Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

2018/19 Winter Banter and General Discussion - We winter of YORE


Baroclinic Zone
 Share

Recommended Posts

I like pivotal...tropical tidbits is good too since it updates pretty quick....pivotal has far more parameters to choose from.
 
Also, it's not fancy, but the good ol' fashioned PSU ewall is pretty solid for the NCEP models....they've let their international model links turn to shit though a bit. GGEM is still ok. Just mae sure you click on the "all" link and not the actual hour.
http://mp1.met.psu.edu/~fxg1/ewall.html
Thank you!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys I have a question......didn't want to muck up the storm threat thread so the banter thread seems appropriate......so I often check CA weather forecast since as most of you know I am from there......Bay Area to be specific....anyway right now there are actual blizzy warnings up in the Sierra range for this big ole system coming onshore now......question is are there different criteria for blizzy warnings depending on the location?  In most cases when I was living in CA it would only be Winter Storm Warnings for this area.....I'm talking foothills east of Sacramento and then the Lake Tahoe area......seems a blizzy warning is rare out there maybe cuz the severity of the storms are high compared to other parts of the country....like here I know theres something about 3 hrs of sustained wind greater than 30 mph or something during heavy snow......but out west in Lake Tahoe that seems easy to achieve so I'm wondering if NWS has different criteria based on region?

It just seemed weird to see the red blizzy on the map when I checked.......epic snows forecast up there anyway.....4-5 feet lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, ice1972 said:

Hey guys I have a question......didn't want to muck up the storm threat thread so the banter thread seems appropriate......so I often check CA weather forecast since as most of you know I am from there......Bay Area to be specific....anyway right now there are actual blizzy warnings up in the Sierra range for this big ole system coming onshore now......question is are there different criteria for blizzy warnings depending on the location?  In most cases when I was living in CA it would only be Winter Storm Warnings for this area.....I'm talking foothills east of Sacramento and then the Lake Tahoe area......seems a blizzy warning is rare out there maybe cuz the severity of the storms are high compared to other parts of the country....like here I know theres something about 3 hrs of sustained wind greater than 30 mph or something during heavy snow......but out west in Lake Tahoe that seems easy to achieve so I'm wondering if NWS has different criteria based on region?

It just seemed weird to see the red blizzy on the map when I checked.......epic snows forecast up there anyway.....4-5 feet lol

I think 80-100 inches may qualify. Insane totals out there. Its probably different criteria for an urban area like Boston. Imagine Boston getting 6-8 feet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DavisStraight said:

I think 80-100 inches may qualify. Insane totals out there. Its probably different criteria for an urban area like Boston. Imagine Boston getting 6-8 feet.

Ya that’s my point.....the folks that live in South Lake Tahoe scoff at the folks in Boston when it comes to bizzys I think.....which is why I asked if NWS has different criteria for blizzy warnings depending on location....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ice1972 said:

Hey guys I have a question......didn't want to muck up the storm threat thread so the banter thread seems appropriate......so I often check CA weather forecast since as most of you know I am from there......Bay Area to be specific....anyway right now there are actual blizzy warnings up in the Sierra range for this big ole system coming onshore now......question is are there different criteria for blizzy warnings depending on the location?  In most cases when I was living in CA it would only be Winter Storm Warnings for this area.....I'm talking foothills east of Sacramento and then the Lake Tahoe area......seems a blizzy warning is rare out there maybe cuz the severity of the storms are high compared to other parts of the country....like here I know theres something about 3 hrs of sustained wind greater than 30 mph or something during heavy snow......but out west in Lake Tahoe that seems easy to achieve so I'm wondering if NWS has different criteria based on region?

It just seemed weird to see the red blizzy on the map when I checked.......epic snows forecast up there anyway.....4-5 feet lol

It's the same as here. <=1/4SM, 35+ mph for 3+ hours. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OceanStWx said:

It's the same as here. <=1/4SM, 35+ mph for 3+ hours. 

Ever wonder why they dropped heavy snow warnings and why they dont have a higher criteria for very heavy snowfall?  Like the definition for a blizzard without heavy falling snow, maybe that should be called a ground blizzard warning, while we have a separate warning for very heavy falling snow along with high winds?  For example, we could do something like, snow falling at the rate of at least 2 inches per hour for 6 consecutive hours with 40+ mph gusts for that time period and call that a snowfall blizzard warning.  Or when a storm is predicted to drop a foot or more of snow over a wide area in less than 24 hours, you could call that a heavy snow warning rather than have a winter storm warning be the top end criteria for heavy snow- which seems really low for the top end criteria to be a 6" snowfall.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ice1972 said:

Ya that’s my point.....the folks that live in South Lake Tahoe scoff at the folks in Boston when it comes to bizzys I think.....which is why I asked if NWS has different criteria for blizzy warnings depending on location....

It can snow there on July 4th- imagine that lol.

All this snow isn't just good for their skiing, it's even better news for their reservoirs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Ever wonder why they dropped heavy snow warnings and why they dont have a higher criteria for very heavy snowfall?  Like the definition for a blizzard without heavy falling snow, maybe that should be called a ground blizzard warning, while we have a separate warning for very heavy falling snow along with high winds?  For example, we could do something like, snow falling at the rate of at least 2 inches per hour for 6 consecutive hours with 40+ mph gusts for that time period and call that a snowfall blizzard warning.  Or when a storm is predicted to drop a foot or more of snow over a wide area in less than 24 hours, you could call that a heavy snow warning rather than have a winter storm warning be the top end criteria for heavy snow- which seems really low for the top end criteria to be a 6" snowfall.

Not happening. If anything we'll be trimming the number of warning types we issue. 

That was the goal of getting rid of the heavy snow warning. It covered similar space to a winter storm warning. When we verify events we can still call it heavy snow vs a winter storm (which would have mixed precip and/or wind). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, OceanStWx said:

Not happening. If anything we'll be trimming the number of warning types we issue. 

That was the goal of getting rid of the heavy snow warning. It covered similar space to a winter storm warning. When we verify events we can still call it heavy snow vs a winter storm (which would have mixed precip and/or wind). 

I appreciate that we would want warnings to be simplified for better communication with the public, but is it a good idea for there not to be a separate warning issued for extreme events vs moderate 6 inch ones?

Or is it that the impact of let's say an 18 inch snowstorm isn't considered different enough from an 8 inch snowstorm for example and that's we're better off without the additional top level warning?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

I appreciate that we would want warnings to be simplified for better communication with the public, but is it a good idea for there not to be a separate warning issued for extreme events vs moderate 6 inch ones?

Or is it that the impact of let's say an 18 inch snowstorm isn't considered different enough from an 8 inch snowstorm for example and that's we're better off without the additional top level warning?

Basically. The impact of more snow is really just the snow removal aspect, which plows keep up with to the point that 18 inches isn't sitting on roads (i.e. there is never more than a few inches on the road at any time). The step up is really blizzards, when plows can't even find the roads to clear them. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, OceanStWx said:

Basically. The impact of more snow is really just the snow removal aspect, which plows keep up with to the point that 18 inches isn't sitting on roads (i.e. there is never more than a few inches on the road at any time). The step up is really blizzards, when plows can't even find the roads to clear them. 

Right, the wind blows the snow right back faster than the roads can be plowed.  I experienced that in the Boxing Day Blizzard, couldn't do any plowing or shoveling because every few minutes after shoveling I looked outside and there was a big snow drift where I had just shoveled lol.  And this was well after the snow had stopped falling!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, OceanStWx said:

It's the same as here. <=1/4SM, 35+ mph for 3+ hours. 

My point was that in the Sierra Nevada range or any mountain range where you get a ton of snow that criteria is easily met basically every storm......I mean the wind over some of the mountain tops is easily 60+ mph and its not uncommon to gust over 90.........and yet I don't remember blizzard warnings being hoisted for every storm back when I regularly used to drive to Lake Tahoe many times per winter......it was always Winter Storm Warnings.......so the question is what makes NWS out of Sacramento issue blizzard warnings - some higher criteria?

Actually now that I'm looking at STO site the blizzard warnings are actually for the lower elevations and they have a regular winter storm warning along the spine of the Sierra.....maybe its elevation dependent.....where blizzard criteria is less likely to be met for a given storm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ice1972 said:

My point was that in the Sierra Nevada range or any mountain range where you get a ton of snow that criteria is easily met basically every storm......I mean the wind over some of the mountain tops is easily 60+ mph and its not uncommon to gust over 90.........and yet I don't remember blizzard warnings being hoisted for every storm back when I regularly used to drive to Lake Tahoe many times per winter......it was always Winter Storm Warnings.......so the question is what makes NWS out of Sacramento issue blizzard warnings - some higher criteria?

Actually now that I'm looking at STO site the blizzard warnings are actually for the lower elevations and they have a regular winter storm warning along the spine of the Sierra.....maybe its elevation dependent.....where blizzard criteria is less likely to be met for a given storm

They definitely split their zones by elevation not just county level. As far as directives go though, there is no stated difference in criteria.

It's possible it's like us with MWN, that the majority of the zone doesn't reach criteria. Also possible that lack of verification means they don't issue blizzard warnings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, OceanStWx said:

They definitely split their zones by elevation not just county level. As far as directives go though, there is no stated difference in criteria.

It's possible it's like us with MWN, that the majority of the zone doesn't reach criteria. Also possible that lack of verification means they don't issue blizzard warnings.

speaking of blizzards, are you even considering blizzard watches or warnings for downeast Maine? I'm thinking the sustained winds may not produce unless there's quite a bit of mixing down to the surface?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MarkO said:

speaking of blizzards, are you even considering blizzard watches or warnings for downeast Maine? I'm thinking the sustained winds may not produce unless there's quite a bit of mixing down to the surface?

Don't exist anymore!

It's on the table though. After 12z Sunday, the NE LLJ really cranks, the question may be whether +SN is still falling long enough.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, OceanStWx said:

They definitely split their zones by elevation not just county level. As far as directives go though, there is no stated difference in criteria.

It's possible it's like us with MWN, that the majority of the zone doesn't reach criteria. Also possible that lack of verification means they don't issue blizzard warnings.

They aired another bit of misinformation on TWC during their Sierra Blizzard coverage, they said that only 5 blizzard warnings have been issued for the Lake Tahoe area (they said that area is covered by the Reno area NWS) in the whole history of forecasting for that region!

 

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...