DavisStraight Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Just now, moneypitmike said: Just broke in the new snowblower. It works. Going it to use mine in 5 minutes, it started last I tried so hoping it also works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Nice little band to cap it off.maybe I can make 12 inches. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Just now, moneypitmike said: Just broke in the new snowblower. It works. Congrats. Mine didn’t work today…lol. The gear shifter is messed up. Prob a rusted gear wheel inside but not 100% sure. Thankfully there’s an older dude around the corner who repairs snow blowers so he’s gonna look at it tomorrow. At least this was a good storm to not have the snow blower. It was rpettt east to shovel this champagne powder. Only annoying part was the denser snow banks at each end of my horseshoe driveway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Just now, CoastalWx said: Nice little band to cap it off.maybe I can make 12 inches. Yep. This was a good one for many. Out here we have a steady mood snow now in that lighter band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TauntonBlizzard2013 Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Snowing pretty hard, may push 9 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moneypitmike Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 1 minute ago, ORH_wxman said: Congrats. Mine didn’t work today…lol. The gear shifter is messed up. Prob a rusted gear wheel inside but not 100% sure. Thankfully there’s an older dude around the corner who repairs snow blowers so he’s gonna look at it tomorrow. At least this was a good storm to not have the snow blower. It was rpettt east to shovel this champagne powder. Only annoying part was the denser snow banks at each end of my horseshoe driveway. That blows (haha). True on this being a good one for it to break on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavisStraight Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 2 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said: Congrats. Mine didn’t work today…lol. The gear shifter is messed up. Prob a rusted gear wheel inside but not 100% sure. Thankfully there’s an older dude around the corner who repairs snow blowers so he’s gonna look at it tomorrow. At least this was a good storm to not have the snow blower. It was rpettt east to shovel this champagne powder. Only annoying part was the denser snow banks at each end of my horseshoe driveway. The banks are always the worst, especially when you 15-20 inches and it's not powdery, its usually a heavy snow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSnowman Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Snowing Hard again. This is quite nice. But just gets me closer to the number I Want so badly that I’ll never get to in 12. 2 hours ago, DotRat_Wx said: God please kill me And we are free to complain on hereDOT haha. I don’t just whine, I give Very detailed specifics on my complaining, so you’re given a chance to clap back at specifics you know. Vs. one big eye roll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 7, 2022 Author Share Posted January 7, 2022 It was exhilarating hearing CT bitch about AEMATT for the past week, enroute to 2-3 times as much snow as I got. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spanks45 Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Just finished melting my core from today.... 0.46" L.E. 7.5" of new snow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Kids trampling pack ftl. 3 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 7, 2022 Author Share Posted January 7, 2022 5.5" Hoping to hit 6" and verify the token warning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 7, 2022 Author Share Posted January 7, 2022 Just now, CoastalWx said: Kids trampling pack ftl. You are pasty there....all powder here. Glad the kids are enjoying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BombsAway1288 Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said: It was exhilarating hearing CT bitch about AEMATT for the past week, Ebay route to 2-3 times as much snow as I got. 6in is nothing to be disappointed at and well within your forecast. I'm sure you'll clean up over 95% of SNE by April. Climo FTW for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 7, 2022 Author Share Posted January 7, 2022 Just now, BombsAway1288 said: 6in is nothing to be disappointed at and well within your forecast. I'm sure you'll clean up over 95% of SNE by April. Climo FTW for you. I'm over it...its a beautiful winter landscape. Good for you guys in the deathband, though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weathafella Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Well this final band pushed me to 12.0. Maybe another 0.1 coming? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxsniss Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Per Box twitter: As of 1 PM, here are how our climate sites stand in terms of snowfall from the season's first major winter storm: #Boston - 11.2 inches #Worcester - 6.2 inches #Providence - 5.9 inches #Hartford - 5.4 inches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 10 minutes ago, TheSnowman said: Snowing Hard again. This is quite nice. But just gets me closer to the number I Want so badly that I’ll never get to in 12. And we are free to complain on hereDOT haha. I don’t just whine, I give Very detailed specifics on my complaining, so you’re given a chance to clap back at specifics you know. Vs. one big eye roll. Specifically, you're a wanker. 5 minutes ago, CoastalWx said: Kids trampling pack ftl. ftw, friend...ftw. They enjoy it more than we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 5 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said: 5.5" Hoping to hit 6" and verify the token warning. Blew me out of the water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damage In Tolland Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Just now, JC-CT said: Specifically, you're a wanker. ftw, friend...ftw. They enjoy it more than we do. Ted Lasso? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MegaMike Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Let's try to clear up some things I've read: 1) Almost all NWP models (if not, all) provide liquid water equivalent (LWE) and snow water equivalent (SWE) as diagnostic fields. When I write, "diagnostic fields" this implies that both variables, LWE and SWE, is calculated within the model itself between modeled time steps. Modeled time steps are ~27 seconds depending upon the horizontal resolution of a modeling system. Regardless, the calculation of LWE is straightforward. LWE = the liquid accumulation of all hydrometeor contributions diagnosed by a modeling system The calculation of SWE varies by microphysics (mp) scheme. I'll give one example - one (there are many) mp scheme calculates fall rates for snow, pristine ice (I consider this sleet), graupel, and rain. Thus, fall rates can be converted into hydrometeor accumulation by multiplying by the modeled time step. Once the time stepped accumulation is obtained, SWE becomes - SWE = snow + sleet... Just keep in mind that SWE is often used to determine snowfall for all private/public websites. Since almost all mp schemes includes sleet within their routines, SWE may be overdone due to sleet contamination (for regions that mix). Thankfully, most websites make this clear. 2) mp schemes are reliable at fine grid scales (<3km). They can consider heat, moisture, and momentum flux caused by convection without parametrization. At larger scales (>12km), convective parameterizations are required to essentially approximate convictive processes. Although I'm not entirely sure, I believe cumulus parameterization from global models, to regional models, then to mesoscale models caused some forecasting problems for today's event. Just a thought! 3) The land surface model (LSM) of all NWP models includes a snow depth field that does determine new snowfall. Unfortunately, the algorithm is usually two-dimensional and the output isn't archived in gridded output... Delta snow depth (often provided by websites) will almost always be underdone since it includes gauge losses between the ground-snow and air-snow interface. 4) Anyone ever notice ''6-hour averaged Precip Rate" which is plotted by precipitation type? Think about it, does that make sense? No... They take an accumulated product (over the past 6 hours in this case), and use an instantaneous field to plot precipitation intensity by precipitation type. This is why you occasionally see snowfall along a cold front. Precipitation fell before the front passed (likely in a warm sector), BUT they use atmospheric fields post-frontal passage to determine precipitation type. This is no bueno imo. 5) Last one. Since snowfall is post-processed by most websites (excluding the ICON - I'd like to know what 'true SLR' means), keep in mind that they need instantaneous fields to calculate snow ratios. If output is provided every 6 hours, imagine how inaccurate snowfall may be when using instantaneous fields. I said this once, I'll say it again: Websites need to be descriptive. Especially as it relates to snowfall products. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 1 minute ago, Damage In Tolland said: Ted Lasso? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George001 Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 8 minutes ago, wxsniss said: Per Box twitter: As of 1 PM, here are how our climate sites stand in terms of snowfall from the season's first major winter storm: #Boston - 11.2 inches #Worcester - 6.2 inches #Providence - 5.9 inches #Hartford - 5.4 inches Snowiest January since 2018, and the great pattern is just getting started based on the long range guidance. This is why its good to let the winter develop and give it a chance before writing it off. When I made that panic room threat things looked bad, but I jumped the gun there. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MegaMike Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 11.5'' of very light snowfall in Wrentham, MA (measured at 11:30 AM). I'm teleworking in MA for now. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tunafish Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 12 minutes ago, CoastalWx said: Kids trampling pack ftl. I almost put my 5 year old up for adoption when she came within 4 feet of my snowboard earlier. We settled on a perma-ban from the backyard while it's snowing. I have a backup board location but yikes, kid, show some respect. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC-CT Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 7 minutes ago, MegaMike said: 4) Anyone ever notice ''6-hour averaged Precip Rate" which is plotted by precipitation type? Think about it, does that make sense? No... They take an accumulated product (over the past 6 hours in this case), and use an instantaneous field to plot precipitation intensity by precipitation type. This is why you occasionally see snowfall along a cold front. Precipitation fell before the front passed (likely in a warm sector), BUT they use atmospheric fields post-frontal passage to determine precipitation type. This is no bueno imo. Indeed I have. Sim radar, for the models that have it, will always show a more accurate "in time" look at the storm's forecasted existence. Average precip rate is always lagging the actual storm evolution. 7 minutes ago, MegaMike said: 5) Last one. Since snowfall is post-processed by most websites (excluding the ICON - I'd like to know what 'true SLR' means), keep in mind that they need instantaneous fields to calculate snow ratios. If output is provided every 6 hours, imagine how inaccurate snowfall may be when using instantaneous fields. HRRR seems to also have an explicit snow forecast, at least based on the (?) info screen on pivotalweather. Although it seems boilerplate so probably worth confirming. And also very possible that not all model sites use it for their graphics. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 4 minutes ago, MegaMike said: Let's try to clear up some things I've read: 1) Almost all NWP models (if not, all) provide liquid water equivalent (LWE) and snow water equivalent (SWE) as diagnostic fields. When I write, "diagnostic fields" this implies that both variables, LWE and SWE, is calculated within the model itself between modeled time steps. Modeled time steps are ~27 seconds depending upon the horizontal resolution of a modeling system. Regardless, the calculation of LWE is straightforward. LWE = the liquid accumulation of all hydrometeor contributions diagnosed by a modeling system The calculation of SWE varies by microphysics (mp) scheme. I'll give one example - one (there are many) mp scheme calculates fall rates for snow, pristine ice (I consider this sleet), graupel, and rain. Thus, fall rates can be converted into hydrometeor accumulation by multiplying by the modeled time step. Once the time stepped accumulation is obtained, SWE becomes - SWE = snow + sleet... Just keep in mind that SWE is often used to determine snowfall for all private/public websites. Since almost all mp schemes includes sleet within their routines, SWE may be overdone due to sleet contamination (for regions that mix). Thankfully, most websites make this clear. 2) mp schemes are reliable at fine grid scales (<3km). They can consider heat, moisture, and momentum flux caused by convection without parametrization. At larger scales (>12km), convective parameterizations are required to essentially approximate convictive processes. Although I'm not entirely sure, I believe cumulus parameterization from global models, to regional models, then to mesoscale models caused some forecasting problems for today's event. Just a thought! 3) The land surface model (LSM) of all NWP models includes a snow depth field that does determine new snowfall. Unfortunately, the algorithm is usually two-dimensional and the output isn't archived in gridded output... Delta snow depth (often provided by websites) will almost always be underdone since it includes gauge losses between the ground-snow and air-snow interface. 4) Anyone ever notice ''6-hour averaged Precip Rate" which is plotted by precipitation type? Think about it, does that make sense? No... They take an accumulated product (over the past 6 hours in this case), and use an instantaneous field to plot precipitation intensity by precipitation type. This is why you occasionally see snowfall along a cold front. Precipitation fell before the front passed (likely in a warm sector), BUT they use atmospheric fields post-frontal passage to determine precipitation type. This is no bueno imo. 5) Last one. Since snowfall is post-processed by most websites (excluding the ICON - I'd like to know what 'true SLR' means), keep in mind that they need instantaneous fields to calculate snow ratios. If output is provided every 6 hours, imagine how inaccurate snowfall may be when using instantaneous fields. I said this once, I'll say it again: Websites need to be descriptive. Especially as it relates to snowfall products. Thanks for the detailed post. I’ve always despised the model snow maps (or clown maps as I call them) and this is another great description of why they stink. They are fun to look at for sure…but they do often cause a lot of confusion and often inflate expectations compared to usual. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tamarack Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 36 minutes ago, dryslot said: Wish i would've been sitting on top of the Cashes Ledge Buoy earlier today, Looked like 2"+/hr rates there. And we know that with those rates snow will accumulate even on a warm surface. Might be up to 1.5" here, or even 1.7 to take 3rd place for the season's biggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40/70 Benchmark Posted January 7, 2022 Author Share Posted January 7, 2022 13 minutes ago, wxsniss said: Per Box twitter: As of 1 PM, here are how our climate sites stand in terms of snowfall from the season's first major winter storm: #Boston - 11.2 inches #Worcester - 6.2 inches #Providence - 5.9 inches #Hartford - 5.4 inches I'm pretty much in line with the other 3 sites. I should gone into work in Chelsea...they probably had like 10" lol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STILL N OF PIKE Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Was outside for 90 min as a nice light snow fell to end things . Joined my GF’s kids in a neighborhood snowball fight (had to really pack them down to get a snowball ) but was just a great wintery day and scene . No mixing , no rain , just a snow storm . Kids loved it I did manage several direct hits which is always rewarding lol 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now