Napril 2023 Obs/Disco

[noforsnow]

42 minutes ago, BrianW said:

What a special day on tap for South Fl. 

Scattered/Numerous Thunderstorms Across South Florida Today...
...Severe Weather and Flooding Rainfall May Accompany Storms...

Quasi-zonal upper level flow presides over much of the lower latitudes of CONUS. The exception here is a vigorous H500 short-wave trough and attendant mesoscale-convective system that is propagating eastward across the Gulf of Mexico. As this feature approaches South Florida, RAP/GFS guidance suggest that this wave will decouple into separate impulses, one of which will allow of differential cyclonic vorticity advection to encompass South Florida.This will be
commensurate with divergent flow aloft, low-level convergence, and a general veering of winds within the troposphere favoring warm air advection from SFC-700 hPa. Sufficient instability on the order of 1500-2500 J/kg should allow for thunderstorms to develop as the aforementioned wave phases with peak heating this afternoon, though convective debris may limit surface heating and resultant thunderstorm coverage in some locations. Furthermore, effective bulk
shear on the order of 30-40 kt and steepened mid-level lapse rates around 7/7.5 C/km may allow for a few severe thunderstorms to develop this afternoon - mainly over eastern portions of South Florida. Hail up to quarters in size and a brief tornado or two cannot be ruled out within the most robust thunderstorms that develop through the evening hours today. 

Wish it was special... still recovering from our recent run of "special" days

[WxWatcher007]

2 hours ago, WhiteLawns said:

Cornwall ct!

It was incredible last night. 

[Typhoon Tip]

was that witnessed by unaided eye, though?

... with camera tech the way it is, and pervasive these days, ... these auroras are photoed by way of timed exposures, that are then rendered to Twitter and other social media platforms under the auspices of, 'look what I saw last night' - leaving the part out that they could not have "seen" anything without these devices.

I rarely see a disclaimer or any comment at all really that says, 'I am not actually worthy of the center of attention I'm seeking, because I could not have seen this without high tech assistance' 

lol.  No but these long exposures can "see" auroras that glancing at the nocturnal firmament alone more commonly cannot detect.

[CoastalWx]

5 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

was that witnessed by unaided eye, though?

... with camera tech the way it is, and pervasive these days, ... these auroras are photoed by way of timed exposures, that are then rendered to Twitter and other social media platforms under the auspices of, 'look what I saw last night' - leaving the part out that they could not have "seen" anything without these devices.

I rarely see a disclaimer or any comment at all really that says, 'I am not actually worthy of the center of attention I'm seeking, because I could not have seen this without high tech assistance' 

lol.  No but these long exposures can "see" auroras that glancing at the nocturnal firmament alone more commonly cannot detect.

EVERYTHING is saturated these days. I was thinking the same, how did it look with the naked eye? 

[CoastalWx]

On 4/17/2023 at 6:20 PM, Damage In Tolland said:

It had .50~ .75 Saturday all of SNE

 

It had multiple fake snowstorms this winter 

Sell it 

 

On 4/17/2023 at 6:21 PM, Damage In Tolland said:

Every air mass has warmed this spring as we get closer. Each and every.

Tough stretch for the KFS. 

[STILL N OF PIKE]

12 hours ago, CoastalWx said:

I reseeded a chunk of the yard so it’s perfect. Otherwise it’s washed away. I don’t need 3” of rain in April. Hopefully May is wet because last year Stein started then and didn’t look back. 

An inch is solid , especially over a 18 hour period or so 

I’m jokin , I just thought we had to post at least a couple times a day referencing ole stein

[Typhoon Tip]

8 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

 

Tough stretch for the KFS. 

Yeah, pretty low slugging percentage for the first month of this years 'summer batting' season...

[CoastalWx]

2 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

An inch is solid , especially over a 18 hour period or so 

I’m jokin , I just thought we had to post at least a couple times a day referencing ole stein

LOL, I think Stein has moved towards jack fetishes like Powderfreak said. If it's not 3"+...  

We were flooding after the March nor'easter and water levels looked a bit lower than normal last week, but nothing crazy heading into yesterday. Looks fairly wet going forward. This week probably features lots of sct aftn shwrs/iso thunder.

[weatherwiz]

wow just saw there was an EF-2 tornado in New York (Sullivan County) Saturday. I think I saw something that we are off to a historic start in terms of confirmed tornadoes to start the year (even ahead of 2011, but remember it was pretty quiet that year until late April and May). Already an Ef3 in Delaware and an EF2 in New York and were not even into severe season yet. 

[IrishRob17]

3 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

wow just saw there was an EF-2 tornado in New York (Sullivan County) Saturday. I think I saw something that we are off to a historic start in terms of confirmed tornadoes to start the year (even ahead of 2011, but remember it was pretty quiet that year until late April and May). Already an Ef3 in Delaware and an EF2 in New York and were not even into severe season yet. 

The one Saturday had a path of close to 10 miles too

[CoastalWx]

4 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

wow just saw there was an EF-2 tornado in New York (Sullivan County) Saturday. I think I saw something that we are off to a historic start in terms of confirmed tornadoes to start the year (even ahead of 2011, but remember it was pretty quiet that year until late April and May). Already an Ef3 in Delaware and an EF2 in New York and were not even into severe season yet. 

It's been a quiet 10 years in the tornado dept. We've had several bursts of events producing EF1s-3s for sure. Haven't had a lot of violent ones though. 

[weatherwiz]

1 minute ago, IrishRob17 said:

The one Saturday had a path of close to 10 miles too

Pretty impressive for around here.

Just now, CoastalWx said:

It's been a quiet 10 years in the tornado dept. We've had several bursts of events producing EF1s-3s for sure. Haven't had a lot of violent ones though. 

Yes, there has been a definite drop in violent tornadoes over the past decade (though maybe up a bit this year?). What's really interesting too is aren't tornado related deaths up a bit?

[Typhoon Tip]

40 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

EVERYTHING is saturated these days. I was thinking the same, how did it look with the naked eye? 

I did see an iPhone video taken outside of Fairbanks Alaska a month or so ago, ...when a sneaking CME that for some reason escaped the detection methods ... slammed the Earth out of nowhere ( or it may have been one of those "co-rotating" deals).  The guy was moving the vantage of the phone's camera around an undulatory sky of light curtains while crowd oo's and ah's were audible in the background. He was offering some baser hick expletives of his own... 

That's in Alaska though. 

The last time I saw unaided aurora my self (mid latitudes) was way back in 1985 around 11pm in Rockport Mass, looking NNE from Long Beach.  It was very low on the horizon and you had to stare for a while to see it or gain much impression of any irregular light pulsations...  Prior to that, I saw it several times in Michigan growing up a young lad.  Oh wait ...I forgot. I went back there for an autumn in 1990 and saw a pretty good display that was higher in the sky ... But, that looked nothing like these renderings we are seeing on social media so frequently nowadays.

I suspect the ambient light pollution from PWM-ATL east of Appalachia also represents certain interference problems for ooing and aahing caliber displays, too. 

[WxWatcher007]

At least here in light pollution heavy central CT, it was much more faint. Barely visible. But that’s beside the point? The fact that it’s even visible here…and quite visible in darker locations as far as Texas speaks for itself? 

[tamarack]

16 hours ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Going back well over a decade... I've been noting a remarkably tight correlation between space weather activity, and New England's inability to ever see them due to terrestrial weather interference.

Truth.  We're about zero-for-5 for the most recent total lunar eclipses, along with conjunctions, aurora, even passages of ISS.  I'm sadly pessimistic for next April 8.

RA finally reached here about 10 last evening, had a few mod/hvy showers before midnight but only 0.48" thru 7 this morning, -RA/DZ since with temp ~40.  Into each NNE spring some mank must fall.

[Typhoon Tip]

21 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

At least here in light pollution heavy central CT, it was much more faint. Barely visible. But that’s beside the point? The fact that it’s even visible here…and quite visible in darker locations as far as Texas speaks for itself? 

Well yeah...  it is what is.  Not to discredit one being able to see - or ridicule the significance of the event ( I was initially poking fun at the audience seekers out there that use technology... blah blah). 

I've driven I84 at night a few times, though... It seemed to me once 10 or so miles up the way heading out of Hartford, that sky up there gets pretty damn dark though. If "ambient light pollution" in this context means diffused artificial light, that would cloak ( ironic oxymoron -) the existence of smaller nooks that may offer some better viewing chances.  sure. 

Man, I just wonder how a Carrington -scaled event would compete with the illumination grid of the planet. Well...heh, ultimately it would win of course. Because within an hour or two of onset, the grid sectors would start blinking off in chunks... but for a time, would you be able to see those unworldly spirits that seem like they could almost touch the tree tops in downtown NYC, or how 'bout "Lost" to Morality Vegas - that'd be the shits.

You ever see those satellite/night displays of the landscape, and the artificial lights looking nerve cells replete with dendritic connections to nearby other nerve cells...  digress

[wxeyeNH]

56 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

was that witnessed by unaided eye, though?

... with camera tech the way it is, and pervasive these days, ... these auroras are photoed by way of timed exposures, that are then rendered to Twitter and other social media platforms under the auspices of, 'look what I saw last night' - leaving the part out that they could not have "seen" anything without these devices.

I rarely see a disclaimer or any comment at all really that says, 'I am not actually worthy of the center of attention I'm seeking, because I could not have seen this without high tech assistance' 

lol.  No but these long exposures can "see" auroras that glancing at the nocturnal firmament alone more commonly cannot detect.

You are spot on.  It seems these days everyone uses either time exposures or some post processing.  It is very hard to know what you would see just looking up at the sky.  In general photography is blurring into art a bit.  The picture from Cromwell had to be one of these.  That bright patch could never be that white.

[mreaves]

It looks like 1.90" will be it for the first round of misery.  This week looks no bueno.

[WxWatcher007]

13 minutes ago, wxeyeNH said:

You are spot on.  It seems these days everyone uses either time exposures or some post processing.  It is very hard to know what you would see just looking up at the sky.  In general photography is blurring into art a bit.  The picture from Cromwell had to be one of these.  That bright patch could never be that white.

Two years ago I was in Maine and saw the Milky Way for the first time. It was nothing like the what you’d see in some processed photos, but it didn’t need to be. It was still a ribbon of light across the sky, albeit fainter, and it was a legitimately spiritual experience for me. 

It’s part of the reason why I don’t take a lot of video during chases. Experiencing it cannot be replicated. Often times it’s better to put down the phone and just see with your own eyes.

[powderfreak]

48 minutes ago, wxeyeNH said:

You are spot on.  It seems these days everyone uses either time exposures or some post processing.  It is very hard to know what you would see just looking up at the sky.  In general photography is blurring into art a bit.  The picture from Cromwell had to be one of these.  That bright patch could never be that white.

Isn’t that what it is though?  I have no problems with the time lapses… I mean look up at the sky at night and it doesn’t look like the starry photos with Milky Way exploding overhead like a good nighttime lapse shows…. Or extended fireworks time lapse, etc.

I guess I’ve always thought of photography as trying to elicit an emotional response, like all art tries.  No one wants to print and put a 3 foot photo on their living room wall of what the naked eye sees at midnight looking around, lol.

I guess it depends on what you are going for.  I like that you can line up half a dozen photographers and get half a dozen interpretations of the same scene.

[Typhoon Tip]

Mm... the issue ( originally aroused for sarcastic humor) isn't art value. It was about when not being clear that what is being shown is intended for "art"; that could be a problem. 

Pointing out the obvious here: We don't know what is the 'organic' experience, then ... Which in fact means more in truth, as to the extent of what reality is. 

When someone titles and contents a Tweet without recognizing the exaggeration/doctoring due to technology, merely broadcasting their vantage point of the event, that is manipulative (i.e. can and usually ends up being, divisive )

You know.. op ed: we live a media soaked impression of what reality is, already.  Which has turned that "could be a problem" above into a whopping IS. These fantastic Tweet phenomenon, regardless of aurora this ... or deep fake that... whatever, they are just microcosms of the same practice of the "Industrial Media Complex."  Media makes money. The Tweeter gets their notoriety... Whatever the currency sought, aside ... it is disingenuous in either sense. 

The whole practice ( "really" haha) markets their "recreation" to the blind - so to speak ... - those whom ( and unfortunately, this appears to be proven > 50% of the populous) are initially less if not totally unprepared to objectively scrutinize what they are seeing/hearing...  The commoner's don't have a chance.  ha. I mean, the technology is beyond their scope of understanding, so the dazzling display is more akin to the first protohominid lifting a burning flame.

 

[dendrite]

I like when I look back at old COOP forms from the early/mid 1900s and see "aurora" in the notes. You know damn well they were seeing it with the naked eye back then.

[Sey-Mour Snow]

12z GFS is a bit wet from Saturday night into early next week.. 

[powderfreak]

41 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Mm... the issue ( originally aroused for sarcastic humor) isn't art value. It was about when not being clear that what is being shown is intended for "art"; that could be a problem. 

Yeah, you just want people to say "my photo of XYZ"... not "This is what Joe Public saw of XYZ with the naked eye" like it's a science project.  

I mean anyone who has ever picked up a National Geographic mag or watched Planet Earth etc and thinks they are just scenes the naked eye sees are lying to themselves, ha.  

Most of it also comes down to FOMO...fear of missing out.  Did I miss that beautiful display?  Or would I not have seen it that way?  If not, then I don't feel like I missed anything.  If yes, then damn I wish I saw that, ha.

[wxeyeNH]

45F  Moderate rain showers with drizzle in between.  Yet these are low clouds and I can see blue patches between the stratus with the sun coming out while it is raining.  The sun is so strong I'm getting ground fog like in winter over snow in a humid airmass.  Kind of unusual.

About .35" since last evening and 2.45" for the whole event

Going back to the Aurora,  the big event in 2003?  I was up here.  Digital photography just begining.  With the naked eye it was awe inspiring.  Extremely noticeable.  Everyone was taking about it.  So, yes it can be that bright.  Last night was so exasperating for me as I like Astronomy.  Even the best Aurora can't compare to a full total eclipse.

[Brewbeer]

2 hours ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Two years ago I was in Maine and saw the Milky Way for the first time. It was nothing like the what you’d see in some processed photos, but it didn’t need to be. It was still a ribbon of light across the sky, albeit fainter, and it was a legitimately spiritual experience for me. 

This, nothing like the full Milky way splayed across the darkest sky imaginable.  Nothing I've seen comes close the dark sky at Mt. Katahdin in Baxter State Park in northern Maine. Truely amazing 

[CoastalWx]

I hate getting into that art debate, because many photographers get defensive when you call out the saturation. 

 

For me, I'm talking about those real egregious examples. To the point where it's completely incorrect in terms of how the visions appear. I can't tell you how many times I've seen pics of "Boston Common in Autumn.." and it's just laughable. Just completely wrong. That stuff I have a problem with. At that point you're just throwing it out there to disrobe to how many likes and retweets you get. 

[CoastalWx]

I've seen pics from Eric and Scott (Mainejayhawk and Powderfreak). Those are high quality shots from a good camera with maybe a hint of augmentation....and that is perfectly fine. Perhaps they do nothing to them.  I love their pics. 

[Damage In Tolland]

3 hours ago, CoastalWx said:

 

Tough stretch for the KFS. 

Havent they though? This one was supposed to be 40’s and rain for a week lol

[MaineJayhawk]

Just now, CoastalWx said:

I've seen pics from Eric and Scott (Mainejayhawk and Powderfreak). Those are high quality shots from a good camera with maybe a hint of augmentation....and that is perfectly fine. Perhaps they do nothing to them.  I love their pics. 

I use Lightroom and Photoshop liberally, but that's because I shoot at low light conditions and need to bring detail out of the shadows.  Bright sunny days need no help.  I haven't yet shot the aurora, but when I do it'll be a long exposure much like with the Milky Way