Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,588
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

April Pattern/obs thread.


weathafella
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

NAM’d at 18z. Nice 8-12 incher for ORH county. 
 

 

It would be fun if it happened because it would melt in a day or two and trees aren’t nearly leafed enough to cause many issues.

I wouldn’t really expect anything in the valley but even a sloppy inch or two would be novel.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, HIPPYVALLEY said:

It would be fun if it happened because it would melt in a day or two and trees aren’t nearly leafed enough to cause many issues.

I wouldn’t really expect anything in the valley but even a sloppy inch or two would be novel.

Yeah I’m tossing that solution for now but I’m hoping it verifies. Much rather have a bit of sloppy snow than a 40F rainstorm. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tamarack said:

At best (or worst depending on one's viewpoint), cut amounts in half on the blue and by 1/4 for the higher numbers except maybe the reds - ain't gonna be 10:1 for most.

I’d take it even further. You can prob even cut amounts by 60-80% in the blues…and more like 40-50% in the pinks/reds lower than 1500 feet elevation. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ORH_wxman said:

I’d take it even further. You can prob even cut amounts by 60-80% in the blues…and more like 40-50% in the pinks/reds lower than 1500 feet elevation. 

I’d remove all of it from the Hudson to Champlain Valleys, and CT River too, ha.

This is where it gets to mesoscale model range and those snow maps on 3km NAM look like a topographic map from 1500ft on up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, powderfreak said:

I’d remove all of it from the Hudson to Champlain Valleys, and CT River too, ha.

This is where it gets to mesoscale model range and those snow maps on 3km NAM look like a topographic map from 1500ft on up.

Yeah down below 200 feet you can prob just completely eliminate accumulations. Esp if outside the CCB intense banding. If you are under that, then I could see a few sloppy inches at 33-34F. But this isn’t a typical setup for late season snows. The ageo flow is too much out of the east. The antecedent airmass is pretty good though so can’t discount it altogether…esp in the interior elevations that are halfway decent with CAD. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

I’d remove all of it from the Hudson to Champlain Valleys, and CT River too, ha.

This is where it gets to mesoscale model range and those snow maps on 3km NAM look like a topographic map from 1500ft on up.

There will be I was surprised posts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Yeah down below 200 feet you can prob just completely eliminate accumulations. Esp if outside the CCB intense banding. If you are under that, then I could see a few sloppy inches at 33-34F. But this isn’t a typical setup for late season snows. The ageo flow is too much out of the east. The antecedent airmass is pretty good though so can’t discount it altogether…esp in the interior elevations that are halfway decent with CAD. 

No such thing as too much east flow in Randolph, I don't think?

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...