JAN 9th-10th Flooding Threat

Wind warnings and advisories issued by NWS

This is such a weird setup for wind lol I'm actually looking at this, I think that the band of max gusts is actually going to be centered on the I-95 Corridor, and not along the immediate coastline, although there will likely be some equally impressive gusts along the coast as well, but I don't think as frequently.

rb924119 wrote:This is such a weird setup for wind lol

What do you mean?

weatherwatchermom wrote:

rb924119 wrote:This is such a weird setup for wind lol

What do you mean?

Well, I'm looking at forecast soundings from various models, and syncing it up with some general ideas that I have, and here's what I'm coming up with:

-Where there is currently deep snowpack (Northeast PA, NW NJ, Lower Hudson Valley, and then across the northern half of Connecticut and Massachusetts), the rate of warming aloft should outpace the rate of warming at the surface because the snow works to keep the ground level cold, thereby creating an extreme low-level inversion. As I discussed earlier, this will work to prevent the strongest winds from mixing to the surface.

-Along the immediate coastline, although there is no snowpack, the coastal waters are sufficiently cool. So, as the winds are ramping up, they will be successfully mixing to the surface. But, as the belt of maximum winds, and thus, warm advection approaches, because the coastal waters are several degrees Celsius cooler than the air that will be coming in aloft, this will work similarly to the snowpack and work to create another extreme low-level inversion, which will again help to prevent the strongest winds from mixing to the surface. Not only is this shown by forecast soundings, specifically by the HRRR, but there are indications on other model soundings for this as well.

-In between the two zones; the snowpack and the immediate coast, however, there is a belt of more effective warm air and dew point transport at the surface, which helps to keep pace with the warming aloft and keep the atmospheric column generally isothermal. Because there's no inversion, or a very, very slight one, it will be easier for the maximum winds to mix all the way to the surface in this zone as that belt passes overhead.

Now, again, I want to stress that this doesn't mean that it's not going to be windy elsewhere lol but I think the I-95 Corridor from roughly Washington, D.C., to Philadelphia, to Trenton, and then to about Edison would be one maximum wind zone, and then again starting on Long Island, along the entire NORTH Shore and coastal Connecticut, and then rounding off in coastal Rhode Island. In these zones, I can see maximum wind gusts close to 75 mph. Along the immediate coastlines and SOUTH Shore of Long Island, I think gusts 60-65 mph. Once you get north and west of I-78/287, then I think your maximum wind gusts drop off fairly substantially, more in the 45-50 mph range, EXCEPT in places like the Susquehanna Valley, Hudson River Valley, and Connecticut River Valley, where topographical turbulence will help stronger winds mix down. I these locations, I can see gusts to 65 mph.

I'm going to try to put together a map of this to make it more understandable lol but that's what I'm thinking.

rb924119 wrote:

weatherwatchermom wrote:

rb924119 wrote:This is such a weird setup for wind lol

What do you mean?

Well, I'm looking at forecast soundings from various models, and syncing it up with some general ideas that I have, and here's what I'm coming up with:

-Where there is currently deep snowpack (Northeast PA, NW NJ, Lower Hudson Valley, and then across the northern half of Connecticut and Massachusetts), the rate of warming aloft should outpace the rate of warming at the surface because the snow works to keep the ground level cold, thereby creating an extreme low-level inversion. As I discussed earlier, this will work to prevent the strongest winds from mixing to the surface.

-Along the immediate coastline, although there is no snowpack, the coastal waters are sufficiently cool. So, as the winds are ramping up, they will be successfully mixing to the surface. But, as the belt of maximum winds, and thus, warm advection approaches, because the coastal waters are several degrees Celsius cooler than the air that will be coming in aloft, this will work similarly to the snowpack and work to create another extreme low-level inversion, which will again help to prevent the strongest winds from mixing to the surface. Not only is this shown by forecast soundings, specifically by the HRRR, but there are indications on other model soundings for this as well.

-In between the two zones; the snowpack and the immediate coast, however, there is a belt of more effective warm air and dew point transport at the surface, which helps to keep pace with the warming aloft and keep the atmospheric column generally isothermal. Because there's no inversion, or a very, very slight one, it will be easier for the maximum winds to mix all the way to the surface in this zone as that belt passes overhead.

Now, again, I want to stress that this doesn't mean that it's not going to be windy elsewhere lol but I think the I-95 Corridor from roughly Washington, D.C., to Philadelphia, to Trenton, and then to about Edison would be one maximum wind zone, and then again starting on Long Island, along the entire NORTH Shore and coastal Connecticut, and then rounding off in coastal Rhode Island. In these zones, I can see maximum wind gusts close to 75 mph. Along the immediate coastlines and SOUTH Shore of Long Island, I think gusts 60-65 mph. Once you get north and west of I-78/287, then I think your maximum wind gusts drop off fairly substantially, more in the 45-50 mph range, EXCEPT in places like the Susquehanna Valley, Hudson River Valley, and Connecticut River Valley, where topographical turbulence will help stronger winds mix down. I these locations, I can see gusts to 65 mph.

I'm going to try to put together a map of this to make it more understandable lol but that's what I'm thinking.

Light brown = maximum wind gusts to 50 mph
Orange = maximum wind gusts to 65 mph
Red = maximum wind gusts to 75 mph

I already know that Jman is going to ask why I didn't include NYC proper, and it's because they will be influenced by the relatively cooler coastal water. However, I cannot rule out an isolated gust in excess of 65 mph due the the natural funneling effect created by the bight plus the extra turbulence from the buildings, but I feel that will be more of an isolated incident, not a rule. Anyway, this was a very tough forecast to put together because of the inversions, but, we'll see how it goes. Regardless, I do think that this will be a pretty impactful event for most of the region.

amugs wrote:

jmanley32 wrote:NJ Gov. issued a SOE:

https://abc7ny.com/nj-weather-storm-rain-flooding/14296318/

I know its because of passic river mostly but I think Gov. Hochul should also declare a SOE as the rivers here will likely flood too and may be  a lot of power outages.

Sorry JMAN but there are 8 rivers in NJ that can reach major flood levels and the shore is going to absolutely raked with moderate to.possibly major tidal flooding, power outages galore and flooding. My man you are so off base poo posing the SOE by Murphy. Absolutely necessary move.

Folks this is going to be rough as Frank638 states. I don't care what wind map you use they are going to cause bigly problems along with dangerous flash floods. The amount of lightening in the Gulf Coast of Texas and LA is off the charts. That's latent heat that will be transported up this way. Sustained 25-35 mph winds are 1 minute plus in length, that's sustained length of time. I teach this with civil engineering section of engineer course I teach.  Gusts can last along at 30 seconds. 
So let's say 30 mph winds for 2 minutes and then the wind ramps up to 46 mph or 52 mph (splitting hairs)for 30 seconds  = big issues or no pause then back down to 27 mph= bigger issues.Thats the scenarios we are looking at.
The psf and.psi are minimal differnces. 
Now you go to 65/70 mph gusts you have big damage.

Repeat thus for 3 or 4 or 5 hours and damages become bad, very bad for some areass.

hold in the reins when did i poo poo his caĺing it? Im glad he did. Our governor should also call a soe is what i said. Absolutely everything you said spot on. ive been tooting how bad this will be for 2 days now, i know especially in NJ. But i also think that its go hit ny hard too.

rb924119 wrote:This is such a weird setup for wind lol I'm actually looking at this, I think that the band of max gusts is actually going to be centered on the I-95 Corridor, and not along the immediate coastline, although there will likely be some equally impressive gusts along the coast as well, but I don't think as frequently.

any idea why they feel the counties well inland in nj warrent a warning but nyc and southern westchester dont when we are right on the water? I think they made a mistake not including our area. Thats just my thinking. I understand why NJ just curious when they think it will well inland there and not 5 10 miles from the water here?

jmanley32 wrote:

rb924119 wrote:This is such a weird setup for wind lol I'm actually looking at this, I think that the band of max gusts is actually going to be centered on the I-95 Corridor, and not along the immediate coastline, although there will likely be some equally impressive gusts along the coast as well, but I don't think as frequently.

any idea why they feel the counties well inland in nj warrent a warning but nyc and southern westchester dont when we are right on the water? I think they made a mistake not including our area. Thats just my thinking. I understand why NJ just curious when they think it will well inland there and not 5 10 miles from the water here?

Possibly for the same reason that I didn't include them in my max forecast.

rb924119 wrote:

rb924119 wrote:

weatherwatchermom wrote:

rb924119 wrote:This is such a weird setup for wind lol

What do you mean?

Well, I'm looking at forecast soundings from various models, and syncing it up with some general ideas that I have, and here's what I'm coming up with:

-Where there is currently deep snowpack (Northeast PA, NW NJ, Lower Hudson Valley, and then across the northern half of Connecticut and Massachusetts), the rate of warming aloft should outpace the rate of warming at the surface because the snow works to keep the ground level cold, thereby creating an extreme low-level inversion. As I discussed earlier, this will work to prevent the strongest winds from mixing to the surface.

-Along the immediate coastline, although there is no snowpack, the coastal waters are sufficiently cool. So, as the winds are ramping up, they will be successfully mixing to the surface. But, as the belt of maximum winds, and thus, warm advection approaches, because the coastal waters are several degrees Celsius cooler than the air that will be coming in aloft, this will work similarly to the snowpack and work to create another extreme low-level inversion, which will again help to prevent the strongest winds from mixing to the surface. Not only is this shown by forecast soundings, specifically by the HRRR, but there are indications on other model soundings for this as well.

-In between the two zones; the snowpack and the immediate coast, however, there is a belt of more effective warm air and dew point transport at the surface, which helps to keep pace with the warming aloft and keep the atmospheric column generally isothermal. Because there's no inversion, or a very, very slight one, it will be easier for the maximum winds to mix all the way to the surface in this zone as that belt passes overhead.

Now, again, I want to stress that this doesn't mean that it's not going to be windy elsewhere lol but I think the I-95 Corridor from roughly Washington, D.C., to Philadelphia, to Trenton, and then to about Edison would be one maximum wind zone, and then again starting on Long Island, along the entire NORTH Shore and coastal Connecticut, and then rounding off in coastal Rhode Island. In these zones, I can see maximum wind gusts close to 75 mph. Along the immediate coastlines and SOUTH Shore of Long Island, I think gusts 60-65 mph. Once you get north and west of I-78/287, then I think your maximum wind gusts drop off fairly substantially, more in the 45-50 mph range, EXCEPT in places like the Susquehanna Valley, Hudson River Valley, and Connecticut River Valley, where topographical turbulence will help stronger winds mix down. I these locations, I can see gusts to 65 mph.

I'm going to try to put together a map of this to make it more understandable lol but that's what I'm thinking.

Light brown = maximum wind gusts to 50 mph
Orange = maximum wind gusts to 65 mph
Red = maximum wind gusts to 75 mph

nice map if true warnings need to be extended un a number of places i think nws is going conservative im more in line with you. 60 to 65 here is gonna cause havok if it happens. I noticed you included the sound facing shore of westchester in the 75 moh thats a nose hair away from here and very close to where i work in new rochelle by a mile or so.

rb924119 wrote:

jmanley32 wrote:

rb924119 wrote:This is such a weird setup for wind lol I'm actually looking at this, I think that the band of max gusts is actually going to be centered on the I-95 Corridor, and not along the immediate coastline, although there will likely be some equally impressive gusts along the coast as well, but I don't think as frequently.

any idea why they feel the counties well inland in nj warrent a warning but nyc and southern westchester dont when we are right on the water? I think they made a mistake not including our area. Thats just my thinking. I understand why NJ just curious when they think it will well inland there and not 5 10 miles from the water here?

Possibly for the same reason that I didn't include them in my max forecast.

60 to 65mph is warning level.or are those max gusts on ur map a exception rather than a rule? So though there could be max gusts in this area to 65 mph it will most frequently be 50 mph?

jmanley32 wrote:

rb924119 wrote:

jmanley32 wrote:

rb924119 wrote:This is such a weird setup for wind lol I'm actually looking at this, I think that the band of max gusts is actually going to be centered on the I-95 Corridor, and not along the immediate coastline, although there will likely be some equally impressive gusts along the coast as well, but I don't think as frequently.

any idea why they feel the counties well inland in nj warrent a warning but nyc and southern westchester dont when we are right on the water? I think they made a mistake not including our area. Thats just my thinking. I understand why NJ just curious when they think it will well inland there and not 5 10 miles from the water here?

Possibly for the same reason that I didn't include them in my max forecast.

60 to 65mph is warning level.or are those max gusts on ur map a exception rather than a rule? So though there could be max gusts in this area to 65 mph it will most frequently be 50 mph?

No, no, I know they are warning level haha but what I’m saying is their reasoning for keeping the max gusts lower in their forecast for the NYC area may be the same as mine. Our two forecast values are different, but they may be based on similar reasoning, that’s all I’m saying.

As for my actual forecast, it’s exactly what it states lol the red zone is the area that I think is most likely to experience maximum gusts from 65-75. The orange zones I think will see gusts 50-65, and the beige zones will see gusts 35-50.

Does that help?

rb924119 wrote:

jmanley32 wrote:

rb924119 wrote:

jmanley32 wrote:

rb924119 wrote:This is such a weird setup for wind lol I'm actually looking at this, I think that the band of max gusts is actually going to be centered on the I-95 Corridor, and not along the immediate coastline, although there will likely be some equally impressive gusts along the coast as well, but I don't think as frequently.

any idea why they feel the counties well inland in nj warrent a warning but nyc and southern westchester dont when we are right on the water? I think they made a mistake not including our area. Thats just my thinking. I understand why NJ just curious when they think it will well inland there and not 5 10 miles from the water here?

Possibly for the same reason that I didn't include them in my max forecast.

60 to 65mph is warning level.or are those max gusts on ur map a exception rather than a rule? So though there could be max gusts in this area to 65 mph it will most frequently be 50 mph?

No, no, I know they are warning level haha but what I’m saying is their reasoning for keeping the max gusts lower in their forecast for the NYC area may be the same as mine. Our two forecast values are different, but they may be based on similar reasoning, that’s all I’m saying.

As for my actual forecast, it’s exactly what it states lol the red zone is the area that I think is most likely to experience maximum gusts from 65-75. The orange zones I think will see gusts 50-65, and the beige zones will see gusts 35-50.

Does that help?

Yes ,so IYO you think there should be a HWW here and over Northern NJ and up the river in NY too as 50-65mph warrents that.

I had also mentioned why you think that the east facing shore of westchester experiences the highest numbers, thats only miles from here and even closer to where I work in New Rochelle, by anymeans we are splitting hairs, or I am and we just have to wait and see what happens? I think this overperforms more to your line of thinking.

The reporting off of the westchester coast is always a bit higher than over here i now recall, its amazing what only a few miles will do, but I am also very close to the hudson, in fact I face it's direction to my west and always watch anything coming in from NJ or watch it pass by in longing lol as i wave bye on the other side

jmanley32 wrote:

rb924119 wrote:

jmanley32 wrote:

rb924119 wrote:

jmanley32 wrote:

rb924119 wrote:This is such a weird setup for wind lol I'm actually looking at this, I think that the band of max gusts is actually going to be centered on the I-95 Corridor, and not along the immediate coastline, although there will likely be some equally impressive gusts along the coast as well, but I don't think as frequently.

any idea why they feel the counties well inland in nj warrent a warning but nyc and southern westchester dont when we are right on the water? I think they made a mistake not including our area. Thats just my thinking. I understand why NJ just curious when they think it will well inland there and not 5 10 miles from the water here?

Possibly for the same reason that I didn't include them in my max forecast.

60 to 65mph is warning level.or are those max gusts on ur map a exception rather than a rule? So though there could be max gusts in this area to 65 mph it will most frequently be 50 mph?

No, no, I know they are warning level haha but what I’m saying is their reasoning for keeping the max gusts lower in their forecast for the NYC area may be the same as mine. Our two forecast values are different, but they may be based on similar reasoning, that’s all I’m saying.

As for my actual forecast, it’s exactly what it states lol the red zone is the area that I think is most likely to experience maximum gusts from 65-75. The orange zones I think will see gusts 50-65, and the beige zones will see gusts 35-50.

Does that help?

Yes ,so IYO you think there should be a HWW here and over Northern NJ and up the river in NY too as 50-65mph warrents that.

Yeah haha you can say that lol

jmanley32 wrote:I had also mentioned why you think that the east facing shore of westchester experiences the highest numbers, thats only miles from here and even closer to where I work in New Rochelle, by anymeans we are splitting hairs, or I am and we just have to wait and see what happens? I think this overperforms more to your line of thinking.

The reporting off of the westchester coast is always a bit higher than over here i now recall, its amazing what only a few miles will do, but I am also very close to the hudson, in fact I face it's direction to my west and always watch anything coming in from NJ or watch it pass by in longing lol as i wave bye on the other side

That’s actually because of Long Island. If you look at a topographical map, the L.I.E. basically runs along a ridgeline that separates the lower elevation of the South Shore, and the higher elevation of the North Shore. Although it’s not a huge difference in the grand scale of things, with this setup, I think the low-level cold from the coastal water will be driven into that ridgeline, and the faster winds will be just a little higher. Then, as the air downslopes as it crosses the island and into the Sound it will allow the stronger winds to mix down to the surface more effectively. And that’s why I tail that red zone off into Rhode Island, because there’s no longer any land there to enhance vertical momentum transport or break up the low-level cold. And, based on the southeasterly wind direction, that’s why I hit the eastern shore of Westchester County with higher winds, because I think it’ll be affected by the mixing caused by Long Island.

rb924119 wrote:

jmanley32 wrote:I had also mentioned why you think that the east facing shore of westchester experiences the highest numbers, thats only miles from here and even closer to where I work in New Rochelle, by anymeans we are splitting hairs, or I am and we just have to wait and see what happens? I think this overperforms more to your line of thinking.

The reporting off of the westchester coast is always a bit higher than over here i now recall, its amazing what only a few miles will do, but I am also very close to the hudson, in fact I face it's direction to my west and always watch anything coming in from NJ or watch it pass by in longing lol as i wave bye on the other side

That’s actually because of Long Island. If you look at a topographical map, the L.I.E. basically runs along a ridgeline that separates the lower elevation of the South Shore, and the higher elevation of the North Shore. Although it’s not a huge difference in the grand scale of things, with this setup, I think the low-level cold from the coastal water will be driven into that ridgeline, and the faster winds will be just a little higher. Then, as the air downslopes as it crosses the island and into the Sound it will allow the stronger winds to mix down to the surface more effectively. And that’s why I tail that red zone off into Rhode Island, because there’s no longer any land there to enhance vertical momentum transport or break up the low-level cold. And, based on the southeasterly wind direction, that’s why I hit the eastern shore of Westchester County with higher winds, because I think it’ll be affected by the mixing caused by Long Island.

I'll take your word for it because it is too late for my old mind to comprehend all that lol, we track tomorrow, have a good night thanks for your writeups and map. I think they are sound.

I think 3KM NAM and all the nam runs for that fact are under doing the rain, it has some areas not even seeing 2 inches in the areas that are calling for 2-3+

Thanks, brother, we’ll surely be back at it tomorrow haha and I haven’t even looked at precip honestly. It’s been well discussed. The wind forecast is what’s so tricky with this one. We’ll see how I do! Good night haha

And for those that saw my post earlier and mugs response about the SOE, I was absolutely commending Gov, Murphy, he is always on pt. I however was saying that I think Hochul should also call a down state SOE instead of just a travel advisory as I have seen how bad this kind of storm can be and she has often waited too little too late to calla SOE. Yor Gov. is great sorry if there was misunderstanding in my message.

BTW Ray, my parents are in your red area, to be specific Guilford, CT. They have filled their tub with water for flushing as it is a rural shore town and no power = no water pump. Looks like they could really be in for it. It is so sad as a kid I used to love to play and build tree forts in the small pine grove we had in our backyard. Irene did round 1 of removal and Sandy took the rest out, cost many thousands of doallrs for the cleanup. They decided to extend the yard by about 25 feet (might even been more not sure) or so once it was just a barren opening of woods. We used to have nice protction between the two houses on either side but the woods thinned out so much that everyone has a clear view now, less in summer obviously. Amazing it took till 2011/2012 (we moved there in 1986 and was able to withstand many windstorms prior) to take out that pine grove, goes to show storms are only getting worse.

For my area we still under a high wind advisory with 25-35 with gusts to 55. I would expect the coastal areas to get higher winds due to less frictional effects with the wind coming right off the water. Also the hilly areas near and around 22 and locations like that due to a bit of elevation they may see some impressive gusts

jmanley32 wrote:I think 3KM NAM and all the nam runs for that fact are under doing the rain, it has some areas not even seeing 2 inches in the areas that are calling for 2-3+

One thing that may limit the rainfall is the speed of this, storm will be moving at a good clip

rb924119 wrote:

weatherwatchermom wrote:

rb924119 wrote:This is such a weird setup for wind lol

What do you mean?

Well, I'm looking at forecast soundings from various models, and syncing it up with some general ideas that I have, and here's what I'm coming up with:

-Where there is currently deep snowpack (Northeast PA, NW NJ, Lower Hudson Valley, and then across the northern half of Connecticut and Massachusetts), the rate of warming aloft should outpace the rate of warming at the surface because the snow works to keep the ground level cold, thereby creating an extreme low-level inversion. As I discussed earlier, this will work to prevent the strongest winds from mixing to the surface.

-Along the immediate coastline, although there is no snowpack, the coastal waters are sufficiently cool. So, as the winds are ramping up, they will be successfully mixing to the surface. But, as the belt of maximum winds, and thus, warm advection approaches, because the coastal waters are several degrees Celsius cooler than the air that will be coming in aloft, this will work similarly to the snowpack and work to create another extreme low-level inversion, which will again help to prevent the strongest winds from mixing to the surface. Not only is this shown by forecast soundings, specifically by the HRRR, but there are indications on other model soundings for this as well.

-In between the two zones; the snowpack and the immediate coast, however, there is a belt of more effective warm air and dew point transport at the surface, which helps to keep pace with the warming aloft and keep the atmospheric column generally isothermal. Because there's no inversion, or a very, very slight one, it will be easier for the maximum winds to mix all the way to the surface in this zone as that belt passes overhead.

Now, again, I want to stress that this doesn't mean that it's not going to be windy elsewhere lol but I think the I-95 Corridor from roughly Washington, D.C., to Philadelphia, to Trenton, and then to about Edison would be one maximum wind zone, and then again starting on Long Island, along the entire NORTH Shore and coastal Connecticut, and then rounding off in coastal Rhode Island. In these zones, I can see maximum wind gusts close to 75 mph. Along the immediate coastlines and SOUTH Shore of Long Island, I think gusts 60-65 mph. Once you get north and west of I-78/287, then I think your maximum wind gusts drop off fairly substantially, more in the 45-50 mph range, EXCEPT in places like the Susquehanna Valley, Hudson River Valley, and Connecticut River Valley, where topographical turbulence will help stronger winds mix down. I these locations, I can see gusts to 65 mph.

I'm going to try to put together a map of this to make it more understandable lol but that's what I'm thinking.

You had to bring the strongest winds to edison by name, come on RB keep those strongest winds out of here lol

Good morning, everyone! It's been awhile -- hope you're all well

The latest on winds from a normally conservative Upton office paints a very impactful picture tonight with an increase in expected gusts across the area. High Wind Warnings have been expanded west and now include Manhattan, southern Westchester, & Hudson County, NJ where 65 mph winds are possible. For Staten Island, Queens, Brooklyn and the rest of Long Island, the High Wind Warning verbiage now explicitly calls for 70 mph wind gusts.

It's been more than 3 years since Manhattan was included in High Wind Warning, with the last issuance occurring on December 24, 2020.

Oy ray. NWS saw ur idea snd went with it. Hww issued here (i knew they would just too close to coast) and peak gusts increased to 65mph. Ct and LI increased to 70 mph. .This is go be really bad. Lights out...

SoulSingMG wrote:Good morning, everyone! It's been awhile -- hope you're all well

The latest on winds from a normally conservative Upton office paints a very impactful picture tonight with an increase in expected gusts across the area. High Wind Warnings have been expanded west and now include Manhattan, southern Westchester, & Hudson County, NJ where 65 mph winds are possible. For Staten Island, Queens, Brooklyn and the rest of Long Island, the High Wind Warning verbiage now explicitly calls for 70 mph wind gusts.

It's been more than 3 years since Manhattan was included in High Wind Warning, with the last issuance occurring on December 24, 2020.

hey buddy! And when was it last for 65mph and even li 70 mph hww very rare. Welcome along for this dicy situation. If you read back rb made a map calling these numbers and the nws must seen. We kinda both knew they would increase it. This is bordering on a isiais kind of situation lasted bout 4 to 6 hrs and about same peak gusts. Very concerning.