off they say that "if required to take observations every 6 hours" (for contract employees) you can clear the board at those times.  That, to me, implies it should be ok for Joe Q. Public to do the same (if it's good enough for the NWS/FAA, why not everyone).   

Second, they talk about measuring the max snowfall at the end of the storm, where possible, prior to melting and compaction Per their example: "Snow begins to fall at 10:00 a.m., accumulates to 4.2 inches by 3:00 p.m. and then stops. Ideally, this is when you should measure the snow. The snow begins melting and settling such that by your observation the next morning you only have 2.6 inches of snow on your snow board. The correct number to report for your 24-hour snowfall is 4.2 inches - the accumulation prior to melting and settling." 

That makes sense, but there's no allowance for melting/compaction that occur in a snow to rain/sleet to snow scenario, like we had on 3/7, where got about 3.5" of snow, then a bunch of sleet and rain, which compacted the snow to 2" in depth; it then changed back to heavy snow and the final depth was 8.5" (with 6.5" of new snow on top), but IMO 10" of snow accumulated in two parts (3.5" and 6.5").  If the event had ended after 3.5" of snow and just rain fell afterwards, you'd get to count the 3.5", but the fact that the storm didn't end and changed to  means you can't count that the 3.5" as part 1.  Maybe this is all too picky, but wondering what others think.  

I guess the only way to account for compaction when dealing with an event that is a mixed bag would be to measure right before it changed p-types and then clear the board.  So if you got 5" of pure snow and then it transitioned to rain, you'd record the 5", wipe the board, and then let it rain all it wants.  Then if it went back to snow and began to accumulate again, you'd add that new amount, say 5", to the previous 5" that fell earlier, which gives you a storm total of 10".

Honestly, it's a confusing situation, and perhaps someone has the correct method.

[IrishRob17]

3 minutes ago, EasternLI said:

It doesn't make sense to me. NWS/FAA clear a board every 6 hrs. Yet everyone else isn't supposed to do that because it might inflate totals? How is that logical?

It sounds like the airports still do it that way, though?

I believe so, I don't know who the NWS asks to do the 6 hour measurements for sure. 

[bluewave]

22 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

Thanks, but I've never been able to figure out how to make a snowfall map from that site and frankly, I shouldn't have to.  The NWS ought to simply provide the map in some easy to find location on each CWAs winter page and also on the Eastern Region page.  

They keep some of their stuff on internal systems. I wish they made the Euro MOS available to the pubic. As far as I know, it's only available on the NWS AWIPS system. That may be an agreement with ECMWF not to make available free of charge.

[EasternLI]

5 minutes ago, IrishRob17 said:

I believe so, I don't know who the NWS asks to do the 6 hour measurements for sure. 

That's what I don't get. If we were to send 2 groups out to collect data in the name of science, you don't have one group collect it one way and another group another way. Unless of course the difference is what is being studied, but it isn't in this case.

[RU848789]

22 minutes ago, JerseyWx said:

I guess the only way to account for compaction when dealing with an event that is a mixed bag would be to measure right before it changed p-types and then clear the board.  So if you got 5" of pure snow and then it transitioned to rain, you'd record the 5", wipe the board, and then let it rain all it wants.  Then if it went back to snow and began to accumulate again, you'd add that new amount, say 5", to the previous 5" that fell earlier, which gives you a storm total of 10".

Honestly, it's a confusing situation, and perhaps someone has the correct method.

That's basically what I think should be done, but I get it's more complicated and relies on someone actually being there to make those judgments, whereas simply measuring total snowfall after 24 hours or at the end of the event is simpler.  I guess there's no simple answer to this...

[JerseyWx]

36 minutes ago, EasternLI said:

That's what I don't get. If we were to send 2 groups out to collect data in the name of science, you don't have one group collect it one way and another group another way. Unless of course the difference is what is being studied, but it isn't in this case.

I'd like to see an experiment, controlled for variables of course, where each method is used and we could see what the difference is (I still say it inflates).  Personally, I feel that the NWS should make it the standard method for everyone to measure at the end of the event.

[EasternLI]

34 minutes ago, JerseyWx said:

I'd like to see an experiment, controlled for variables of course, where each method is used and we could see what the difference is (I still say it inflates).  Personally, I feel that the NWS should make it the standard method for everyone to measure at the end of the event.

Oh I'm sure the 6 hour method inflates to some degree, that way is eliminating at least some compaction. I personally use the max depth of the event like they have laid out in the guidelines. I'd just like to see guidelines be the same for all locations. It doesn't look like that's the case right now. That bothers me. Especially after the first sentence in the preface emphasizes importance of consistency and accuracy.

[JerseyWx]

13 minutes ago, EasternLI said:

Oh I'm sure the 6 hour method inflates to some degree, that way is eliminating at least some compaction. I personally use the max depth of the event like they have laid out in the guidelines. I'd just like to see guidelines be the same for all locations. It doesn't look like that's the case right now. That bothers me. Especially after the first sentence in the preface emphasizes importance of consistency and accuracy.

I do the same.  But yeah, I'm all for standardizing measurements.  It's one less thing to worry about.

[donsutherland1]

Four final photos from the recent snowstorm:

[weatherpruf]

13 hours ago, Brasiluvsnow said:

PRUF as much as that sounds good and I think we are all ready for Spring even myself who loves the snow and am done with winter. I believe it is far from the truth because had this storm really busted I have little doubt that those same milk carton people would have been fixtures on this site yesterday and today. I am not saying that you or anyone else did not do well with this storm or another , what I am saying is the people who blew this and were ragging and who posted a lot on Wednesday are are currently AWOL and should at least have the stones to admit they were wrong and give props to the many not just the two I mentioned that nailed this storm,,,,,but I say good luck with that. Happy weekend all !

All of these storms busted for some of us and not others, can't blame people for looking out the window and seeing nothing much going on for hours and assuming it was another bust. I was quite surprised to get nearly a foot of snow in a few hours after only managing 2 inches all day. Most of it is gone already, but that's often the case with these late storms anyway. Looked wonderful watching at the bay during the height of the storm.

[Paragon]

On 3/23/2018 at 1:50 AM, ncforecaster89 said:

Note about the snowfall at KISP.  According to the "NOWData" going back to 1964, the 18.4" event total puts this storm at #1 of all March snow storms.

The 14" total on the 21st ranks as #2 for a single day snowfall in March (behind the 15" of 3/22/1967), and at #3 for all events occuring in March or later (also behind the 16" of 4/6/1982).  

Truly an historic and rare event for central Long Island; relative to March snowfall!       

Wow, I didn't know Islip recorded 16" on 4/6/82- the NYC airports recorded around 8" each.  Was the 16" the highest recorded on Long Island for that storm?

[Paragon]

On 3/23/2018 at 2:06 PM, RU848789 said:

Here's the NWS Eastern Region map, which is pretty similar.  Is there anyone on this planet who can show me where the source map is on the Eastern Region or NWS webpage?  I see this map get generated for various storms and posted by people, yet it's apparently unfindable from the site or google (I get the graphic from google, but not where the graphic is located).  Also, Mt. Holly has the map below, but Upton doesn't appear to have a map on their winter weather page, yet clearly Upton's data are in this Eastern Region page.  It's all a bit annoying. 

I like the 12-18 on that map a lot better than the 6-8 on the other map which was wrong for SW Nassau.

[Paragon]

On 3/22/2018 at 4:44 PM, nzucker said:

Big difference between early March and late March. It's common to have snowpack in the region through around March 10th, then it gets progressively more difficult as average highs approach 50F near the equinox.

The March 2004 equinox storm melted in one day. We had 8" around dawn in Dobbs Ferry, then by dusk it was all gone.

I wish you had been around to witness the April 1982 behemoth, it might just be my 8 year old memories but I distinctly remember that snow sticking around for a week, and another snowstorm at the end of the week to boot.  Heck, the April 2003 snowstorm kept snow on the ground for 4 days too (three straight days in the 30s after that.)

[Paragon]

On 3/22/2018 at 4:42 PM, jm1220 said:

I think you’re supposed to measure once the snow ends, and it’s one measurement on a board per 24 hours. When did it end? Around 3-4am? I measured about 11” as well early this morning around 6:45, but I have no idea of what compacted before then. It also wasn’t on a board. Crazy-it looks nothing like that much fell now with how much it’s melting. 

JM was 11" your total snowfall? I figured you had some more snow after 7 am since it kept snowing until about 10 AM here.

[ncforecaster89]

27 minutes ago, Paragon said:

Wow, I didn't know Islip recorded 16" on 4/6/82- the NYC airports recorded around 8" each.  Was the 16" the highest recorded on Long Island for that storm?

Hi Paragon!  From all the data I've seen, it appears the 16" in KISP is the largest recorded amt on Long island.  Of course, there may have been higher unofficial totals, but the NESIS map has the highest amount centered on Islip.

As you noted, both LaGuardia & Kennedy recorded 8.2" and 8.0", respectively.   NYC central park tallied 9.6", itself...with Newark coming in above 13".    

http://w2.weather.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=okx