Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

Two Mdt to high impact events NYC subforum; wknd Jan 6-7 Incl OBS, and mid week Jan 9-10 (incl OBS). Total water equiv by 00z/11 general 2", possibly 6" includes snow-ice mainly interior. RVR flood potential increases Jan 10 and beyond. Damaging wind.


wdrag
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

That doesn’t answer the question…

 

yesterday morning you were using the ukmet illustrate a point because of its warm inland track. Now, it has since went to a cold snowy and you are cherry picking the 06z gfs with surface temps…

Because both sets of solutions are showing the same challenges with the warm air. The first challenge is a more wrapped up system which could correct NW under 72 hrs. The GFS has the 2nd challenge with a trough in the West pumping the ridge and temps in the mid 30s. But it takes longer for the system to consolidate so the surface low is weaker. While it’s still too early, the RGEM is weaker and more strung out with the low than the GEM near the end of it’s run. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, bluewave said:

Because both sets of solutions are showing the same challenges with the warm air. The first challenge is a more wrapped up system which could correct NW under 72 hrs. The GFS has the 2nd challenge with a trough in the West pumping the ridge and temps in the mid 30s. But it takes longer for the system to consolidate so the surface low is weaker. While it’s still too early, the RGEM is weaker and more strung out with the low than the GEM near the end of it’s run. 

But let’s ignore all the models getting snowier for the region? 

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

No ones ignoring anything. We’re still 3-4 days away and plenty can change. We’re in the Goldilocks area where the coast can stay snow and it’s heavy on models like the Euro. The GFS has light precip and an initial easterly flow which warms up the city and coast, and the lighter precip probably can’t cool the column enough. Other models yesterday (which we can easily go back to if the confluence starts to weaken and/or low strengthens) showed a further NW track which screws us that way. But there is that tiny Goldilocks track/outcome which most models went to yesterday. But I’m still far from confident that actually happens. I remember Dec 2020, March 2017 etc where they were too SE at this timeframe. 

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

9 minutes ago, jm1220 said:

No ones ignoring anything. We’re still 3-4 days away and plenty can change. We’re in the Goldilocks area where the coast can stay snow and it’s heavy on models like the Euro. The GFS has light precip and an initial easterly flow which warms up the city and coast, and the lighter precip probably can’t cool the column enough. Other models yesterday (which we can easily go back to if the confluence starts to weaken and/or low strengthens) showed a further NW track which screws us that way. But there is that tiny Goldilocks track/outcome which most models went to yesterday. But I’m still far from confident that actually happens. I remember Dec 2020, March 2017 etc where they were too SE at this timeframe. 

It would be great if we had the cold airmass that we did in 2020 for this storm. Highs in the low 30s and lows around 20° have produced some memorable snowstorms for us. 
 

Data for NY CITY CENTRAL PARK, NY
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.
Date
Max Temperature 
Min Temperature 
Snowfall 
2020-12-16 31 24 6.5
2020-12-17 33 24 4.0
2020-12-18 32 24 0.0
2020-12-19 32 20 0.0
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, bluewave said:

It’s tough to rely on those 10:1 maps with marginal temperatures as the positive snow depth charts are much lower.

 

Snow depth charts haven't been accurate in the past. You can't deny the fact that the models are looking more colder and wintry even for the coast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Snow depth charts haven't been accurate in the past. You can't deny the fact that the models are looking more colder and wintry even for the coast.

I don’t trust those 10:1 charts in marginal temperatures. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, bluewave said:

Why would you ignore a cold bias which has been showing up all season? 

Because not every storm is similiar . We have a a good cold air source up north providing enough cold air to our region.

Can it change? Sure but things are looking up right now. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bluewave said:

I don’t trust those 10:1 charts in marginal temperatures. 

I think 6+ isn't going to happen in NYC but a few inches might not be out of the question if we get a strong vort .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Snow depth charts haven't been accurate in the past. You can't deny the fact that the models are looking more colder and wintry even for the coast.

We’re not getting 10-1 here. If temps are 32 or 33 it may be 8-1. We still have the problem of easterly flow off the water. If we get a good track and precip intensity it can be overcome, but there’s a very small window between too strong/NW or too weak/suppressed. Where we see models now probably isn’t the final answer. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MJO812 said:

Because not every storm is similiar . We have a a good cold air source up north providing enough cold air to our region.

Can it change? Sure but things are looking up right now. 

 

A good cold air source wouldn’t have highs in the upper 30s. Marginal air masses leave less leeway for significant snowfall from short term model changes. 


82345B19-862B-4257-8F5D-DE91CD8B397B.thumb.jpeg.2dca7ed548235e5aba80b9b86c5705a5.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jm1220 said:

We’re not getting 10-1 here. If temps are 32 or 33 it may be 8-1. We still have the problem of easterly flow off the water. If we get a good track and precip intensity it can be overcome, but there’s a very small window between too strong/NW or too weak/suppressed. Where we see models now probably isn’t the final answer. 

Of course not but people shouldn't downplay what the models are showing right now .

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jm1220 said:

We’re not getting 10-1 here. If temps are 32 or 33 it may be 8-1. We still have the problem of easterly flow off the water. If we get a good track and precip intensity it can be overcome, but there’s a very small window between too strong/NW or too weak/suppressed. Where we see models now probably isn’t the final answer. 

The people using 10:1 ratio maps in a setup like this and thinking that’s actually going to verify are going to be shocked at the actual result. They are going to be grossly inaccurate. This is why the total positive snowfall maps are night and day different

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, bluewave said:

A good cold air source wouldn’t have highs in the upper 30s. Marginal air masses leave less leeway for significant snowfall from short term model changes. 


82345B19-862B-4257-8F5D-DE91CD8B397B.thumb.jpeg.2dca7ed548235e5aba80b9b86c5705a5.jpeg

yeah urban areas would see white rain at best with those temps unless it's heavy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Of course not but people shouldn't downplay what the models are showing right now .

 

Bluewave is just telling it like it is. I know many don't want to hear it but  the airmass is definitely marginal. 

He's just illustrating the challenges. I would honestly be surprised to see much for the coast. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SRRTA22 said:

Even half of that, Im sure all of us would be happy with 3-6" , hopefully we hold and can break the streak

Then again, if it is going to change to rain, or melt within 24 hours, may as well keep the streak going?

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

The people using 10:1 ratio maps in a setup like this and thinking that’s actually going to verify are going to be shocked at the actual result. They are going to be grossly inaccurate. This is why the total positive snowfall maps are night and day different

North and west where it’s colder is more likely to be 10-1 but anything like that here is a pipe dream. I’d be thrilled near the city with anything over a couple inches. North and west though, especially near/NW of 287 is likely sitting pretty. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, bluewave said:

Because both sets of solutions are showing the same challenges with the warm air. The first challenge is a more wrapped up system which could correct NW under 72 hrs. The GFS has the 2nd challenge with a trough in the West pumping the ridge and temps in the mid 30s. But it takes longer for the system to consolidate so the surface low is weaker. While it’s still too early, the RGEM is weaker and more strung out with the low than the GEM near the end of it’s run. 

This is a good point, and a reason why it is USUALLY hard to get an all snow event in this region and why our areas yearly average is only approx 30 inches.

Look at all other years outside of 2000 through 2018 and 1955 through 1969, very hard to get all snow/KU events on a consistent basis. 

I remember getting amped up in February 1994 because I was FINALLY getting an all snow event without the risk of sleet! It was ALWAYS cutter, hugger or slider. 

Also, you can cut the country into three potential trough locations. East coast west coast and central/plains. That's a 1/3 chance right there. In addition, I believe that west coast troughing happens more often through history than east coast. 

We are in an RNA cycle unfortunately and we will have to thread the needle more often than not.

On a positive note, when it does happen it makes it that much sweeter! Getting a 6 inch event in the 80s and 90s was like getting a foot 2000 through 2018.

Leaving on another positive note. If it can snow in February 2018 in a sea of 60 and 70 degree days, it can snow this year. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Brian5671 said:

yeah urban areas would see white rain at best with those temps unless it's heavy

It's January , not March with the sun angle .

Gfs wouldn't work here anyway but Euro would for a few inches.

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, EastonSN+ said:

Leaving on another positive note. If it can snow in February 2018 in a sea of 60 and 70 degree days, it can snow this year

I never said that it couldn’t snow. Just that those 10:1 charts look overdone for such a marginal airmass. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, bluewave said:

I don’t trust those 10:1 charts in marginal temperatures. 

There is no law in the annals of physics that states that snow has to fall at a ratio of 10:1.  There seems to be a lot of people who believe that it does however that is not the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

The people using 10:1 ratio maps in a setup like this and thinking that’s actually going to verify are going to be shocked at the actual result. They are going to be grossly inaccurate. This is why the total positive snowfall maps are night and day different

Do you know what variables are used to calculate this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tatamy said:

There is no law in the annals of physics that states that snow has to fall at a ratio of 10:1.  There seems to be a lot of people who believe that it does however that is not the case.

Yeah, two issues in play. The actual ratios and the raw model cold biases. But even the MOS numbers have been too cold at times this winter. That’s why I wouldn’t  even think about specific accumulations until under 72 hrs or even 24 hrs in a marginal situation like this.

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...