The Blizzard of 06 is the biggest snowstorm in NY CP history

[Cowhide]

BUT..it was also the warmest:
It was heavy wet snow.
Was this overlooked?
Over hyped?
It wasn't far from the snow/rain line. The temperatures at the time the blizzard hit was anywhere between 24-29F.
A little more southerly flow and this could have easily been just a torrential downpour with thunderstorms or an icemaker.

PAST SNOW STORMS
Feb 11-12 2006 (27in)
Dec 26,27 1947 (26in)
Mar 11-13 1888 (20.9in)
Jan 7-8 1996 (20.2in)
Feb 16-17 2003 (19.8in)

It seems that more and more blizzards are created from the warm air from the south colliding in with the arctic air from the north, instead of just directly from Canada.



Just look how brutally cold it was in 1947 and 1888! Can you imagine what the windchill was if the air temp. was -10F!?!


Yes, it was the biggest snowstorm in NY CP history, but because it was just a little below freezing, there were no deaths or damages. in a few days it will all be gone.

Should the temps be a factor to qualify as a blizzard? I think so.

[Brent]

Should the temps be a factor to qualify as a blizzard? I think so.

A blizzard is a blizzard. For most of the duration of the Blizzard of 1993 it was near Freezing here(and actually above when it started), and it was the worst snowstorm in history... who cares about the temperature?

[southerngale]

Yes, it was the biggest snowstorm in NY CP history, but because it was just a little below freezing, there were no deaths or damages. in a few days it will all be gone.

Should the temps be a factor to qualify as a blizzard? I think so.

Well, thank God there were no deaths or damage, if that's the case. It was a blizzard. A blizzard is a very heavy snowstorm with high winds. Why should the temps have anything to do with it qualifying it as a blizzard?

[Cowhide]

Well, I certainly wasn't wishing for deaths.
(Sorry that sentence looked misleading)

It's just an opinion of mine, but I just think that it's not much of an impact when the temperatures are so close to the freezing mark, because the snow melts sooner.

[southerngale]

It may be less of an impact, but I still don't see how that has anything to do with qualifying it as a blizzard.

[ohiostorm]

Just think how much snow wouldve fell if it was 10 degrees colder.

[jasons2k]

Hey guys,

Just returned from NYC and we made it through the experience. I will post a detailed narration of what we experienced with some pics as soon as I can get caught-up here at work, it may be tomorrow...

Just wanted to point-out one item - in New York they are saying this storm was NOT officially a blizzard in the city itself. One of the criteria is wind gusts to 35+ mph for a period of 3 consecutive hours or more. This did not occur, although it was close. So technically, for the NYC reporting stations, the storm did not meet the criteria as a blizzard.

However, it did in some areas (such as CT and Long Island), so I guess you could call the storm itself a blizzard...but in the city it wasn't, just the official snowfall record-breaker.

BTW the thundersnow was something else, haven't seen/heard that since '93.

I'll have more later.....

[Scorpion]

The snow was anything but wet and heavy. The reason for the huge accumalations was how dry it was. It resembled lake effect snow. The ratios were very low. It probably compacted to half the accumalation in a matter of hours.

[wxmann_91]

Originally temperatures were part of the factors to determine if a snowstorm was a blizzard. Though I disagree with that, it is true that one of the deadliest things about a blizzard is the bitter cold that is made worse by the howling winds.