Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

December Discussion II

Typhoon Tip

By Typhoon Tip,
in New England

Recommended Posts

Greg

Greg

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, kdxken said:

 Hi Greg , Southborough it's currently one of my locations :-) didn't mean to ruffle any feathers . I like your posts btw. Peace out ...

My deepest apology for my defensive/trolling reply.  I keep forgetting that not all avatars truely represent exact location so, again, I apologise to you.  It's all good.  We just need a snowy northeaster to get us out of this funk or whatever it's called.  Peace out my friend. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
40/70 Benchmark

40/70 Benchmark

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, das said:

Having read your stuff (from afar from the MId-Atlantic forum) over the years, I am surprised by this comment. @Typhoon Tip is simply expressing a well-understood inverse notion in physics; the Law of Constants. It basically states the tenants of physical constant, which is any set of fundamental invariant quantities observed in nature that are the foundation for the basic theoretical equations of physics. On which meteorology is based.  Tip rightly assesses that those observed qualities that make up the equations that represent ENSO, MJO, etc... are changing and the slope of that change is accelerating.  They are the furthest thing from invariant these days. 

I'm not sure which part of what I said suprised you?

I didn't say he was wrong..but rather merely implied that it hasn't profoundly altered our expectations regarding ENSO as of yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
40/70 Benchmark

40/70 Benchmark

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

 

Thing is... it occurred to me back post the super-nino ... was that like three years ago now. No ..can't be that far, is it? I think it was 2016 ... Anyway, the global impacts from that "super nino" ...didn't generate much vitriol in the headlines.  And I sniffed around ... why? Because there wasn't much.  I even saw papers written ...articles that also discussed plausible explanations why.  

I'm sure the impacts of that event were registered somewhere some how more or less.. but, it didn't concomitantly result comparative to the anomaly its self.  

We have to be careful... it's not black or white, either.  It's more how factors and forces stress systems - or can ... gradient distribution - which is also a changing in time.  So it's more like pushing results up and down a spectrum.  In a colder atmosphere overall, introducing a hot-house SST inferno ENSO up underneath is going to result a coherent registry of observations in the atmosphere.  I'm highly confident there is veracity in at least that baser precept.  And if that's true ... logically the rest follows.

Yeah... supposition... but, if the atmosphere is 90 F everywhere, and the water is 90 F everywhere... what does one think will happen? ...

I wonder if has delayed the establishment of the ocean atmosphere coupling during ENSO events...which may explain why some of these seasons have been so dichotomous in that the second half is so different from the first...ie late starting modoki winters. I get that el nino cliko favors that, but its been more extreme of late it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
  • Author
Posted
16 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I wonder if has delayed the establishment of the ocean atmosphere coupling during ENSO events...which may explain why some of these seasons have been so dichotomous...

yes...related, Ray -

Gradient ...both figuratively and literally means 'slope,' ... in present context, the sense of 'high' nodal variance to those of 'lows', and that restorative forces flow from high to low...etc.

That's true in all physical processes in nature.... The atmosphere ...and really, to keep on point, the "atmospheric-oceanic coupled" state is in thermal dipole at all scales... expanded, this becomes multivariate thermal source and sinks, all of which are in a constant state of attempting to find a neutral/balanced state.  In that foment, if the highs are very high, and the lows are very low.. the "acceleration" curve will express accordingly. 

Bringing this home... the ENSO thermal source(sink) in the atmospheric coupled model ... is/are playing by the same rules.  And ...you've come to the point I was trying to make at least in part.   That "delay" is quite plausibly a physical manifestation of the law of constancy playing out (thanks Daz!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greg

Greg

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Where are you getting 2014-2015 southborough stats? I'm not aware of a coop there. 

National Weather Service Boston,  Click Climate and Past Weather, Click Snowfall Records.  However, it doesn't work right now due to Government Shutdown at this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Greg said:

National Weather Service Boston,  Click Climate and Past Weather, Click Snowfall Records.  IT doesn't work right now due to Government Shutdown at this time.

I'll have to parse over those numbers when it comes back up. But 83" sounds woefully too low for 2014-2015 in Southborough. I'm still not aware of any coop there but maybe it's cocorahs. But you always have to be careful of some of these sites. Snowfall accuracy can vary quite a bit across the different sites. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoastalWx

CoastalWx

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

I'll have to parse over those numbers when it comes back up. But 83" sounds woefully too low for 2014-2015 in Southborough. I'm still not aware of any coop there but maybe it's cocorahs. But you always have to be careful of some of these sites. Snowfall accuracy can vary quite a bit across the different sites. 

Yeah there is no way they got 83”. That would mean like 50” in addition from the big late Jan blizzard and no question they had more from that. Probably 6-8” from the storm prior too right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greg

Greg

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

I'll have to parse over those numbers when it comes back up. But 83" sounds woefully too low for 2014-2015 in Southborough. I'm still not aware of any coop there but maybe it's cocorahs. But you always have to be careful of some of these sites. Snowfall accuracy can vary quite a bit across the different sites. 

It may be very well be COCORAHS.  All I did really was look how much snow fell each month from Nov/ Dec - March/April and added tham up.  You can see how much snow was on groung and how big the storm were overall. However, you do make a very good point that some of the data may potentially not be correct but how much is the question. I could very well be wrong though.  I may have read something that was not correct such as Southborough vs. Southbridge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greg

Greg

Posted
Posted

Quite a gradient! Billerica had 26.0" and North Billerica had 34.0"  An 8.0" difference in the same town next to me?  If I had to guess an inbetween amount would be more appropriate for the same town just next to me. Probably average 30.0" if I had to guess and be more reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoastalWx

CoastalWx

Posted
Posted
Just now, Greg said:

Quite a gradient! Billerica had 26.0" and North Billerica had 34.0"  An 8.0" difference?  If I had to guess an inbetween amount would be more appropriate for the same town just next to me. Probably average 30.0" if I had to guess and be more reasonable..

I would say both are respectively too low and too high. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, dendrite said:

I see no Southborough in cocorahs. I do see Southbridge COOP on the NWS site and they had 83.7” that season.

Yeah southbridge is way out by Sturbridge. I still think 83 is prob low for them that winter but definitely closer than it would be for southborough.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DavisStraight

DavisStraight

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, dendrite said:

I see no Southborough in cocorahs. I do see Southbridge COOP on the NWS site and they had 83.7” that season.

That's about right for my town, we didn't get the higher totals in most storms being on the western side but Westborough out to Southborough definitely had more than I did, I have pictures from Westborough when we had the highest pack and it was much more than me. I'd say over 100 for Southborough/Westborough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weathafella

weathafella

Posted
Posted
Just now, kdxken said:

 Actually I do,  Coastal with no temperature issues it's Brighton. Onshore banding it's Sherborn . If there's taint I'll stay in Southborough :-) 

Damn.....you covered all the bases!   It seems like you’re most often in sherborn these days....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kdxken

kdxken

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, DavisStraight said:

That's about right for my town, we didn't get the higher totals in most storms being on the western side but Westborough out to Southborough definitely had more than I did, I have pictures from Westborough when we had the highest pack and it was much more than me. I'd say over 100 for Southborough/Westborough.

 From my limited time in Southborough totals always seem comparable to Milford . I don't know what Milford totals were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ORH_wxman

ORH_wxman

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, kdxken said:

2015 Brighton.  I'll take either right about now...

 

2015.jpg

'78 had the far superior individual storm while '15 was absolutely relentless for 3 weeks straight and still a pretty big storm of its own. Two different beasts but similar levels of impressiveness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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