Fozz Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I thought you had to go to Garret County to avg 40"+ in MD Pretty much, but I do think the highest elevations of the Blue Ridge mountains (over 2000') exceed 40". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 The NYC/PHL region is basically MA climate with SNE attitude. Sorry to break it to you fine gents. If you want to start including various "hills" in the equation, throw in my house in Western MD that averages 120" per year... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Well of course...you've got the elevation...up on that plateau...probably a more severe winter than most of Lower Michigan. Well, I like your spot on Long Island. Wouldn't mind having a bungalow there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isotherm Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 The NYC/PHL region is basically MA climate with SNE attitude. Sorry to break it to you fine gents. If you want to start including various "hills" in the equation, throw in my house in Western MD that averages 120" per year... And BWI/DCA is basically a RIC/RDU climate with a NYC/PHL attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozz Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 And BWI/DCA is basically a RIC/RDU climate with a NYC/PHL attitude. How many 18"+ snowstorms did BWI/Baltimore record, compared to RIC, RDU, NYC and PHL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 One thing that makes using the 30 year climate block when discussing these two cities A little skewed is that during the 80's NYC had a dismal snow decade because many storms were suppressed to the south, therefore improving the DC area's snow numbers by a decent margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neblizzard Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Long Range GFS maintains the -AO/-NAO pattern, one has to wonder if the La Nina is ever going to take over the pattern at some point this winter. .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 And BWI/DCA is basically a RIC/RDU climate with a NYC/PHL attitude. BWI climo is way closer to NYC than RIC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 How many 18"+ snowstorms did BWI/Baltimore record, compared to RIC, RDU, NYC and PHL? Baltimore is a great snow town if you love HECS and are really patient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikolai Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 One thing that makes using the 30 year climate block when discussing these two cities A little skewed is that during the 80's NYC had a dismal snow decade because many storms were suppressed to the south, therefore improving the DC area's snow numbers by a decent margin. Except the 80s were completely average in DC. By the same logic, DC's dismal past decade (only saved by 09-10 and 02-03) was because the snow that was supposed to hit DC instead developed too late, hitting NYC. It's a silly statement either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozz Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 One thing that makes using the 30 year climate block when discussing these two cities A little skewed is that during the 80's NYC had a dismal snow decade because many storms were suppressed to the south, therefore improving the DC area's snow numbers by a decent margin. DC and Baltimore also had below average snowfall overall during the 1980s, so I don't know what you mean when you say it improved the DC area's snow numbers "by a decent margin". Sure, 1987 was a good year in DC, but there were many lousy years as well. The fact is, you do not live in SNE, and you do not "rightfully" average 30". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isotherm Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 BWI climo is way closer to NYC than RIC. RIC: 14", BWI: 21", NYC: 28" Evenly split 7" between the three cities. If we bring temps into the discussion, BWI is definitely closer to RIC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozz Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 RIC: 14", BWI: 21", NYC: 28" Evenly split 7" between the three cities. If we bring temps into the discussion, BWI is definitely closer to RIC. If we go by 1981-2010 averages, it is RIC: 10" BWI: 20" NYC: 26" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgwp96 Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 avgs mean crap anyway. how many times do cities actually hit them? its usually one extreme or another Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 This discussion is not very interesting so I will let my anal retentive assistant Fozz work out the details with your OCD climo representative. Keep me posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthShoreWx Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 That comparison is unfair however, considering the 70s and 80s were NYC's two least snowy decades in its entire 140 years of climatological records. You'd have to pick up DC's two worst decades to make a reasonable comparison. Here some good charts on NYC below from Yehuda. Note that the 70s-80s are a pretty severe abberation from the norm: http://www.americanw...-city-snowfall/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Central Park definitely does not report low, having lived one block away going on three winters now. I doubt there was any change from the time I moved to NYC from beforehand... my measurements have always been very close to the park's (and when they're not, they tend to even out--it will report generously on one event and skimp on another, but it's definitely very accurate overall). The problem comes from posters like Analog96 who say they get 32" when they never had anywhere near that amount, as well as other posters from the suburbs. Central Park is an accurate reporting station, DCA is not (or if it was, Central Park is still reflective of a much larger area than DCA, which simply reflects a few feet of tarmac below jet planes). the airports on the other hand are another story entirely (especially because they measure on rooftops.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 You are taking the highest station of record in the entire NYC metro area and comparing it with the lowest station of record in the entire DC metro area. On top of that you are comparing an airport reporting station with a non airport station when it is known airports have low snowfall bias. Right there you have already made your statistically comparison invalid. Furthermore you are changing the peramiters of the argument. I originally engaged in this discussion because of the statement made by someone that the NYC area recieves 500 percent more snowfall then the DC area. This was later amended to 40-50%, better but still a gross exageration. The debate I am engaged in is that the NYC metro area does not recieve 40-50% more snowfall on average then the DC metro area. If you want to win the argument that Central Park averages 71 percent more snowfall then some runway on an island in the potomac river south of DC then yay you win. No one was arguing with you about that. However, the stats you just cited are useless for the purposes of the argument I was engaged in. I could compare IAD and JFK (our regions highest official reporting station and your regions lowest) and make the statement that DC and NYC recieve basically the same avg snowfall. That would be statistically correct in the narrow scope I framed it but it would be misleading and just as innacurate as what you just did. I guess I should qualify one more thing for this debate. If you want to site statistics you can not be selective in what data you use and o not use. If we are talking about comparing the entire NYC area and the DC area one location can not be used against another location. If you want to compare airports it must be all airports in both regions. If its non airport reporting stations and coops fine but then look up all the statistics for all coop stations in the 2 metro areas and run the numbers. Either way what you are trying to prove is not backed up by statistical data and evidence. I hope youre not implying that I said 500% because I would never make a ridiculous claim like that-- I dont think that even Portland Maine averages 500% of DC..... I said 125-150% to cover both the low end and the high end, going from JFK (22") to Upton (30-32") I think the numbers will prove me to be correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikolai Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 the airports on the other hand are another story entirely (especially because they measure on rooftops.) I don't know about that. I know what I saw in Brooklyn didn't match what JFK measured for the 12/26 event, but I don't think JFK or LGA misrepresent their immediate areas. JFK is in a swamp on the south side of BK/Queens--of course they'll average less snow than Central Park, but I don't think it's a bad representation for southern BK/Queens, either. LGA's snowfall measurements generally seem to corroborate neighboring reports as well, but I do question the temperatures there... even for the location, LGA seems to run under a furnace, much like DCA does. I'd actually say DCA and LGA are equivalent in bogus temperature obs, but LGA does better in representing snow (DCA is, bar none, the most awful reporting station for legitimate amounts on the East Coast. Bar. None.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I'm not from either region, but I think I would put the difference between NYC area and DC area snowfall at a value between psuhoffman and northshorewx...probably in the 30-35% range. In NYC metro you basically have as low as 20-22" avg (near JFK and other unfavorable spots on the south facing shores) to as high as 32-34" on the north shore of Long Island and a few northern burbs as you approach White Plains. I think a number around 27" would be a fair value to approximate the region as a whole. I think for DC, 16" at Reagan is obviously the low outlier and you can increase it to 23" or so when you get out by IAD. I think roughly 20" would be a fair value for the metro region as a whole. 27" vs 20" is about a 35% difference...if you tweak these average by an inch or so in either direction for either or both airports, you can generate differences as low as 20% (26 vs 21) and as high as 50% (28 vs 19). Sounds like you agree with my 25-50 pct (very rough) estimate, Will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikolai Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Sounds like you agree with my 25-50 pct (very rough) estimate, Will I'm clearly not Will, but what I'd say is that the regions are roughly the same when it comes to regimes that don't favor Miller Bs, while when Miller Bs are more prevalent, NYC's region averages roughly 50% more than the DC area (aka, the last decade). Overall, the NYC metro has a roughly 25% edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I don't know about that. I know what I saw in Brooklyn didn't match what JFK measured for the 12/26 event, but I don't think JFK or LGA misrepresent their immediate areas. JFK is in a swamp on the south side of BK/Queens--of course they'll average less snow than Central Park, but I don't think it's a bad representation for southern BK/Queens, either. LGA's snowfall measurements generally seem to corroborate neighboring reports as well, but I do question the temperatures there... even for the location, LGA seems to run under a furnace, much like DCA does. I'd actually say DCA and LGA are equivalent in bogus temperature obs, but LGA does better in representing snow (DCA is, bar none, the most awful reporting station for legitimate amounts on the East Coast. Bar. None.) There were a couple of situations which I asked Will about and he told me he knows about problems theyve had there-- specifically, there were two storms in the 08-09 winter, in one of which JFK "measured" less than an inch, and we had 3-4 inches here with the snow plows out. As you probably know they dont put out snow plows until there's over 2 inches of snow, and Im about 4 miles from there. Another one was March 09 when they "measured" around 7 inches and we had widespread 10-11 inches both in Queens and here. This all goes back to Feb 1978 when both they and LGA supposedly "measured" 14" lol.... apparently, them measuring snow from roof tops creates problems for them in windy snowstorms (and also storms with a great deal of mixing and melting.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 NYC isnt without its issues either-- they like to round snowfall to exact inches-- and I remember the 2/10 storm last year, they had recorded exactly 10.0 inches with about 2 hours of moderate to heavy snowfall left, and somehow that also ended up being their final total. They had 3 or 4 storms last year which somehow had exact integer snowfall totals, and now we have this 20.0 storm lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I'm clearly not Will, but what I'd say is that the regions are roughly the same when it comes to regimes that don't favor Miller Bs, while when Miller Bs are more prevalent, NYC's region averages roughly 50% more than the DC area (aka, the last decade). Overall, the NYC metro has a roughly 25% edge. Yeah, what happens when you smooth out averages over a number of years, you lose those finer details. In "normal" winters, its not 50%, but when you have winters like 93-94 or 03-04 it skews the averages somewhat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I agree about DCA misrepresenting snowfall on a whole nother level-- what did they get in their biggest snowstorm last year? I remember someone saying that if they didnt get 20 inches in that one, they wouldnt ever get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikolai Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 NYC isnt without its issues either-- they like to round snowfall to exact inches-- and I remember the 2/10 storm last year, they had recorded exactly 10.0 inches with about 2 hours of moderate to heavy snowfall left, and somehow that also ended up being their final total. They had 3 or 4 storms last year which somehow had exact integer snowfall totals, and now we have this 20.0 storm lol Well, to be fair, I don't think the 2/25 storm last year had 20"+ at NYC, so it kind of evens out. This past storm was definitely higher impact and had more snow (in both BK and NYC), so one of the measurements was off... and even at the time, 2/25 didn't feel like a 20" storm. Your next post is also correct--in an average winter, DC and NYC will see similar snow amounts. I think it's basically that NYC sees "good" winters more often than DC (03-04, 93-94 both examples). This decade has contained many flukes, though--03-04, 05-06, especially (and considering I had 13-14" in McLean in between IAD and DCA while both stations measured around 8" with 2/12/06, it was frustrating to say the least...). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Well, to be fair, I don't think the 2/25 storm last year had 20"+ at NYC, so it kind of evens out. This past storm was definitely higher impact and had more snow (in both BK and NYC), so one of the measurements was off... and even at the time, 2/25 didn't feel like a 20" storm. Your next post is also correct--in an average winter, DC and NYC will see similar snow amounts. I think it's basically that NYC sees "good" winters more often than DC (03-04, 93-94 both examples). This decade has contained many flukes, though--03-04, 05-06, especially (and considering I had 13-14" in McLean in between IAD and DCA while both stations measured around 8" with 2/12/06, it was frustrating to say the least...). One tough point that psuhoffman was trying to get across but was falling a bit on deaf ears was that Central Park is the high obs site (in terms of snow) for nyc metro unlike other cities. BOS/PHL/DCA are all about the worst spot in each metro region (esp DCA and BOS) to measure snowfall. Central Park does a better job at representing the city for snow than those other sites. 16" for DCA and 43" for BOS is low compared to the rest of the city proper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Well, to be fair, I don't think the 2/25 storm last year had 20"+ at NYC, so it kind of evens out. This past storm was definitely higher impact and had more snow (in both BK and NYC), so one of the measurements was off... and even at the time, 2/25 didn't feel like a 20" storm. Your next post is also correct--in an average winter, DC and NYC will see similar snow amounts. I think it's basically that NYC sees "good" winters more often than DC (03-04, 93-94 both examples). This decade has contained many flukes, though--03-04, 05-06, especially (and considering I had 13-14" in McLean in between IAD and DCA while both stations measured around 8" with 2/12/06, it was frustrating to say the least...). That and the Feb 06 storm might have both been overdone-- I didnt see anyone else coming in with 2 foot amounts, let alone the 27 inches NYC reported in Feb 06. Am I misremembering or was there a storm (in 08-09 I think) when you were running around Central Park measuring snow and you came up with consistently higher totals than what the Park reported? I think it was your first winter up here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-X Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 One tough point that psuhoffman was trying to get across but was falling a bit on deaf ears was that Central Park is the high obs site (in terms of snow) for nyc metro unlike other cities. BOS/PHL/DCA are all about the worst spot in each metro region (esp DCA and BOS) to measure snowfall. Central Park does a better job at representing the city for snow than those other sites. 16" for DCA and 43" for BOS is low compared to the rest of the city proper. Will, he mentioned EWR also though and I've always thought EWR does a better job reporting snowfall (and temps) than NYC does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Will, he mentioned EWR also though and I've always thought EWR does a better job reporting snowfall (and temps) than NYC does. The thing is...that EWR has the same avg as NYC (Central Park) pretty much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.