Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,728
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    kraken613
    Newest Member
    kraken613
    Joined

Feb 8-9th Snow, Sleet, ZR OBS Thread


The 4 Seasons
 Share

Recommended Posts

Not sure I even ended up with 4-5” here but anyways, I think this storm went about as well as it could have forecasting wise. I love these storms because there are so many different processes involved and it really takes a good bit of time to digest everything and then try and simulate in your head how things will play out. 

  • Like 2
  • 100% 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

mm  I wonder ...  those areas from VT/NH that received the 6-8" might have done it purely on ratio and not on more liq equiv. 

I also report a mid event period of ZR in this system's 5.25"belly depths. It's not a lot... granted. It's thin, but, it does hold stack height down a little, and... just be virtue of a warm layer intrusion possibly interfering some with the DGZ level, might atone for the couple of inches less down here.   

In other words, if judging this event purely based on snow depth, the real bust is actually that it was not all snow -   you know?    interesting.  If all snow, the 6-8" might have been more successful. 

The surface temperatures never moved here throughout the crux of the heavier fall rates. 26Fer  .. there was a tuck of sorts later on as we did briefly dip to 24 for a couple hours prior to dawn during those couple of super fluff inches. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

Not sure I even ended up with 4-5” here but anyways, I think this storm went about as well as it could have forecasting wise. I love these storms because there are so many different processes involved and it really takes a good bit of time to digest everything and then try and simulate in your head how things will play out. 

I’m so disappointed I didn’t just stick with 4-8. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, snowgeek said:

2.75” here just SE of Albany with a little crusty layer in the middle. NWS forecast was 7-11”. Ooops. Culprit was the dry air and I imagine that band to the north up near Saratoga where they reported around a foot gave us a little subsidence?


.

That is a pretty sizable bust for your area. I’m not sure any model showed that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

I’m so disappointed I didn’t just stick with 4-8. 

This one had a lot of flags present, plus we have a long-standing history of knowing how these events roll. Unless you’re into the heaviest banding for a longer duration, go low. 
 

Once again Bufkit, NAM, GFS, and HRRR (as we got into its range) did a phenomenal job illustrating how this would pan out. Now, bufkit isn’t the holy gospel, if the model doesn’t have banding go over that location say, well then it will be way off, however, that’s something you factor in when making a forecast. Anyways, just like last week, most locations on bufkit literally had 2-3 hours of heavy snow with rates ~1”+ per hour, outside that window rates were barely even 0.50” per hour and hardly even above 0.2”.

QPF maps have to be used with extreme caution in these fast moving events too. You really have to nail down, of that QPF how much is being maximized efficiently?

  • Like 1
  • 100% 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, weatherwiz said:

This one had a lot of flags present, plus we have a long-standing history of knowing how these events roll. Unless you’re into the heaviest banding for a longer duration, go low. 
 

Once again Bufkit, NAM, GFS, and HRRR (as we got into its range) did a phenomenal job illustrating how this would pan out. Now, bufkit isn’t the holy gospel, if the model doesn’t have banding go over that location say, well then it will be way off, however, that’s something you factor in when making a forecast. Anyways, just like last week, most locations on bufkit literally had 2-3 hours of heavy snow with rates ~1”+ per hour, outside that window rates were barely even 0.50” per hour and hardly even above 0.2”.

QPF maps have to be used with extreme caution in these fast moving events too. You really have to nail down, of that QPF how much is being maximized efficiently?

GFS QPF was bong worthy down there. This was your 00z 12hr QPF with the event already underway and then actual totals. 
image.png

IMG_1418.jpeg

  • Like 3
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...