Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,607
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

January 2021


40/70 Benchmark
 Share

Recommended Posts

Premature post

Anyway that’s a plausible explanation for that as far as the 29th is concerned I still don’t see why that can’t be corrected North. 
 
… Which is to say I’m not willing to remove that as a possibility yet. Is it likely probably not. I tell you though the GEFs  locks the ridge axes over the Dakotas and then pushes the trough out to sea .. that doesn’t make any sense it extends the wave length without having any systemic mechanical device to do so in the larger synoptic evolution of the pattern

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Damage In Tolland said:

I’m not 100% on this.. but I believe this will be least snowiest Jan at BOS, BDL, PVD and ORH

Nah. ORH is at 3.6” and here are the top 10 least snowiest

Trace 1955

 0.8” 1980

0.9” 1911

1.1” 1913

1.8” 1969

2.0” 1962

2.5” 1967

2.7” 1992

2.8” 1989

3.8” 1934

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Nah. ORH is at 3.6” and here are the top 10 least snowiest

Trace 1955

 0.8” 1980

0.9” 1911

1.1” 1913

1.8” 1969

2.0” 1962

2.5” 1967

2.7” 1992

2.8” 1989

3.8” 1934

Damn that's pretty meager considering the overall favorable geographic placement, elevation of ORH. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Nah. ORH is at 3.6” and here are the top 10 least snowiest

Trace 1955

 0.8” 1980

0.9” 1911

1.1” 1913

1.8” 1969

2.0” 1962

2.5” 1967

2.7” 1992

2.8” 1989

3.8” 1934

It took 32 days for ORH to record a below normal daily temperature departure during this stretch.  That is obscene.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, CT Valley Snowman said:

Damn that's pretty meager considering the overall favorable geographic placement, elevation of ORH. 

Yeah there’s been some historic turds in January. I remember a couple of those (1992 and 1989) during a horrific 4 year stretch. 

We've been lucky not to have anything that bad recently though 2007 comes close.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KoalaBeer said:

Pretty much giving up on the season for down here...I’ll be happy with whatever we can squeak out from here on out. Maybe March holds some surprises. Sierras are about to get smoked....

 

7245B97D-A83A-4357-B51D-9F063B492968.jpeg

I'm so jealous........remember some real great biggies up there.......have experienced those massive dumps there several times and they are so amazing.......I-80 over Donner Pass is a definite challenge in your little 2 door coupe with chains on in a blizzard.......especially after you crest the pass and start your descent into Reno - its steep........did 360's once at 2am in the middle of a whiteout.......luckily the time of day helped with nobody around me lol..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Premature post

Anyway that’s a plausible explanation for that as far as the 29th is concerned I still don’t see why that can’t be corrected North. 
 
… Which is to say I’m not willing to remove that as a possibility yet. Is it likely probably not. I tell you though the GEFs  locks the ridge axes over the Dakotas and then pushes the trough out to sea .. that doesn’t make any sense it extends the wave length without having any systemic mechanical device to do so in the larger synoptic evolution of the pattern

I feel like the trough position is ideally a little further west....so I can certainly see it going out to sea...TBH, at this point, I would be shocked it provided significant impact to the region.

Disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Go Kart Mozart said:

The other problem is that the storm stacks vertically early and big.  It would need to come very close to hit SNE...maybe north of Cape May.

Yea, even if it hit, its going to be a "load blown SW" event....another theme of this god foresaken winter.

We probably don't even need to worry about it, though.

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...