Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,611
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

OBS/DISCO - The Historic James Blizzard of 2022


TalcottWx
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Here are my thoughts....I feel like some people in interior NE MA are measuring in drifts. I just drove down to my sister's, near the N Reading line in eastern Wilmington, and the avg depth was 10-11". My current average depth is 8-9", settled down from 10-11" last night.

I am confident that I had about 12" of total snowfall, and Wilmington had about 14", and really do not care to argue the point.

Will do a full post-storm write up later.

I tend to agree.  I'm guesstimating we had about 13-13.5 here in Andover. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, TheBudMan said:

 

totally agree with you Ray.   Wakefield reported 22"   I'm about 2 miles from Quanapowitt and live on the Reading/N  Reading line.   I think we had 16-18" tops.   Definitely think people didn't measure properly. 

 

3 minutes ago, Dotb said:

I tend to agree.  I'm guesstimating we had about 13-13.5 here in Andover. 

Both of your measurements makes sense to me. @TheBudMan I could see you getting 2-3" more than my sister in e Wilmington because RAD clearly shows the west end of that band got you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's what it was like in Attleboro yesterday under that heavy band. Got about 24 inches here, Dodgeville area. Tough to tell, measured in a few spots in a soccer field. Found some 5+ ft drifts while snowshoeing during the storm. acc0ce9109d7b65203b9e9f92d794319.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading all this post storm analysis gives me doubts now about my total. It's strange, yesterday just before it got dark it was still snowing but the entire depths ranged from 12" - 30" worth of drifting in both the front and back yard. Almost wonder if some of the snow from other surrounding neighbors' houses landed in my yard. That's why I hate trying to measure very fluffy wind-blown snow. Heck, I'm usually guilty for undermeasuring. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Took a few measurements in my yard last night before coming in, and came up with 21".  That seemed to make sense to me, as there were other folks in Bristol and Warren reporting the same after I checked on the NWS site.  However, checked the NWS site today and they had removed all the high numbers from Bristol, went with 18" report instead.  Seems an inch or two low to me, but in the end it's not a big deal.  Swansea, Fall River, and Tiverton were all in the 20's are right nearby and were also in that death band just as long as me.

Also had a chance to take a little drive around town - no photos unfortunately.  Some awesome scenes down at Colt Sate Park.  Lots of fields and open spaces near the water were bare ground, and then suddenly, you would get into spots with 4-6 foot drifts where all that blowing snow had a chance to settle.  Cool stuff.  Plus my son finally had a big storm to have some fun sledding and attempting to build snow forts and piles with this rather fluffy stuff.  A great storm overall, even if it wasn't historic as we wanted it to be. :D

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol….it’s always about my BY….IDC about other peoples BY…..nobody else exists in winter

2 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Just bc it wasn't historic in our BYs, doesn't mean it wasn't historic for other areas....it certainly was. 

 

2 hours ago, msg112469 said:

Bitter comment. Garbage storm? If you are that emotional about who gets the most snow, then you should have grabbed a hotel on a line somewhere on a line from Newburyport to Boston to Taunton. Some of the best Winter conditions in years!

 

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We get about the same amount of snow around here as many parts of New England but it comes in rather boring 2-4 inch dumps on a regular basis and seldom is there what I would call a snowstorm. On the other hand at this elevation (I am at about 4000 ft asl) it seldom melts once on the ground, although it can rain here and turn a snow pack into a mess. Current snow depth here is more or less what it has been for weeks, 15" with 2 feet at the local ski hill and 3 feet in the alpine. Down in the Columbia valley they vary from 6" to a foot most of the winter and sometimes lose the pack. It has not actually snowed here for two weeks but it looks about the same as it did every day since mid-December. I think the snow pack here is a bit below normal, it can be up to 4-5 feet. These storms you get are considerably more interesting but our heat waves rock (five days over 105 F last summer). Severe storm action is about a toss-up. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://easternmassweather.blogspot.com/2022/01/blizzard-of-22-verification.html

 

Blizzard of '22 Verification

Solid Effort with Mixed Results

In the lead up to the Blizzard of '22, the primary question pertaining to the evolution of the storm was the degree to which the descent of arctic air into the region would cause the storm to deflect to the east and chase convection over the ocean.
AVvXsEhM2r3UQAcsIbmfgyuRbIEPM2OtIaTWVa6G
 Thus it was this crucial question that represented the focus of Friday's Final Call
 
Eastern Mass Weather postulated that the heaviest snows would fall in two primary bands.
 
The first being associated with the mid level deformation over east central Mass down into Eastern Connecticut:
AVvXsEjofJGYf28hXy-chnk4aGiTUcmvLktssENX
 
This area of very heavy snowfall was the result of mid level convergence due to both the changing of wind direction and speed:
 
AVvXsEhOR1vZxiI-G7KPICLYUh2BY8KzH9LaZSki
 
 
And a steep temperature differential:
 
AVvXsEgjGSf7WoIS9srKwJspjvb7v5Ebwgm2ksqp

 
As evidenced by the relative humidity fields (moisture) in the mid levels of the atmosphere:
 
AVvXsEjill2OvvMAoTdCrV5cvSwhoGW0MiefTMep
 
This culmination of factors in the mid levels of the atmosphere  was forecast to result in the intense lift necessary to produce excessive snowfall rates of up to 2 to even as much as 6" per hour an isolated areas:
 
AVvXsEjJUvj6L-zYUhd1AB_TWrUw4bC18BKbmu_q
 
While this idea worked out for the most part, the area of intense lift transferred to the coast, instead of extending into north central and interior NE Mass, as forecast. Thus the heaviest snows materialized over eastern CT:
 
 
AVvXsEhKbGIBkfpTAP_ASuFQ7I4aUnlVBMw2C4QT

 Before relocating to southeastern Mass and coastal eastern Mass.
 
AVvXsEhTZdsRd54ls_Y1k4Fefm2Fb2FycxxgLYpX
 
 
 
AVvXsEiIIWpfigyHnIZSIqFeCyzsI27TQ1s0iGKR

 
 
 
AVvXsEg9fx4ceVGNTqh9ZY28fbi7ty_VznjSIgZj
 
 
AVvXsEi8s5ogsAphqDsIKaY5iKqDRUbOJJMhTxxZ

 
This caused the heaviest snows, from about 24-30", to shift from the forecast primary area of focus for heavy banding, across the interior,  to the secondary area along the coast:
 
AVvXsEjEi66hZ4yrWIG5jlbnnZ5bXO94O2puEI0W

 
This subsequently became the primary focus for the heaviest mesoscale banding that was originally forecast to translate across Worcester county and interior NE Mass.
 
AVvXsEhuZtisoZZoHfa8J6Tq-v7QsIUra_NltdfC

 
 
AVvXsEhIHPr-OZhEfd5N5P08qYnRYKVEsw8psouQ

 
 
AVvXsEiSpiokCGqMlXdsePjxnwiarIr8MgaV5L9L

 
Ultimately, towards the latter stage of the storm on Saturday evening, the forecast area of deformation banding across the interior did materialize, producing a secondary somewhat lesser maxima of up to about 18". 
 
 
AVvXsEgptad9ddxY5fy5h-YUHPXFKNOoQE_-OuVb
 
However, this was too late to reach the forecast amounts of 18-30" in this area, which ended up occurring over southeast Mass in association with the coastal area of deformation.
 

Final Snowfall Accumulations:

AVvXsEjatow9Y9cP4TCFnRWTKahZq-V5nKoCH2Df

 

vs Final Call: 

 
AVvXsEgO6lBMELdoNd0onKfshApkYpkO8QYPYp9f

 
& First Call:
 
AVvXsEjJYfGNeAXOE4bIwDdjbibUCTkzglZfH5ei

 
Final Grade: B-
 
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, TauntonBlizzard2013 said:

True… and didn’t lose much today 

What some Monday morning quarter backs fail to understand is wind packing quickly dropped the fluff. If I measured this morning I only had 18 but with 6 hr snowboard and peak depth of 22 it was 24. Totally confident in my numbers. @JC lol on those Columbia reports. Wind scoured when I got there at 7 last night but on the hill 6 to 8 max. The big numbers started in Scotland but really ramped up just after Canterbury at the Plainfield line. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

What some Monday morning quarter backs fail to understand is wind packing quickly dropped the fluff. If I measured this morning I only had 18 but with 6 hr snowboard and peak depth of 22 it was 24. Totally confident in my numbers. @JC lol on those Columbia reports. Wind scoured when I got there at 7 last night but on the hill 6 to 8 max. The big numbers started in Scotland but really ramped up just after Canterbury at the Plainfield line. 

I always trust your numbers 100%...and Kev, as much as we break balls. The idea that he inflates is totally false...he is actually very meticulous.

  • Like 6
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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