February 2025

[Yanksfan]

16 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

People want results instead of pretty Day 10+ maps. 

You can scream epic or amazing pattern all you want but unless something happens it's just fantasy.

Our amazing January pattern gave us almost nothing 

Great post. Someone in the NE forum several years ago said it best during a high potential period for snow, “You can’t shovel potential.”

[EastonSN+]

13 minutes ago, Yanksfan said:

Great post. Someone in the NE forum several years ago said it best during a high potential period for snow, “You can’t shovel potential.”

I disagree with that post that was provided. The whole point of having these tools at our disposal are to have an idea of what type of pattern is coming up. It is a fact that it is a better than average pattern to get snowfall. What is the point of developing this technology if all we're going to do is say oh darn it didn't snow I'm never looking at the future again and see a good pattern and think it's going to snow. 

End users should know better than to think that a better than average pattern is going to guarantee a great outcome, same as looking at a pattern that's going to give us 70° weather is definitely not going to give us snow same as February 2018. 

Our alternative would be to stop developing the technology and stop utilizing the long range forecasting. That is taking a step back in progress. 

As a hobbyist I want to share the excitement of a good period that is coming up. If it doesn't pan out and we get nothing or close to nothing I'm not going to stop looking at the long range forecast and say hope it's never going to work again. 

Never understood why posters want to post their feelings instead of posting perhaps a counter to the h5 look with additional material to explain why it won't work out other than it hasn't so far so why should it in the future.

[Monty]

1 hour ago, EastonSN+ said:

I disagree with that post that was provided. The whole point of having these tools at our disposal are to have an idea of what type of pattern is coming up. It is a fact that it is a better than average pattern to get snowfall. What is the point of developing this technology if all we're going to do is say oh darn it didn't snow I'm never looking at the future again and see a good pattern and think it's going to snow. 

End users should know better than to think that a better than average pattern is going to guarantee a great outcome, same as looking at a pattern that's going to give us 70° weather is definitely not going to give us snow same as February 2018. 

Our alternative would be to stop developing the technology and stop utilizing the long range forecasting. That is taking a step back in progress. 

As a hobbyist I want to share the excitement of a good period that is coming up. If it doesn't pan out and we get nothing or close to nothing I'm not going to stop looking at the long range forecast and say hope it's never going to work again. 

Never understood why posters want to post their feelings instead of posting perhaps a counter to the h5 look with additional material to explain why it won't work out other than it hasn't so far so why should it in the future.

If we eliminated feelings posts we'd lose half the Boards activity including pretty much the entire Libertybell catalogue 

[LibertyBell]

2 hours ago, EastonSN+ said:

I disagree with that post that was provided. The whole point of having these tools at our disposal are to have an idea of what type of pattern is coming up. It is a fact that it is a better than average pattern to get snowfall. What is the point of developing this technology if all we're going to do is say oh darn it didn't snow I'm never looking at the future again and see a good pattern and think it's going to snow. 

End users should know better than to think that a better than average pattern is going to guarantee a great outcome, same as looking at a pattern that's going to give us 70° weather is definitely not going to give us snow same as February 2018. 

Our alternative would be to stop developing the technology and stop utilizing the long range forecasting. That is taking a step back in progress. 

As a hobbyist I want to share the excitement of a good period that is coming up. If it doesn't pan out and we get nothing or close to nothing I'm not going to stop looking at the long range forecast and say hope it's never going to work again. 

Never understood why posters want to post their feelings instead of posting perhaps a counter to the h5 look with additional material to explain why it won't work out other than it hasn't so far so why should it in the future.

there are levels to everything, it's why some winters are bad, some are average, while others are good and some are truly great.

Some winters you just know are slam dunk great like 1995-96 and 2002-03.  They're extremely rare.  You can have a good pattern but it's still not a great one.  Sort of like having a good player, but you wouldn't say he's the next Michael Jordan.

 

[LibertyBell]

2 hours ago, Monty said:

If we eliminated feelings posts we'd lose half the Boards activity including pretty much the entire Libertybell catalogue 

the greatest of human activities are the result of feelings pal.  Otherwise you wouldn't have genuises like Mozart and Leonardo Da Vinci.  You'd just have a bunch of mediocre calculator jockeys / accountants looking at lines on a chart and trying to figure out which line correlates to what outcome 2 weeks down the line when chaos is far more important than any correlation.

But you probably didn't even understand any of what that means.....

[dseagull]

11 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

the greatest of human activities are the result of feelings pal.  Otherwise you wouldn't have genuises like Mozart and Leonardo Da Vinci.  You'd just have a bunch of mediocre calculator jockeys / accountants looking at lines on a chart and trying to figure out which line correlates to what outcome 2 weeks down the line when chaos is far more important than any correlation.

But you probably didn't even understand any of what that means.....

Facts don't care about your feelings.   Science doesn't care about your feelings. 

But... Tracking threats and developing an initial interest in the field of meteorology, learning to analyze the tools at hand, and then occasionally enjoying the outcome is fun.  Fun is a feeling, so I agree with you there.  ...pal

[LibertyBell]

15 minutes ago, dseagull said:

Facts don't care about your feelings.   Science doesn't care about your feelings. 

But... Tracking threats and developing an initial interest in the field of meteorology, learning to analyze the tools at hand, and then occasionally enjoying the outcome is fun.  Fun is a feeling, so I agree with you there.  ...pal

It's not science if you don't understand chaos theory, pal.  And you can't track something 7 days out let alone or 10 or 14 days.  There's literally nothing to track that far in advance unless you're tracking an index value and that's not tracking anything.  Tracking something 7+ days out That's not science-- that's nonsense.  Learn the difference between correlation, causation and how chaos is much stronger than any index and learn that the effectivity of these tools is EXTREMELY limited and you'll be disappointed far less often.

As an example of the limitations of these tools, 5-7 days ago the outlook for February was entirely different than what it is now.  This isn't astronomy, it's not an exact science, it's not even close.

[weatherpruf]

11 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

It's not science if you don't understand chaos theory, pal.  And you can't track something 7 days out let alone or 10 or 14 days.  That's not science-- that's nonsense.  Learn the difference between correlation, causation and how chaos is much stronger than any index and learn that the effectivity of these tools is EXTREMELY limited and you'll be disappointed far less often.

As an example of the limitations of these tools, 5-7 days ago the outlook for February was entirely different than what it is now.  This isn't astronomy, it's not an exact science, it's not even close.

It's actually comical. Like chasing ghosts.

[LibertyBell]

Just now, weatherpruf said:

It's actually comical. Like chasing ghosts.

Logic is an important part of any scientific quest and logic shows us that you just can't rely on any particular outcome.

Some people are treating something that might be slightly more likely than not as some kind of scientific certitude.  You can't track something that doesn't even exist yet.

 

[weatherpruf]

5 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Logic is an important part of any scientific quest and logic shows us that you just can't rely on any particular outcome.

Some people are treating something that might be slightly more likely than not as some kind of scientific certitude.  You can't track something that doesn't even exist yet.

 

These boards are fun to read, but rarely do I find them very predictive of actual outcomes. 

[psv88]

1 minute ago, weatherpruf said:

These boards are fun to read, but rarely do I find them very predictive of actual outcomes. 

Most are weenies and some are trolls. Some are objective and are pretty good. 

[weatherpruf]

8 minutes ago, psv88 said:

Most are weenies and some are trolls. Some are objective and are pretty good. 

This week is a perfect example; the fact is that nothing of major significance has really occurred for many of us, and doesn't look to either. 

[NYER72]

Hello!  Non expert here but LOVE these forums!  how many times have we seen "Big Snow" in models a week out and we get 1-3 inches (NY Metro here). I'm no expert but a long time lurker on forums like this, so been there, seen it, got the t Shirt!. Anything over 3-4 inches in the city appears to be something special in recent years. In 17 years of living here I can count snowfalls of 1 foot on one hand. It will be what it will be!

[coastalplainsnowman]

44 minutes ago, weatherpruf said:

These boards are fun to read, but rarely do I find them very predictive of actual outcomes. 

I don't think that tells the whole story though.  What these boards definitely provide is that anyone who follows closely here will almost *never* be surprised by a weather event.  You can see them up to a mile away, or 360 hours, to be exact.  Sure, they often don't materialize, but  I never see a non-layman on here calling anything a certainty outside 72 hours. When they do materialize though, it's a thing of beauty.  When that L appears out of nowhere off the NC coast within a few hours of when a model predicted it 120 hours prior, that's pretty cool.  But if that same storm travels 25 W of where it was predicted to go, some will complain that everything s*cks.  It reminds of the Louis CK bit where there's a guy on a plane who just learned about the miracle of in-flight internet, and when it goes down he starts complaining as if it was a birthright.

[TJW014]

22 minutes ago, NYER72 said:

Hello!  Non expert here but LOVE these forums!  how many times have we seen "Big Snow" in models a week out and we get 1-3 inches (NY Metro here). I'm no expert but a long time lurker on forums like this, so been there, seen it, got the t Shirt!. Anything over 3-4 inches in the city appears to be something special in recent years. In 17 years of living here I can count snowfalls of 1 foot on one hand. It will be what it will be!

NYC would probably have over a 100" seasonal average if Day 5-10 maps verified every time. 

 

[SnoSki14]

It's going to snow. Ensembles continue to hit us. GFS OP just had another weenie run. 

It's a matter of which system gets us. I think our moods would shift if we could get a nice 2-4" event tonight 

[Yanksfan]

5 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

It's going to snow. Ensembles continue to hit us. GFS OP just had another weenie run. 

It's a matter of which system gets us. I think our moods would shift if we could get a nice 2-4" event tonight 

 Everybody needs to chill. Any individual OP run can’t handle all the little nuances from the bombardment of waves that it’s trying to decipher. Look at the GFS for instance. It’s flip flopping like a fish from run to run.  We need to focus on tonight only and forget about a storm that is days away. Once this upcoming storm passes and hopefully produces, then we can turn our attention to the next potential  event.

[bluewave]

6 hours ago, coastalplainsnowman said:

I don't think that tells the whole story though.  What these boards definitely provide is that anyone who follows closely here will almost *never* be surprised by a weather event.  You can see them up to a mile away, or 360 hours, to be exact.  Sure, they often don't materialize, but  I never see a non-layman on here calling anything a certainty outside 72 hours. When they do materialize though, it's a thing of beauty.  When that L appears out of nowhere off the NC coast within a few hours of when a model predicted it 120 hours prior, that's pretty cool.  But if that same storm travels 25 W of where it was predicted to go, some will complain that everything s*cks.  It reminds of the Louis CK bit where there's a guy on a plane who just learned about the miracle of in-flight internet, and when it goes down he starts complaining as if it was a birthright.

We are just following model forecasts which have improved greatly since the 70s and 80s. Then we take into account what the recent model biases have been. But no matter how much long range model forecasts improve, a 10 to 15 day forecast is always going to have some errors due to the nature of modeling.

We live very close to where continental air masses interact with the Gulf Stream to our Southeast. So my guess is that this is one reason snowfall details usually have to wait with snowfall until the short term. Models just can’t pin down snowfall details over a 240 or 360 hr forecast period. So the best we can do is identify patterns would could potentially produce snow. It’s even harder with a rapid succession of systems like we are getting this month. 

Most 360 hr surprises in the 2020s have been toward warmer and less snowy as the time period approached. So this near record block forecast for mid-February wasn’t showing up on the models back on January 30th. But the general 500 mb  longwave  pattern will turn out to be correct. It’s always the nuisances and details within a pattern will vary. So while we can get excited about snowfall potential in a general pattern, it’s always going to come down to the shorter range details as to how much snow we get. 
 

Old 360 hr forecast had correct longwave 500 mb pattern but missed the record block near Greenland and the North Pole

New forecast 

Old forecast

[LibertyBell]

17 minutes ago, bluewave said:

We are just following model forecasts which have improved greatly since the 70s and 80s. Then we take into account what the recent model biases have been. But no matter how much long range model forecasts improve, a 10 to 15 day forecast is always going to have some errors due to the nature of modeling.

We live very close to where continental air masses interact with the Gulf Stream to our Southeast. So my guess is that this is one reason snowfall details usually have to wait with snowfall until the short term. Models just can’t pin down snowfall details over a 240 or 360 hr forecast period. So the best we can do is identify patterns would could potentially produce snow. It’s even harder with a rapid succession of systems like we are getting this month. 

Most 360 hr surprises in the 2020s have been toward warmer and less snowy as the time period approached. So this near record block forecast for mid-February wasn’t showing up on the models back on January 30th. But the general 500 mb  longwave  pattern will turn out to be correct. It’s always the nuisances and details within a pattern will vary. So while we can get excited about snowfall potential in a general pattern, it’s always going to come down to the shorter range details as to how much snow we get. 
 

Old 360 hr forecast had correct longwave 500 mb pattern but missed the record block near Greenland and the North Pole

New forecast 

Old forecast

Chris, how much does this anomalous block have to do with the Kara Block that just caused the record setting snowfall in northern Japan?

Other reasons why our midrange and longrange forecasting isn't more accurate is because of poor sampling in the oceans and in other parts of the world.  Our weather doesn't begin here, it begins on the other side of the world and over sparsely sampled ocean waters.

 

[bluewave]

Just now, LibertyBell said:

Chris, how much does this anomalous block have to do with the Kara Block that just caused the record setting snowfall in northern Japan?

Other reasons why our midrange and longrange forecasting isn't more accurate is because of poor sampling in the oceans and in other parts of the world.  Our weather doesn't begin here, it begins on the other side of the world and over sparsely sampled ocean wates.

 

That KB block shifted the whole pattern across the Northern Hemisphere this month. It’s forecast to retrograde back to near the North Pole over the next week. Notice how this is causing the global temperatures to finally drop below the record levels.

[LibertyBell]

1 minute ago, bluewave said:

That KB block shifted the whole pattern across the Northern Hemisphere this month. It’s forecast to retrograde back to near the North Pole over the next week. Notice how this is causing the global temperatures to finally drop below the record levels.

Kara Block = Black Swan event.  It also happened in the 2015-16 winter to turn that winter around from historically warm to historically snowy and cold.

[bluewave]

25 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Kara Block = Black Swan event.  It also happened in the 2015-16 winter to turn that winter around from historically warm to historically snowy and cold.

This time around we are still contending with the much faster Northern Stream of the Pacific Jet since 18-19. That winter had the great STJ to go with KB block retrograde back across the North Pole. So we are still dealing with the cutter, hugger, and suppressed Southern Stream storm tracks which make 30” snowstorms in NYC harder to come by.

[LibertyBell]

54 minutes ago, bluewave said:

This time around we are still contending with the much faster Northern Stream of the Pacific Jet since 18-19. That winter had the great STJ to go with KB block retrograde back across the North Pole. So we are still dealing with the cutter, hugger, and suppressed Southern Stream storm tracks which make 30” snowstorms in NYC harder to come by.

Maybe this is why we're seeing the modeling vary so much from run to run, it doesn't know how to properly handle the faster northern stream.  It originates from a data sparse region anyway.

[weatherpruf]

2 hours ago, SnoSki14 said:

It's going to snow. Ensembles continue to hit us. GFS OP just had another weenie run. 

It's a matter of which system gets us. I think our moods would shift if we could get a nice 2-4" event tonight 

Yes the mood would def shift. And, I hope you're right. You've not been bullish much this year IIRC.

[MJO812]

[weatherpruf]

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

Kara Block = Black Swan event.  It also happened in the 2015-16 winter to turn that winter around from historically warm to historically snowy and cold.

Well it was not historic except for one big ass KU; the rest of the year had nada in terms of serious events. But, i'd rather that than this. Not like we have a choice....

[forkyfork]

i wonder if the expanded hadley cell is one of the reasons we have a such a strong northern stream worldwide 

[SACRUS]

 

32 / 8 some high clouds moving out and clouds moving north from the system near the Mid Atlantic.  1 - 3 inches of liquid precip over the next 7 days (through 2/15) we'll see how much can fall as frozen.  Overall colder than normal for the week as a whole.  Stronger cold towards the 18th.

 

[SACRUS]

 

Records:

Highs:

EWR: 65 (2017)
NYC: 62 (2017)
LGA: 62 (2017)
JFK: 65 (2017)


Lows:

EWR: -7 (1934)
NYC: -7 (1934)
LGA: -2 (1963)
JFK: -2 (1963)

Historical:

 

1835 - A severe cold wave gripped the southeastern U.S. The mercury dipped to 8 above at Jacksonville FL, and to zero at Savannah GA. Orange trees were killed to the roots. (David Ludlum)

1936 - The temperature at Denver CO plunged to a record 30 degrees below zero. (David Ludlum) (The Weather Channel)

 

1956: From February 1-8, heavy snow fell over the Panhandle of Texas. Snowfall amounts include 43 inches in Vega, 24 inches in Hereford, and 14 inches in Amarillo. The storm caused 23 deaths and numerous injuries. It snowed continuously for 92 hours in some locations.

 

1968: The highest 1-day snow at the Savannah Airport in South Carolina occurs on this date when 3.6 inches of snow fell. 

1985 - Blue Canyon, CA, set a 24-hour February snowfall record by receiving 42 inches of snow from February 7th-8th.

1987 - A powerful storm produced blizzard conditions in the Great Lakes Region. Winds gusted to 86 mph at Janesville WI and Cleveland OH received 12 inches of snow. North winds of 50 to 70 mph raised the water level of southern Lake Michigan two feet, and produced waves 12 to 18 feet high, causing seven million dollars damage along the Chicago area shoreline. It was the most damage caused by shoreline flooding and erosion in the history of the city of Chicago. (The National Weather Summary) (Storm Data)

1988 - Arctic air invaded the north central U.S. Hibbing MN reported a morning low of 30 degrees below zero. (The National Weather Summary)

1989 - A winter storm over California produced snow from the beaches of Malibu to the desert canyons around Palm Springs, and the snow created mammoth traffic jams in the Los Angeles Basin. Sixteen cities in the western U.S. reported record low temperatures for the date. Marysville CA reported an all-time record low reading of 21 degrees above zero. (The National Weather Summary) (Storm Data)

1989: Mammoth traffic jams in the Los Angeles area as freak snow struck California. The snow was reported from the beaches of Malibu to the desert around Palm Springs. 

1990 - Unseasonably mild weather prevailed across the south central and eastern U.S. Twenty-two cities, including five in Michigan, reported record high temperatures for the date. The afternoon high of 53 degrees at Flint MI surpassed their previous record by ten degrees, and the high of 66 degrees at Burlington IA exceeded their old record by eight degrees. (The National Weather Summary)

2009 - Snow falls at levels above elevations of 11,000 feet on the Big Island's Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea in Hawaii. The Weather Doctor

2013 - A nor'easter produced heavy snowfall over the New England states. In Boston, Massachusetts, total snowfall reached 24.9 inches, the fifth-highest total ever recorded in the city. New York City officially recorded 11.4 inches of snow at Central Park, and Portland, Maine, set a record of 31.9 inches. Hamden, Connecticut, recorded the highest snowfall of the storm at 40 inches.

[SACRUS]

 

NYC:

Feb 8, 1974: 6.1 inches of snowfall

Feb 8, 1994:  9 inches of snowfall /sleet

Feb 8, 2013: 11.4 inches of snowfall