Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,598
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    PublicWorks143
    Newest Member
    PublicWorks143
    Joined

2/13 Significant/Major Winter Storm Discussion & Observations


Northof78
 Share

Recommended Posts

After seeing the 0z GFS, GGEM, ICON, and UKMET. I have not seen enough to move away from my initial thinking that this will could be a light accumulation event (after rain) in New York City. By that, I mean 1" to perhaps 3" of snow. Those numbers can be refined either upward or downward following tomorrow's guidance, which could begin to move into better consensus.

It is encouraging that there remain some global models with at least a moderate event (after slashing 10:1 maps by 50%) in and around New York City, particularly the higher-scoring GGEM and UKMET. The 2/10 4z NBE also showed 3.0" for NYC, 2.6" for Newark, and 3.5" for White Plains.

It remains concerning that much of the storm could occur with NYC's temperature holding at or above 35 degrees (the GFS MOS was not yet available at the time of this post). The elevated temperatures suggest that this will likely be a slushy low ratio snowfall (5:1 or below) that limits accumulations in New York City and Newark. Better rates and accumulations would be likely north and west of those cities.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do some of you ever stop to think?  Don't you think the same people you see down on this threat (minus snowman19) would be honking if they saw big potential?  Of course they would.  This isn't about be jaded bc of the last 2 pathetic winters.  This about a crappy setup with a marginal airmass.  It's also ok to be optimistic but it also blinds many.  We're all here to talk about the weather.  There's many posters here with 20+ years experience as hobbyists or meteorologists.  You should all know by now who you should take seriously and who you shouldn't. Why do so many of you act like someone is taking away your snow?  It's wild.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 10
  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

After seeing the 0z GFS, GGEM, ICON, and UKMET. I have not seen enough to move away from my initial thinking that this will could be a light accumulation event (after rain) in New York City. By that, I mean 1" to perhaps 3" of snow. Those numbers can be refined either upward or downward following tomorrow's guidance, which could begin to move into better consensus.

It is encouraging that there remain some global models with at least a moderate event (after slashing 10:1 maps by 50%) in and around New York City, particularly the higher-scoring GGEM and UKMET. The 2/10 4z NBE also showed 3.0" for NYC, 2.6" for Newark, and 3.5" for White Plains.

It remains concerning that much of the storm could occur with NYC's temperature holding at or above 35 degrees (the GFS MOS was not yet available at the time of this post). The elevated temperatures suggest that this will likely be a slushy low ratio snowfall (5:1 or below) that limits accumulations in New York City and Newark. Better rates and accumulations would be likely north and west of those cities.

Don - all valid thermal/column/accumulation concerns, but if the modeling is correct and along 95 we get 1-1.5" per hour snowfall rates with almost the entire column below 32F, but just the surface maybe at 33-35F, I would think we'd actually do at least Kuchera ratios or higher, i.e., 0.7-0.8, as the falling crystals would likely be decent dendrites from the DGZ to near the surface and only melt a little near the surface, hopefully not enough to lead to significant compaction and low ratios. 

I liken this to some of the late March/April storms we've had with high intensity, but decent ratios (not 0.5 at least)/accumulations although that's relying on memory and with your treasure trove of data you have access to, perhaps those storms did have poor ratios (although decent accumulations were seen). If the models verify and we do get at least ok ratios, then we could be looking at 6" or more for 95 - and with heavy paste, we could then have substantial power outages. Will be interesting to see.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

Don - all valid thermal/column/accumulation concerns, but if the modeling is correct and along 95 we get 1-1.5" per hour snowfall rates with almost the entire column below 32F, but just the surface maybe at 33-35F, I would think we'd actually do at least Kuchera ratios or higher, i.e., 0.7-0.8, as the falling crystals would likely be decent dendrites from the DGZ to near the surface and only melt a little near the surface, hopefully not enough to lead to significant compaction and low ratios. 

I liken this to some of the late March/April storms we've had with high intensity, but decent ratios (not 0.5 at least)/accumulations although that's relying on memory and with your treasure trove of data you have access to, perhaps those storms did have poor ratios (although decent accumulations were seen). If the models verify and we do get at least ok ratios, then we could be looking at 6" or more for 95 - and with heavy paste, we could then have substantial power outages. Will be interesting to see.  

At the height of the storm, ratios could be fairly decent. The late-season storms with heavy snow (quarter mile or less visibility) were above 5:1. At that time, the temperature was typically 32-33. Hopefully, the later guidance will show somewhat colder readings.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NEG NAO said:

Some will be excited about this

sn10_acc-imp.us_ne.png

Most of us haven't been impressed with the setup, but who knows. Maybe we're due to get lucky with one after a lousy couple years. I'm still not getting my hopes up too high, but the models did look better tonight. We need a nice snowstorm around here, so let's hope this keeps trending better tomorrow. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, winterwx21 said:

Most of us haven't been impressed with the setup, but who knows. Maybe we're due to get lucky with one after a lousy couple years. I'm still not getting my hopes up too high, but the models did look better tonight. We need a nice snowstorm around here, so let's hope this keeps trending better tomorrow. 

I myself don't care for heavy wet snow at my advanced age - I still think it will only end up being a couple slushy inches near the coast .........

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, brooklynwx99 said:

you are relying on a potent 500mb shortwave here… the ECMWF accomplishes that with a great 500mb pass. i do think that it’s notable that the ECMWF is digging in under 96 hours out 

IMG_4750.thumb.png.97626f36566a58c2e90d56a68c349f30.png

faEsO46.gif

Slightly delayed this run.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, donsutherland1 said:

At the height of the storm, ratios could be fairly decent. The late-season storms with heavy snow (quarter mile or less visibility) were above 5:1. At that time, the temperature was typically 32-33. Hopefully, the later guidance will show somewhat colder readings.

The Euro gets down to 32F along 95 by 7 am and most of the snow then falls with temps 31-32F along 95 and colder inland, which is why ratios are near 10:1 along 95 and higher than that inland.  The other models do look to bottom out at the 33-34F range around 7 am and are likely there for 3-4 hours on either side of that with the heavy snow, but hard to know that with models only showing temp data every 6 hours and temps being in the mid 30s at 1 am and 1 pm.  Need more granular data...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RU848789 said:

The Euro gets down to 32F along 95 by 7 am and most of the snow then falls with temps 31-32F along 95 and colder inland, which is why ratios are near 10:1 along 95 and higher than that inland.  The other models do look to bottom out at the 33-34F range around 7 am and are likely there for 3-4 hours on either side of that with the heavy snow, but hard to know that with models only showing temp data every 6 hours and temps being in the mid 30s at 1 am and 1 pm.  Need more granular data...

The most recent example we have of this is April 2, 2018.  We don't need to get to 32.... but it needs to be 33-34 at least,  35-36 won't cut it for more than an inch or two (at the very most.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SBUWX23 said:

vertically stacked lows are decaying and do not produce the same dynamics. you want the mid level loves to pass to your south. 

I know but it seems like unstacked lows always seem to mix or change to rain on the south shore. There hasn't been an all snow 6"+ storm here since 2017 or 2018.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TriPol said:

Anyone remember the vday storm of 2007? We got a couple of inches… of sleet! It was by far the worst sleet storm I’ve ever seen. Any chance of a redux?

NO way in hell. completely different setup with arctic air already in place from clippers in 2007.  Here is your reminder- from the old weatherman  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_2007_North_American_blizzard

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...