Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,609
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

Major Nor'easter snow storm (possible top 20) Noon Wednesday-Noon Thursday Dec 16-17, 2020

wdrag

By wdrag,
in New York City Metro

 Share

Recommended Posts

jm1220

jm1220

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, mikem81 said:

I am in Garden City. We were all Snow thrugh 11pm when it started pouring sleet. Feel asleep after that. Wat happened overnight? Did we ever flip to rain?

Farmingdale at one point was 35 and rain so I assume everyone from the Suffolk border on east did as well. I was asleep as well, have no idea. There was 2” at 7am on top of a crusty layer which must have been the rain and sleet so that back end snow came after. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Rjay
Rjay
RCNYILWX
RCNYILWX

Lurker on this thread, originally from College Point Queens, been working at NWS Chicago since 2010. Jealous of this storm, as it's been exceptionally boring out here and big snowstorms like Superstor

jbenedet
jbenedet

I think you’re going to see a correction back southeast today as the arctic airmass that’s building into the region throughout the day begins to get ingested into the models.  The temp drops thro

Posted Images

LibertyBell

LibertyBell

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, mikem81 said:

I am in Garden City. We were all Snow thrugh 11pm when it started pouring sleet. Feel asleep after that. Wat happened overnight? Did we ever flip to rain?

eh mostly we dry slotted around midnight and switched to a mix for a time between 1 am and 3 am then back to snow at 3:30 am and then it got heavy

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LibertyBell

LibertyBell

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, bluewave said:


https://vlab.ncep.noaa.gov/web/environmental-modeling-center/fv3-convective-allowing-forecast-system

UNIFIED FORECAST SYSTEM : CONVECTIVE-ALLOWING FORECAST AND DATA ASSIMILATION SYSTEM

 

UNIFIED FORECAST SYSTEM : Convective-Allowing Forecast and Data Assimilation System

 

1. Preamble

The UFS Convective-Allowing Model (CAM) Working Group’s charge is to create, using the FV3 dynamical core, a convective-allowing ensemble-based data assimilation and forecast system for the 0-3 day range to replace This development is a collaborative effort between NWS (NCEP/EMC), OAR (NSSL, GSD, GFDL), NCAR, the DTC, and academia. Experience gained from the development of earlier operational and experimental CAM systems such as the GSD’s HRRR/HRRRE, the NAM nests from EMC, the NSSL Experimental Warn-on-Forecast System for ensembles (NEWS-e), the NCAR experimental CAM ensemble, and GFDL’s FV3-based CAM efforts, will guide this project as it evolves. The anticipated operational system, the Rapid Refresh Forecast System (RRFS), will be a single-core (FV3) CAM ensemble-based data assimilation and forecast system. The RRFS is planned for operational implementation in FY2023.

 

2. Background and Development Timeline

As part of its commitment to the implementation of a unified forecast system in NCEP’s Production Suite, NOAA is planning to replace NCEP’s myriad mesoscale and convective-allowing systems with new guidance systems based on the FV3 dynamic core. As of July 2018, the NCEP meso/CAM scale modeling suite currently consists of the following components:

  1. North American Mesoscale (NAM) system: Runs the Non-hydrostatic Multiscale Model on B-Grid (NMMB). The NAM consists of a North American 12-km parent domain run to 3.5 days and 4 non-moving nests run to 2.5 days at 3-km resolution over the CONUS, Alaska, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii. An additional 1.5 km nest is run over a pre-selected part of the CONUS or Alaska to 1.5 days for fire weather support operations. The NAM features an 6-h data assimilation cycle with hourly analysis updates for the 12 km parent domain and the 3 km CONUS/AK nests.
  2. High-Resolution Window (HiResW):  Consists of ~ 3-km runs of the NMMB model and two configurations of the ARW model over the CONUS, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Guam (single ARW run only).
  3. High-Resolution Ensemble Forecast (HREF) system: Current/time-lagged HiResW and NAM CONUS nests are used to generate ensemble products. Currentversion is an 8-member ensemble for CONUS with HiresW and NAM CONUS nest members; HREF for Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico are a 6-member ensemble with HiResW members only.
  4. Short-range Ensemble Forecast (SREF) system: Runs at 16 km over North America and currently consists of 26 members (13 NMMB, 13 ARW) with physics/initial condition diversity. The replacement of the SREF and deterministic NAM systems will be based on whether they can be replaced by improved forecast guidance from the FV3-GFS and FV3-GEFS. 
  5. Rapid Refresh (RAP) and High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR): The RAP and HRRR are run hourly out to 21 hr and 18 hr, respectively. RAP is run at 13-km resolution over North America (identical to the NAM parent domain), while HRRR is run at 3 km over CONUS. As of July 2018, the 00/06/12/18z HRRR cycles were extended to 36-hr, and the 03/09/15/21z RAP cycles were extended to 39-hr. A HRRR-Alaska system was also added, running every 3 h. 

NAM development was frozen after the March 2017 upgrade, and RAP/HRRR development with the WRF-ARW model will cease after the RAPv5/HRRRv4 upgrade in 2020. However, operational execution of these modeling and associated DA systems will continue until comparable FV3-based systems are able to give similar performance. The transition of these deterministic modeling systems to FV3-based configurations will be prioritized as follows; these milestones are also summarized in the chart below:

 

FY2019-FV2020 : HRRR v4 implementation and SAR-FV3 development

  • Development of the FV3-based stand-alone regional model (SAR-FV3) to bring its capabilities and performance up toward the current CAM systems 
  • Finalize and implement RAPv5/HRRRv4
  • Add the extended HRRR forecasts to HREF, possibly replace NMMB members in HREF with SAR-FV3 members
  • Preliminary ensemble DA testing with SAR-FV3
  • Begin evaluation in NOAA testbeds

 

FY2020-FY2021 :SAR-FV3 development/testing for Meso/CAM 

  • Finalize porting of HRRR physics into CCPP for use in SAR-FV3
  • Finalize FV3-based RAP
  • Continue evaluation of FV3 SAR against existing systems
  • Continue development of DA capabilities with SAR-FV3
  • Continue evaluation in NOAA testbeds

 

FY2021-FY2023 : Evolution to a FV3-based single core Rapidly Refreshed Forecast System (RRFS) : FV3 CAM ensemble with DA

  • Ensemble analysis and forecast system development with SAR-FV3 and JEDI
  • Development of stochastic physics for single core
  • Continue evaluation in NOAA testbeds
  • Pursuant to favorable evaluation, implement v1.0 RRFS [2023]

9e2fef2b-ba69-1528-5307-e9c0978e029b?t=1

 

 

 

3. Ongoing Efforts

 

EMC : Developed a limited area regional version of the FV3 and adapted the NCEP Unified Post-Processor (UPP) and Grid-scale Interpolation (GSI) analysis for the FV3SAR. Currently running two real-time forecast experiments:

 

  •        A control run of a 60-h forecast over the CONUS of a 3 km limited area standalone FV3 with initial and boundary conditions from the operational FV3GFS
  •       A parallel run of the 3 km FV3 for dynamics/physics tuning tests

 

EMC is also developing a hourly ensemble data assimilation capability with the limited area FV3.

 

GSD : Developing RAP-sized FV3 domain and modifying pre-processing to use RAP instead of GFS / Fv3GFS input for lateral boundary conditions. Working with EMC on developing better grid-spacing uniformity for the continental FV3-RAP domain

 

EMC/GSD/NSSL/Developmental Test Bed Center (DTC) : Develop commonly-shared FV3SAR workflow

 

4. Links to Relevant Documents/Web Sites

image.gif

Thanks, Chris.  BTW this was YOUR storm since you called it first.

And I like that they are keeping the NAM around until a new model can replace it that has at least a similar level of functionality.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluewave

bluewave

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

And I like that they are keeping the NAM around until a new model can replace it that has at least a similar level of functionality.

 

The model they are developing to replace the NAM missed the change to sleet that the NAM had around 8pm. So it will need more work in the future to be able to capture strong WAA around the 850mb level. 

https://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/bblake/fv3/

D59B1531-DE47-4214-9FF0-A630569745C0.thumb.png.bf5e0e05f57c5c533c61bbf74c50f3da.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SleetStormNJ

SleetStormNJ

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, bluewave said:

The model they are developing to replace the NAM missed the change to sleet that the NAM had around 8pm. So it will need more work in the future to be able to capture strong WAA around the 850mb level. 

https://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/bblake/fv3/

D59B1531-DE47-4214-9FF0-A630569745C0.thumb.png.bf5e0e05f57c5c533c61bbf74c50f3da.png

 

 

Thanks!  Just wanted to say you are a real asset and resource to this board.  Appreciate your contributions and thought analysis too!

Keep us up to date on the model changes!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brian5671

Brian5671

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, HVSnowLover said:

Hard I would think because we don’t get same ratios. Would need like 3 to 4 inches of qpf to get those amounts. 

Feb 2013 dropped 30-40 inches in CT.    BDR recorded an even 30 for #1 on the all time list.   the 40 inch amts were a bit east of here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluewave

bluewave

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, forkyfork said:

how on earth did this give bgm 40 inches? this has to be climate change
 

The previous record wasn’t  even 4 years old yet. The warming background state, increased moisture, and strong blocking pattern seem to be the underlying causes. Notice how warm the months before these two record storms were.

Local warmth

Time Series Summary for Binghamton Area, NY (ThreadEx) - Month of Nov
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.
Rank
Year
Mean Avg Temperature 
Missing Count
1 1975 44.6 0
2 2011 44.4 0
3 2001 44.3 0
4 2015 44.1 0
5 2006 43.0 0
6 1964 42.9 0
7 2020 42.8 0
- 2009 42.8 0

 

Time Series Summary for Binghamton Area, NY (ThreadEx) - Month of Feb
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.
Rank
Year
Mean Avg Temperature 
Missing Count
1 1984 33.1 0
2 2017 31.5 0


CONUS warmth

 

November 2020

The average November temperature across the contiguous U.S. was 46.4 degrees F (4.7 degrees above average), which placed the month at the fourth-hottest Novemberin the 126-year record.

 

The February 2017 temperature was 41.2°F, 7.3°F above the 20th century average. This ranked as the second warmest February in the 123-year period of record. Only February 1954 was warmer for the nation at 41.4°F. Most locations across the contiguous U.S.were warmer than average during February.Feb 28, 2017

 

  



RECORD EVENT REPORT...UPDATED 
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE BINGHAMTON, NY 
1215 PM EST THU DEC 17 2020

...SNOWFALL RECORDS SET AT BINGHAMTON NY...

THE 2 DAY SNOWFALL AS OF 1015 AM IS 39.9" AT THE GREATER BINGHAMTON 
AIRPORT IN THE TOWN OF MAINE, NY. THIS BREAKS THE ALL TIME RECORD 
FOR 2 DAY SNOWFALL. THE OLD RECORD WAS 35.3" SET MARCH 14 TO 15, 
2017. 

THE ONE DAY SNOWFALL FROM TODAY IS 26.3" AS OF 1015 AM. THIS IS THE 
SECOND GREATEST SNOWFALL FOR ANY CALENDAR DAY. THE GREATEST ONE DAY 
SNOWFALL IS 31.2" ON MARCH 14TH, 2017.  

...SNOW DEPTH RECORD SET AT BINGHAMTON NY...

THE SNOW DEPTH THIS MORNING AT 7 AM WAS 39 INCHES. THE OLD RECORD 
WAS 35 INCHES ON MARCH 15 1993 AFTER A BLIZZARD. 

RECORDS HERE AT THE GREATER BINGHAMTON AIRPORT GO BACK TO 1951.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rjay

Rjay

Posted
Posted
On 12/16/2020 at 7:55 AM, Rjay said:

@MJO812/@LibertyBell/Me 5-10"  Good

@psv88/@jm1220 /@uofmiami  8-14" Good

@Allsnow/@Stormlover74 /@forkyfork 8-14"  2 for 3

@BxEngine/@snowman19 10-16"  Bx had 9.8" so bust

@Animal 14-20"  Huge bust since he actually moved lol

@snywx and crew 14-20"   12". Bust 

@Tatamy 18-24"   Bust

@Juliancolton 18-24"  11.9".  Bust

 

Bust zone is NENJ, NYC and LI.  PICKED WRONG ZONE TO BUST LOL

Overall I give myself a C-.  

Note to self:

"You are not a good forecaster". 

  • Haha 4
  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jm1220

jm1220

Posted
Posted
On 12/16/2020 at 10:28 AM, jm1220 said:

I'm thinking 6-9" for us, staying a little conservative. Maybe too much South Shore left in me. 

We'll need the heavy snow rates initially to hold off the warm air aloft. It can definitely happen but I think Upton's a little too high and the Euro too cold. 

Other areas: NJ shore less than 1" most places-NE winds off warm water are a killer. 

South Shore: 3-6", maybe 2-3" twin forks, also I-95 south of I-78 such as Trenton. Sleet comes in earlier here obviously and you deal with the ocean influence too so possibly some rain especially out east. Minor additional accum from CCB remnants. 

North Shore out to Wading River area and most of NYC: 6-9", more of the initial thump is snow, changes to sleet at the end of it. Freezes into cement after storm leaves and CCB remnant drops maybe 1-3" additional. Also 6-9" for I-78 corridor to PA border, 25 miles or more NW of I-95

Coastal CT, Westchester/Rockland, NJ I-80 and north 9-14", mostly snow with a little sleet possible at the closest the storm comes. Dryslot keeps amounts lower than further north. 

Orange, Putnam south of I-84, more than 25 miles away from CT coast, Sussex County NJ 14-18", all snow. Also dryslot may reach this area somewhat. 

Catskills, Poconos, I-84 corridor and north: 18-24" from deformation snow band and high ratios. 

 

Verification: North Shore was pretty good. NYC was higher than I had with a lot of 10-12" amounts for the northern half of the city and over half a foot elsewhere. I-78 corridor in NJ seems like it came in with the 6-9" range. 

NJ coast I'm not seeing much if any reports of snow, if any they were less than 1" that was washed away fast.

South Shore also looked pretty good. From what I could tell it was about 3" on the south fork and maybe 6-7" in the Rockaways. I was underdone on I-95 south toward Trenton, a lot of 6-7" amounts there. 

Westchester was good. Rockland may have gotten into the dryslot and/or had sleet since they on the low end of my thoughts. Same for coastal CT since there were a lot of amounts on the low end of what I had. Morris/Warren County NJ along I-80  also on the low end.

Orange/Putmam/Sussex County/away from coastal CT I was too high. Maybe subsidence area from the deformation snow further north. Same with the Poconos/Catskills as the deformation snow band was further north along I-88. 

End result: Underdone in NYC and I-95 SW of the city, overdone in northern/western areas. LI/Westchester better. Overall grade: C+

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Roger Smith

Roger Smith

Posted
Posted

(will edit if later data change this total) ...

10.5" two-day total at NYC Central Park appears to be the 14th largest December two-day total in 152 years of records (since 1869). Scanning a data base that I have developed with much assistance from Don Sutherland, these two-day storms (assuming they were all overnight or one-day one-storm totals, maybe one or two are not but anyway) had more than 6 inches in December (search included any that began or ended in December only using 1st or 31st, but no examples found -- there was 9" on Jan 1st 1869 with no data for 1868 so that would qualify if any measurable snow fell on Dec 31 1868).

I have listed the two-day totals in order of magnitude. I have also listed any events that had a heavier two-day total than 5.8" (all are shown, even if neither day is over 6 inches which is where I stopped ranking single days, so this is also a list of the top 36 2-day snow events as well as the top 30 daily amounts, two of which belong to the second listed event). The two-day event in 1904 could be listed as a one-day 7.0" total in some data sets (the division of these various events mostly between 1895 and 1912 are more consistent with the reported daily precip amounts). If so that would move any values under 7.0" to one lower rank position ( higher rank number for those already in the 20s). 

 

Rank __ Date(s) _________ TOTAL (2d amts) ____ Rank (Dec only) of heavier daily amount (if in Dec)

 1. __ Dec 26-27 1947 ____ 26.4 (26.1+0.3) ______ 1st

 2. __ Dec 26-27 2010 ____ 20.0 (12.2+7.8) ______ 6th (and 17th)

 3. __ Dec 26 (1d) 1872 __ 18.0 (one day) _______ 2nd

 4. __ Dec 20-21 1948 ____ 16.0 (15.8 +0.2) _____ 3rd

 5. __ Dec 11-12 1960 ____ 15.2 (3.6+12.6) ______ 5th

 6. __ Dec 5-6 2003 _______14.0 (6.0+8.0) ______ t13th

 7. __ Dec 21-22 1959 ____ 13.7 (3.4+10.3) ______10th

 8. __ Dec 15 1916 _______12.7 (one day) ________4th

 9. __ Dec 24-25 1883 ___ 12.3 (7.3+5.0) ________ 19th

10. __ Dec 30 (1d) 2000 __ 12.0 (one day) _______ 7th

11. __ Dec 24 (1d) 1912 __ 11.4 (one day) _______ 8th 

12. __ Dec 26 (1d) 1933 __ 11.2 (one day) _______ 9th

13. __ Dec 19-20 2009 ___ 10.9 (9.1+1.8) _______ 12th

14. __ Dec 16-17 2020 ___10.5 (6.5 + 4.0) ______ t27th

15. __ Dec 20 (1d) 1874 __ 10.0 (one day) ______ 11th

16. __ Dec 13-14 1917 ____9.5 (8.0+1.5) _______ t13th

17. __ Dec 19-20 1945 ____ 8.3 (8.0+0.3) _______t13th

t18. __ Dec 25-26 1909 ___ 8.0 (7.0+1.0) _______t20th

t18. __ Dec 3-4 1957 _____ 8.0 (0.5+7.5) _______ 18th

20. __ Dec 5 (1d) 1926 ___ 7.9 (one day) _______16th

21. __ Dec 19-20 1995 ____7.7 (5.5+2.2) _______ -- -- 

t22. __ Dec 17-18 1932 ___ 7.2 (6.7+0.5) _______t24th

t22. __ Dec 27-28 1990 ___ 7.2 (0.6+6.6) ______ 26th

24. __ Dec 24-25 1966 ____7.1 (6.7+0.4) _______t24th

t25. __ Dec 12-13 1904 ___7.0 (4.2+2.8) ________ -- -- (could show up as 7.0 12th or 13th one-day in some data)

t25. __ Dec 26 (1d) 1890 _ 7.0 (one day) _______t20th

t25. __ Dec 4 (1d) 1911 ___ 7.0 (one day) ______t20th

t25. __ Dec 15-16 1896 ___ 7.0 (0.2+6.8) ______ 23rd (daily record listed as 7.0 for 16th but 2d total actually, the 6.8 still beats 2020 though)

 

29. __ Dec 23-24 1963 ____ 6.6 (6.0+0.6) ______t29th

30. __ Dec 25 (1d) 1902 __ 6.5 (one day) ______ t27th

31. __ Dec 25-26 1969 ____ 6.3 (2.1+4.2) ______ -- --

32. __ Dec 23-24 1961 ____ 6.2 (2.8+3.4) ______ -- -- 

33. __ Dec 5 (1d) 2002 ____ 6.0 (one day) _____t29th

34. __ Dec 22-23 1896 ____ 6.0 (2.7+3.3) ______ -- -- (same note as 1904 above except 6.0" one day)

t35 __ (hon mention 5.8" on 14th 2003 and 9th 2005)

__________________________________________________

once again, thanks to Don Sutherland for providing me with the data base and supplementary info for some 1890s to 1912 era two-day breakdowns.

any errors would be in my analysis, have checked these over for years and amounts though. 

Noting that half of these events occurred between 21st and 27th of December. On that note, merry Christmas. 

 

  • Like 2
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
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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