Jump to content

Welcome to our forums!

Sign In or Register to gain full access to our forums. By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Welcome!

Thanks for stopping by the Weather Forums! Please take the time to register and join our community. Feel free to post or start new topics on anything related to the weather or the climate.


Photo

Peter Sinks, UT Climate

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply

#51
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 01:03 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

I just crunched the raw data for 1981-2010 @ Mt. Washington. The actual average minimum was -3.1 degrees.

Mount Washington is capable of colder extremes, for instance I don't think the summit of Mt. Rainier has seen -50F (the all-time record low on Mt. Washington). But if you're talking about averages its at best a wash, with a likely advantage to Mt. Rainier on a long term basis.


The problem with that model is the grid-size and orientation doesn't accurately reflect conditions on Mt. Washington.

You're literally off by 2000ft given the small spatial area of the summit.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#52
wx_statman

Posted 11 September 2016 - 01:13 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2398 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

Okay, so this is useless, unfortunately. Here's why.

The highest resolution I can obtain on this model is 4km, and due to the orientation of the grid cells, none are directly situated over Mt. Washington.

Hence, highest grid-cell elevation I can is 4,913ft. The summit of mount Washington is ~6500ft. So, really not helpful at all. Plus we have measured data on the summit.

Here's a visual example:

0E683C12-BF31-424C-867C-E92FC255E74E_zps

 

You can do 800m resolution. For a location like Mt. Rainier, this is probably the best current data we have. The 1970's NPS numbers can be used to augment this data.



#53
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 01:40 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

It's funny because I have always noticed how tightly easterners cling to Mount Washington. You would think it was hands down the harshest climate on earth. I have no doubt that it gets quite wild up there, but there is plenty of competition.


There are snowier places, and there are colder places. I'm not sure there are any windier places. It's said to have the "worlds worst weather" due to the aggregation of severe conditions up there. Lightning/thunderstorms, hurricane force winds several days a week, wind chills below -100F, blinding snowstorms, icing, etc.

It's just a fascinating manifestation of the interaction between geology and the atmosphere.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#54
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 01:42 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.
Also, the reason there's no station on Mt. Rainier is probably due to a combination of the higher elevation and excessive snowfall.

Mount Washinton is only ~6500ft, and it's too windy for much snow accumulation up there. They only average ~290"/yr.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#55
Black Hole

Posted 11 September 2016 - 03:40 PM

Black Hole

    Daily Contributor

  • Admin
  • 1190 posts
  • LocationBountiful, Ut 84010 ~4575ft

Just jumping in here real quick. But the summit of Mt. Rainier is about 2.5 km heigher than Mt. Washington (1900 to 4400m). If there were an identical atmosphere over the two mountains, using the standard lapse rate of 6.5 K/km (a reasonable assumption) that would make the summit of Mt. Rainier about 16 C (~29F) colder on average.

 

Of course that isn't how it ends up, but the point is to say that it is really hard for a place so much lower (but still on a summit) to be colder. 

I am well aware that the mean trough position is over the east coast in winter, but you are crazy if you think that makes up for that kind of an elevation difference. It is simply not possible for Mt. Washington to on average be colder at its summit. The data presented shows this. 


  • Jesse, luminen and wx_statman like this

BS Atmospheric Science University of Utah May 2015

PhD Candidate Atmospheric Sciences

 

--Emphasis on: Forecasting, Mountain Weather, Numerical Weather Prediction, Data Assimilation

 

Winter 2016/17 Snow:
Nov 17: 3.2", 23: 1.6", 28: 9.2" (14)

Dec 1: .5", 16: 2.5", 25: 13" (16)

Jan 2: 5", 3: 2.4", 4: 7.7", 12: 1", 19: 1.2", 21: 13", 23: 6", 24: 1", 25: 3.7", 26: 2.5" (43.5) 

Feb 11: .5", 23: 6.5", 27: 4.5" (13.5)

Mar 5: 5.5" (5.5)

Apr 8: 2", 9: 1.8" (3.8)

May 17: 1" (1)
Total: 96.3"

Lowest Temp: 2F


#56
Black Hole

Posted 11 September 2016 - 03:47 PM

Black Hole

    Daily Contributor

  • Admin
  • 1190 posts
  • LocationBountiful, Ut 84010 ~4575ft

I think the only reason why it is even close is because of the regular cold air intrusions from Canada that affect Mt. Washington while Mt. Rainier frequently sees warmer Pacific airmasses.


BS Atmospheric Science University of Utah May 2015

PhD Candidate Atmospheric Sciences

 

--Emphasis on: Forecasting, Mountain Weather, Numerical Weather Prediction, Data Assimilation

 

Winter 2016/17 Snow:
Nov 17: 3.2", 23: 1.6", 28: 9.2" (14)

Dec 1: .5", 16: 2.5", 25: 13" (16)

Jan 2: 5", 3: 2.4", 4: 7.7", 12: 1", 19: 1.2", 21: 13", 23: 6", 24: 1", 25: 3.7", 26: 2.5" (43.5) 

Feb 11: .5", 23: 6.5", 27: 4.5" (13.5)

Mar 5: 5.5" (5.5)

Apr 8: 2", 9: 1.8" (3.8)

May 17: 1" (1)
Total: 96.3"

Lowest Temp: 2F


#57
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 03:49 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

I think the only reason why it is even close is because of the regular cold air intrusions from Canada that affect Mt. Washington while Mt. Rainier frequently sees warmer Pacific airmasses.


That's the point, though. Look at the typical thermal profile over NH during the cold season, then look at the thermal profile over WA.

Also, you can't assume analogous dry/moist adiabatic lapse rates between the two locations. There's a lot more upper level moisture in the column over WA on average. There's a stark lack of moisture in the upper levels within that O^3 starved polar vortex region.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#58
Black Hole

Posted 11 September 2016 - 04:02 PM

Black Hole

    Daily Contributor

  • Admin
  • 1190 posts
  • LocationBountiful, Ut 84010 ~4575ft

That's the point, though. Look at the typical thermal profile over NH during the cold season, then look at the thermal profile over WA.

Also, you can't assume analogous dry/moist adiabatic lapse rates between the two locations. There's a lot more upper level moisture in the column over WA on average. There's a stark lack of moisture in the upper levels within that O^3 starved polar vortex region.

Well, like I said, that is the reason why it is close. 2.5 vertical kilometers is a big deal Phil, no matter what the airmass is. The difference is bigger than the entire height of Mt. Washington by itself.

 

And I will add, once you get into the mid troposphere and the temperatures get cold, there is hardly any water vapor anyway. That's from the Causius Clapyron (probably misspelled) relationship. Thus, lapse rates tend to increase towards the dry adiabatic lapse rate regardless. 

 

That is how you get snow on Kilimanjaro in Africa too. 


  • Jesse likes this

BS Atmospheric Science University of Utah May 2015

PhD Candidate Atmospheric Sciences

 

--Emphasis on: Forecasting, Mountain Weather, Numerical Weather Prediction, Data Assimilation

 

Winter 2016/17 Snow:
Nov 17: 3.2", 23: 1.6", 28: 9.2" (14)

Dec 1: .5", 16: 2.5", 25: 13" (16)

Jan 2: 5", 3: 2.4", 4: 7.7", 12: 1", 19: 1.2", 21: 13", 23: 6", 24: 1", 25: 3.7", 26: 2.5" (43.5) 

Feb 11: .5", 23: 6.5", 27: 4.5" (13.5)

Mar 5: 5.5" (5.5)

Apr 8: 2", 9: 1.8" (3.8)

May 17: 1" (1)
Total: 96.3"

Lowest Temp: 2F


#59
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 04:43 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

Well, like I said, that is the reason why it is close. 2.5 vertical kilometers is a big deal Phil, no matter what the airmass is. The difference is bigger than the entire height of Mt. Washington by itself.

And I will add, once you get into the mid troposphere and the temperatures get cold, there is hardly any water vapor anyway. That's from the Causius Clapyron (probably misspelled) relationship. Thus, lapse rates tend to increase towards the dry adiabatic lapse rate regardless.

That is how you get snow on Kilimanjaro in Africa too.


Of course altitude is a big deal. Never suggested it wasn't.

Regarding lapse rates, while it's true that the H^2O/N^2-O^2 ratio(s) declines with altitude, both peaks still sit below the climatological 500mb height where the curve is still consequentially sensitive to H^2O content, for these purposes. Rainier sits between ~570-610mb depending on the season, while Mt. Washington sits between 780-830mb under the same conditions.

Then there's the question of the degree of moisture availability upon oragraphic lifting hence the degree of upward transfer of latent heat releases, direct sensible heat fluxes, etc. So, personally I don't think referencing simple adiabatic lapse rate(s) tells us much, as the observed temperature profiles reveal..
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#60
Black Hole

Posted 11 September 2016 - 05:02 PM

Black Hole

    Daily Contributor

  • Admin
  • 1190 posts
  • LocationBountiful, Ut 84010 ~4575ft

Of course altitude is a big deal. Never suggested it wasn't.

Regarding lapse rates, while it's true that the H^2O/N^2-O^2 ratio(s) declines with altitude, both peaks still sit below the climatological 500mb height where the curve is still consequentially sensitive to H^2O content, for these purposes. Rainier sits between ~570-610mb depending on the season, while Mt. Washington sits between 780-830mb under the same conditions.

Then there's the question of the degree of moisture availability upon oragraphic lifting hence the degree of upward transfer of latent heat releases, direct sensible heat fluxes, etc. So, personally I don't think referencing simple adiabatic lapse rate(s) tells us much, as the observed temperature profiles reveal..

I've said what I came to say. The things you referenced are generally true, but data is data. Just admit you are wrong and move on. Or don't, but I don't care to argue when I know that under no condition will you ever back down or admit you are wrong about something. I've known you (at least in an internet sense) long enough to know that much. Peace :)


  • BLI snowman, Jesse and wx_statman like this

BS Atmospheric Science University of Utah May 2015

PhD Candidate Atmospheric Sciences

 

--Emphasis on: Forecasting, Mountain Weather, Numerical Weather Prediction, Data Assimilation

 

Winter 2016/17 Snow:
Nov 17: 3.2", 23: 1.6", 28: 9.2" (14)

Dec 1: .5", 16: 2.5", 25: 13" (16)

Jan 2: 5", 3: 2.4", 4: 7.7", 12: 1", 19: 1.2", 21: 13", 23: 6", 24: 1", 25: 3.7", 26: 2.5" (43.5) 

Feb 11: .5", 23: 6.5", 27: 4.5" (13.5)

Mar 5: 5.5" (5.5)

Apr 8: 2", 9: 1.8" (3.8)

May 17: 1" (1)
Total: 96.3"

Lowest Temp: 2F


#61
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 05:33 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

I've said what I came to say. The things you referenced are generally true, but data is data. Just admit you are wrong and move on. Or don't, but I don't care to argue when I know that under no condition will you ever back down or admit you are wrong about something. I've known you (at least in an internet sense) long enough to know that much. Peace :)


First, I've admitted to being wrong countless times here. Please don't pull that false characterization on me...I screw up constantly. It's part of being human.

Second, you haven't provided any "data" except an equation describing the simple adiabatic lapse rate in a spatially homogenous, idealized earth-atmosphere. Do you think I'm stupid?

Just open the ESRL site and plot the absolute climatological temperatures @ the given pressure levels analogous to the summit of each mountain. Then, if you have any solid topographic on hand, you can calculate the nature of the heat transfer thermodynamics using climatological streamflow and full boundary moisture content.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#62
Black Hole

Posted 11 September 2016 - 05:41 PM

Black Hole

    Daily Contributor

  • Admin
  • 1190 posts
  • LocationBountiful, Ut 84010 ~4575ft

Just to be clear, I was referencing the PRISM and other data that others on here showed you. That data speaks for itself.  


BS Atmospheric Science University of Utah May 2015

PhD Candidate Atmospheric Sciences

 

--Emphasis on: Forecasting, Mountain Weather, Numerical Weather Prediction, Data Assimilation

 

Winter 2016/17 Snow:
Nov 17: 3.2", 23: 1.6", 28: 9.2" (14)

Dec 1: .5", 16: 2.5", 25: 13" (16)

Jan 2: 5", 3: 2.4", 4: 7.7", 12: 1", 19: 1.2", 21: 13", 23: 6", 24: 1", 25: 3.7", 26: 2.5" (43.5) 

Feb 11: .5", 23: 6.5", 27: 4.5" (13.5)

Mar 5: 5.5" (5.5)

Apr 8: 2", 9: 1.8" (3.8)

May 17: 1" (1)
Total: 96.3"

Lowest Temp: 2F


#63
Black Hole

Posted 11 September 2016 - 06:28 PM

Black Hole

    Daily Contributor

  • Admin
  • 1190 posts
  • LocationBountiful, Ut 84010 ~4575ft

First, modeling is not data, or "evidence", for that matter. Scientific method 101.

PRISM is a wonderful model, but it clearly isn't designed to interpolate and constrain boundary layer thermodynamics for particular mountain summits, as the ACTUAL observations on the summit of Mount Washington prove. The PRISM interpolation is, in fact, about 2 degrees too warm relative to the observations on the summit.

 

Phil, I am working on a PhD and I am specializing in data assimilation. I very clearly understand what interpolation is, as well as its strengths and weaknesses. 

Ultimately there is no station on the summit so nobody knows for sure exactly what the temperature is up there, including you. The PRISM data is a reasonable estimation, even if it is a couple of degrees off. Maybe it is also 2F too warm on Rainier. So don't be so overconfident that you know better than the best available data, especially when there is no reasonable reason to believe that Mt. Washington is colder outside of your own hurt pride

In the end PRISM estimates it is +4.5F at Mt. Washington, maybe it is a little more or less but clearly warmer. And the reasonable person expects that at 2.5 km higher it is colder, the data supports that, and beyond that you are just making crap up. Get over it. 


BS Atmospheric Science University of Utah May 2015

PhD Candidate Atmospheric Sciences

 

--Emphasis on: Forecasting, Mountain Weather, Numerical Weather Prediction, Data Assimilation

 

Winter 2016/17 Snow:
Nov 17: 3.2", 23: 1.6", 28: 9.2" (14)

Dec 1: .5", 16: 2.5", 25: 13" (16)

Jan 2: 5", 3: 2.4", 4: 7.7", 12: 1", 19: 1.2", 21: 13", 23: 6", 24: 1", 25: 3.7", 26: 2.5" (43.5) 

Feb 11: .5", 23: 6.5", 27: 4.5" (13.5)

Mar 5: 5.5" (5.5)

Apr 8: 2", 9: 1.8" (3.8)

May 17: 1" (1)
Total: 96.3"

Lowest Temp: 2F


#64
Scott

Posted 11 September 2016 - 06:40 PM

Scott

    Forum Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 226 posts
  • LocationNear Craig Colorado

You mean the NPS data from that station without a history of ever having existed, with an "unknown" period of record (supposed just a few years in the 1970s)? Or, a model that fails to match observed conditions @ Mt. Washington?

This is getting ridiculous. You'd make a terrible scientist, dude.

 

I am the one that compiled the data for the website you are referring to.  None of the data is imaginary.

 

The idea behind the webpage was/is to gather as much information as possible on mountain top climate and weather in the United States.

 

The data is not easy to find all in one place, other than the website and it took a lot of work to gather.

 

The Rainier data you are referring to is from a University of Washington experiment in the 1970's.   The station did not last longer than that because that's all the NPS gave permission for the experiment.  I believe it lasted nine years or so.   The station is not an official NWS or NOAA weather station, but unfortunately it's all the data available (or at least all of the data available that I'm aware of).

 

Even with the limited data, Rainier is indeed much colder than Mount Washington.   Mt Washington is likely windier though (no wind data is available for Rainier).  As far as snowfall goes, the summit of Mt Washington is likely just as snowy as Rainier's.   Most of the snow on Rainier actually falls between 4500-9000 feet elevation.  Above 9000 feet the peak is often above the moist Pacific air masses the drop copious amounts of snow on the slopes of Rainier.

 

While there is currently no weather station near the summit of Mount Rainier, there is currently one at Camp Muir.  Camp Muir is at 10,110 feet elevation and the annual temperature there is 24F, about three degrees colder than that of Mt Washington.   Since the summit of Mount Rainier is much colder than that of Camp Muir, it is obvious that the summit of Rainier would be much colder than Mt Washington.   You can access the Camp Muir Weather Station below:

 

https://www.nwac.us/...a/campmuir/now/

Like SNOTEL sites however, these high mountain stations out West are not included in the official Nation's extremes.   They are simply for scientific study purposes, to predict water runoff and availability and for recreational safety.

 

You can access the SNOTEL data, which covers much of the western mountains below:

 

 http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/snow/

Since the primary purpose of the stations is to predict runoff though, the stations are in the mountain basins rather than on the mountain summits.

 

Even Pikes Peak, in Colorado is significantly colder than Mount Washington, but in winter they are more evenly matched.   For a bit of history, both the Mount Washington station and the Pikes Peak station were both started during the same time period.    The National Weather Service was formed in 1870 and the United States Army Signal Corps were sent to both mountain locations in order to gather data.

 

The Mount Washington station was begun in 1870 and the Pikes Peak station was started in 1873, three years later.   The original purpose of both weather stations was to gather data and to see if weather could be forecasted from the top of the mountains by telegraph.   Unfortunately, it was found that there was little correlation between the weather on the mountains and the surrounding country-side, so funding was cut.   The Pikes Peak station was put out of commission in 1888, while after some lobbying, the Mount Washington Station was allowed to survive.   During the period of record, Pikes Peak was both colder and less windy than Mount Washington.

 

Luckily for weather watchers though, the Pikes Peak station is one again in operation, thanks to the Cog Railway.   The weather data is below:

http://www.cograilwa...eratSummitB.htm

You can obtain the data compiled by the Weather Bureau from the Signal Corps below:

 

https://books.google...hington&f=false

 

Notice that it says that Pikes Peak is definitely colder.

 

That said, the weather on Mt Washington is impressive.   It is one of, or perhaps the windiest place in the lower 48.   It also has a longer period of record for mountain weather than any station I know of on earth.  

 

It is true that many western mountains are colder than Mount Washington, but Mount Washington has the most detailed record and the longest period of record, thus it can be one of the most interesting to study.  

In the website you are referring to, I had to gather all the data available.  Unfortunately, the actual data for mountain tops is not easy to obtain.   It still can be interesting and useful though. 

 

Anyway, NOAA now predicts mountain top weather on a grid and it is very interesting.   If anyone is interested, it is quite interesting to compare the forecast for places like Mount Washington, Mount Rainier, and Denali (current forecasts):

 

Mount Washington:
 

http://forecast.weat...33#.V9YWQ9QrLs0

982370.JPG

 

Mount Rainier:

http://forecast.weat...04#.V9YICNQrLs0

982369.JPG

 

Denali/Mt McKinley:

http://forecast.weat...74#.V9YVyNQrLs0

982368.JPG

 

Although it can be argued that weather forecast aren't 100% accurate, most of the time Denali and Rainier will be forecasted to be colder than Mt Washington.

 


  • Phil, BLI snowman and Jesse like this

#65
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 07:14 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

I am the one that compiled the data for the website you are referring to. None of the data is imaginary. The idea behind the webpage was/is to gather as much information as possible on mountain top climate and weather in the United States. The data is not easy to find all in one place, other than the website and it took a lot of work to gather.

The Rainier data you are referring to is from a University of Washington experiment in the 1970's. The station did not last longer than that because that's all the NPS gave permission for the experiment. I believe it lasted nine years or so. The station is not an official NWS or NOAA weather station, but unfortunately it's all the data available (or at least all of the data available that I'm aware of).


Thanks. Are you aware of the elevation/location of the experiment, the type of instruments used, and the frequency of said measurements? This information would be very helpful to me.

Even with the limited data, Rainier is indeed much colder than Mount Washington. Mt Washington is likely windier though (no wind data is available for Rainier). As far as snowfall goes, the summit of Mt Washington is likely just as snowy as Rainier's. Most of the snow on Rainier actually falls between 4500-9000 feet elevation. Above 9000 feet the peak is often above the moist Pacific air masses the drop copious amounts of snow on the slopes of Rainier.


I have no doubt that, on a complete yearly basis, Rainier is colder than Washington. The prevailing summer streamflow gradient(s) Mt. Washington experiences during the summer results in a much warmer boundary layer, and a higher tropopause exists in general. In winter, the opposite is true, with a much lower tropopause and significantly colder climatological boundary layer.

I'll admit that in looking at the climatological temperatures at the altitude(s) corresponding to the aforementioned geopotential height averages on the NOAA ESRL site, the average absolute temperatures in DJF are a lot closer between the two than I was originally thinking, though I still get the same sign.

Like SNOTEL sites however, these high mountain stations out West are not included in the official Nation's extremes. They are simply for scientific study purposes, to predict water runoff and availability and for recreational safety. You can access the SNOTEL data, which covers much of the western mountains below http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/snow/

Since the primary purpose of the stations is to predict runoff though, the stations are in the mountain basins rather than on the mountain summits.

Even Pikes Peak, in Colorado is significantly colder than Mount Washington, but in winter they are more evenly matched. For a bit of history, both the Mount Washington station and the Pikes Peak station were both started during the same time period. The National Weather Service was formed in 1870 and the United States Army Signal Corps were sent to both mountain locations in order to gather data.

The Mount Washington station was begun in 1870 and the Pikes Peak station was started in 1873, three years later. The original purpose of both weather stations was to gather data and to see if weather could be forecasted from the top of the mountains by telegraph. Unfortunately, it was found that there was little correlation between the weather on the mountains and the surrounding country-side, so funding was cut. The Pikes Peak station was put out of commission in 1888, while after some lobbying, the Mount Washington Station was allowed to survive. During the period of record, Pikes Peak was both colder and less windy than Mount Washington.

Luckily for weather watchers though, the Pikes Peak station is one again in operation, thanks to the Cog Railway. The weather data is below:

http://www.cograilwa...eratSummitB.htm

You can obtain the data compiled by the Weather Bureau from the Signal Corps below:

https://books.google...hington&f=false

Notice that it says that Pikes Peak is definitely colder.


Fantastic information, thanks. I'll be adding these sites to my bookmarks tab. :)

That said, the weather on Mt Washington is impressive. It is one of, or perhaps the windiest place in the lower 48. It also has a longer period of record for mountain weather than any station I know of on earth. It is true that many western mountains are colder than Mount Washington, but Mount Washington has the most detailed record and the longest period of record, thus it can be one of the most interesting to study.

In the website you are referring to, I had to gather all the data available. Unfortunately, the actual data for mountain tops is not easy to obtain. It still can be interesting and useful though.

Anyway, NOAA now predicts mountain top weather on a grid and it is very interesting. If anyone is interested, it is quite interesting to compare the forecast for places like Mount Washington, Mount Rainier, and Denali (current forecasts):

Mount Washington:

http://forecast.weat...33#.V9YWQ9QrLs0

982370.JPG

Mount Rainier:

http://forecast.weat...04#.V9YICNQrLs0

982369.JPG

Denali/Mt McKinley:
http://forecast.weat...74#.V9YVyNQrLs0

982368.JPG

Although it can be argued that weather forecast aren't 100% accurate, most of the time Denali and Rainier will be forecasted to be colder than Mt Washington.


I appreciate the information, thanks.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#66
Scott

Posted 11 September 2016 - 07:27 PM

Scott

    Forum Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 226 posts
  • LocationNear Craig Colorado
Thanks. Are you aware of the elevation/location of the experiment, the type of instruments used, and the frequency of said measurements? This information would be very helpful to me. 

 
The weather station was located somewhere on the crater rim and readings were taken continuously.  Unfortunately, I do not know the type of instruments used.   This was an experiment from ~40 years ago.   Because I am so interested in mountain weather, I obtained the temperatures from the NPS Visitor Center in the 1980's.   It wasn't until years later learned that the data came originally from a University of Washington Study in the 1970's when I inquired about it in a weather forum and someone provided me the information.   It may be best to contact the University itself.  I wish I had the extremes for each month, rather than just the averages.  

 

Unfortunately, much of the weather data is hard to obtain from non-official stations (including the data for Peter Sinks, the topic of this forum).

 

For Pikes Peak, for example, Larry Dunn compiled all the data by hand in the basement of some weather office in Colorado Springs.

 

For some stations, I painstakingly dug for any information I could gather for the website, so it will be easily obtainable for anyone.  For SNOTEL sites, Camp Muir, etc., for example, I don't think averages are available.   Daily data is.  I actually calculated all that information by hand!   Not only that, all the data used to be in metric for the SNOTEL sites and I had to convert it!
 

To show how much work some of it was, here is just one except of one of my hundreds of pages compiled on a random SNOTEL site (Five Point Lake in the Uinta Mountains):

982371.JPG

 

Before the internet, I had to gather data by hand at libraries and archives and I compiled hundreds of notebooks of information.  For example, here is a section of one notebook I have on some weather for mountain top locations in the Wasatch:

982372.JPG

So, a lot of the data, I had to calculate using any sources deemed accurate.  (PS, I am currently trying to put enter the data for the weather station at about 14K on Denali if anyone wants to help!).

I do not know what type of equipment was used for recording the weather data; I only obtained the data.  I always try to be as accurate as possible with it and it was a lot of work to obtain.   I hope that people find my webpages useful as my own motivation is only to share often hard to obtain weather data for remote locations and it was a lot of work to compile. ;)  

The spreadsheet you were referring to with the mountain data might not look like much, but it was actually a labor of love that took many hours of work over several years to compile.  The sources given don't mean that it was a simple google search that provided the data; much of it had to be compiled over a period of several years, and by hand.  

Information in the official NOAA NOW database is much easier to obtain!  
 

I have no doubt that, on a complete yearly basis, Rainier is colder than Washington. The prevailing summer streamflow gradient(s) Mt. Washington experiences during the summer results in both a warmer boundary layer, and higher tropopause in general. In winter, the opposite is true, with a much lower tropopause and significantly colder climatological boundary layer.

 

All data I have seen indicated that Mount Washington has lower extremes, but Mount Rainier is colder on average, even in winter (though they are more evenly matched in winter). 

 

Mount Rainier is more consistently cold in winter, while the temperature fluctuates more on Mount Washington, on both the "warm" and cold sides.

During the time the weather station existed on Rainier, for example, the coldest temperature recorded was -36F.   During the same time period, Mt Washington either matched or exceeded that reading in three years (-36F in 1971, -44F in 1976, and -38F  in 1979) and of course many, many times outside those years.  So Mt Washington definitely has lower extremes (and higher ones as well).

 

Even on Pikes Peak, and more so on Rainier though, the temperatures don't get as warm in winter as they do on Mt Washington.   The temperature on Mount Washington actually rises above freezing periodically in most winters, and occasionally even rises into the 40's).   It doesn't do so on Rainier of Pikes Peak (Pikes Peak has never recorded a temperature as warm as freezing in December, January, and February; I don't know what the winter extreme for Rainier is).

 

So, Mt Washington gets both colder and warmer in winter than Pikes Peak or Rainier, even though the average temperature is a bit warmer in winter on Mt Washington (though it would be interesting to compare wind-chills rather than just actual temperatures).  

Anyway, Mt Rainier is a bit colder than Mt Washington in winter, but only because of the much greater elevation.   At similar elevations, there is no contest.

 

Here is the weather data (almost 100 years worth) for the Paradise Ranger Station, located 9000 feet below Rainier's summit:

http://www.wrcc.dri....iMAIN.pl?wa6898

It is 800 feet or so lower than Mt Washington, but much warmer.   However, since it is 9000 feet below Rainier's summit, it is reasonable to assume that the summit of Rainier should be much colder than down at Paradise.  

 

Although the weather data is limited, the 1970's weather data indicates that the average temperature on Rainier was 2F in January.  This is 26.4F colder than the average January temperature at Paradise RS, which is 9000 feet lower.

 

A 26.4F temperature change (which is 2.9F per thousand feet) sounds very reasonable.   I would assume that the data is accurate.

 

I would assume that you would agree that a 2.9F temperature drop per thousand feet would be reasonable?  

 


  • Phil likes this

#67
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 08:14 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

The weather station was located somewhere on the crater rim and readings were taken continuously. Unfortunately, I do not know the type of instruments used. This was an experiment from ~40 years ago. Because I am so interested in mountain weather, I obtained the temperatures from the NPS Visitor Center in the 1980's. It wasn't until years later learned that the data came originally from a University of Washington Study in the 1970's when I inquired about it in a weather forum and someone provided me the information. It may be best to contact the University itself.

Unfortunately, much of the weather data is hard to obtain from non-official stations (including the data for Peter Sinks, the topic of this forum).

For Pikes Peak, for example, Larry Dunn compiled all the data by hand in the basement of some weather office in Colorado Springs.

I painstakingly dug for any information I could gather for the website, so it will be easily obtainable for anyone. For SNOTEL sites, Camp Muir, etc., for example, I don't think averages are available. Daily data is. I actually calculated all that information by hand! Not only that, all the data used to be in metric for the SNOTEL sites and I had to convert it!

To show how much work some of it was, here is just one except of one of my hundreds of pages compiled on a random SNOTEL site (Five Point Lake in the Uinta Mountains):982371.JPG
So, a lot of the data, I had to calculate using any sources deemed accurate. (PS, I am currently trying to put enter the data for the weather station at about 14K on Denali if anyone wants to help!).



All data I have seen indicated that Mount Washington has lower extremes, but Mount Rainier is colder on average, even in winter (though they are more evenly matched in winter).
During the time the weather station existed on Rainier, for example, the coldest temperature recorded was -36F. During the same time period, Mt Washington either matched or exceeded that reading in three years (-36F in 1971, -44F in 1976, and -38F in 1979). So Mt Washington definitely has lower extremes (and higher ones as well).
Anyway, Mt Rainier is a bit colder than Mt Washington in winter, but only because of the much greater elevation. At similar elevations, there is no contest.

Here is the weather data (almost 100 years worth) for the Paradise Ranger Station, located 9000 feet below Rainier's summit:http://www.wrcc.dri....iMAIN.pl?wa6898
It is 800 feet or so lower than Mt Washington, but much warmer. However, since it is 9000 feet below Rainier's summit, it is reasonable to assume that the summit of Rainier should be much colder than down at Paradise.

Although the weather data is limited, the 1970's weather data indicates that the average temperature on Rainier was 2F in January. This is 26.4F colder than the average January temperature at Paradise RS, which is 9000 feet lower.

A 26.4F temperature change (which is 2.9F per thousand feet) sounds very reasonable. I would assume that the data is accurate.

I would assume that you would agree that a 2.9F temperature drop per thousand feet would be reasonable?


Remember that, over the last century in the PNW, the 1970s are one of the coldest periods on record at 500-600mb (during D/J/F) according to the ESRL data.

Did you compare the average recorded on Mt. Rainier to that of Mt. Washington during the same timeframe? Even if you did, that's probably not a sufficiently long period of record, given subdecadal regional variability.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#68
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 08:58 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.
If you think a few years in the 1970s is an adequate reference period for comparison, fine.

I could pick 8 years in Mt. Washington's record to achieve a colder baseline if I wanted to. If the tables were reversed here, I'd be saying the same thing.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#69
wx_statman

Posted 11 September 2016 - 09:36 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2398 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

If you think a few years in the 1970s is an adequate reference period for comparison, fine.

I could pick 8 years in Mt. Washington's record to achieve a colder baseline if I wanted to. If the tables were reversed here, I'd be saying the same thing.

 

You're deflecting. This isn't what the discussion was about. The 1970's data is what it is.

 

The bigger sticking point was using common sense. Does it make sense for a location at 6,288 feet to average colder during the winter than a location at 14,411 feet, at similar latitude? You're the only person who seems to think so. Never mind the PRISM data or 1970's NPS data, both of which also disagree with you. 


  • Jesse likes this

#70
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 09:41 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

You're deflecting. This isn't what the discussion was about. The 1970's data is what it is.

The bigger sticking point was using common sense. Does it make sense for a location at 6,288 feet to average colder during the winter than a location at 14,411 feet, at similar latitude? You're the only person who seems to think so. Never mind the PRISM data or 1970's NPS data, both of which also disagree with you.


So, if I isolate the 1970s data @ Mt. Washington, and obtain a cooler D/J/F average, is that a sufficient comparative baseline? I'd say no, it isn't.

Altitude is only part of the equation. The overall thermal profile is just much colder over northern New England during DJF than it is over the PNW, and geopotential heights are simply lower overall.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#71
wx_statman

Posted 11 September 2016 - 09:45 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2398 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

So, if I isolate the 1970s data @ Mt. Washington, and obtain a cooler D/J/F average, is that a sufficient comparative baseline? I'd say no, it isn't.

Altitude is only part of the equation. The overall thermal profile is just much colder over northern New England during DJF than it is over the PNW, and geopotential heights are simply lower overall.

 

But not enough to overcome 8,000 feet of elevation difference...and that's the point. 



#72
Scott

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:06 PM

Scott

    Forum Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 226 posts
  • LocationNear Craig Colorado

Remember that, over the last century in the PNW, the 1970s are one of the coldest periods on record at 500-600mb (during D/J/F) according to the ESRL data.

Did you compare the average recorded on Mt. Rainier to that of Mt. Washington during the same timeframe? Even if you did, that's probably not a sufficiently long period of record, given subdecadal regional variability.

 

For the purposes of the webpage, I used all of the years of data available.  Mt Washington had a lot more years available.   The web page wasn't meant to be used as a debate, only to provide the information that was available.  

 

Comparing Mt Washington in the 1970's vs Rainier in the 1970's, I come up with an average winter temperature of 2.0F for Rainier and 7.2F for Mt Washington during the same time periods.  It is true that the period of record is short for Mt Rainier, but there isn't more data available.  Also, keep in mind that it really only the daytime winter temperatures that are warmer on Mt Rainier, night temperatures are about the same for Rainier and Mt. Washington.

 

I think that whichever time periods are compared, Mt Rainier would probably still be colder because of the colder day temperatures.  As mentioned before low temperatures on Mt Washington can drop to colder than Rainier ever gets.

 

Edit:  This might be boring to some, but after some searching, I was able to find the old notebooks where I collected some of the Rainier and Paradise info, as well as Mt Washington, long before the internet:

 

982373.JPG

 

982374.JPG

 

982379.JPG


I would start with writing the easy to obtain stations (such as Mt Washington) alphabetically on the right side of the notebook and then overtime fill in more stations on the left (at the same time updating the extremes).   A trip down memory lane, at least for me (I started these notebooks of weather data in October 1988, at the age of 14).

 

As a random example on page of yearly extremes I compiled for a weather station, all by hand, and pre-internet, this one for Salt Lake City:

 

982375.JPG

To show that I really did compile data accurately and correctly, compare my old notebooks to the now available internet database:

 

982376.JPG

 

Notice that they match perfectly.    :)  I have confidence in the data for that webpage, since I feel that I gathered it correctly. 


  • Jesse and IbrChris like this

#73
wx_statman

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:11 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2398 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

What?

Consider an average adiabatic lapse rate. Before/after accounting for the difference in the climatological pressure levels, depending on the moisture content in the profile, you're talking about anywhere between ~22F and ~28F of cooling over 8000ft, probably on the lower end over Rainier, higher over Washington...there's quite a bit more latent heat release ongoing over the high PNW mountains, given the upwind Pacific and height of the terrain.

http://www.atmo.ariz...icLapseRate.doc

 

Based on everything I know, the summit of Mt. Rainier is most likely colder than the summit of Mt. Washington on a long term basis. And this is just talking about DJF, which you seem intent to focus on.



#74
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:13 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.
FWIW, here's the raw geopotential heights (to extract from) between Feb 1970 and Feb 1980.

05BABBF0-41D0-4CAF-87B1-628406286DE8_zps

Accounting for the pressure differentials and summit altitudes, here's the corresponding air temperatures @ 600mb and 700mb, respectively.

54E92414-3457-49C6-8184-F95C84910A3E_zps

5C447C6C-ECE2-4C38-9D32-3E0ADC406333_zps
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#75
wx_statman

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:19 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2398 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

For the purposes of the webpage, I used all of the years of data available.  Mt Washington had a lot more years available.   The web page wasn't meant to be used as a debate, only to provide the information that was available.  

 

Comparing Mt Washington in the 1970's vs Rainier in the 1970's, I come up with an average winter temperature of 2.0F for Rainier and 7.2F for Mt Washington during the same time periods.  It is true that the period of record is short for Mt Rainier, but there isn't more data available.  Also, keep in mind that it really only the daytime winter temperatures that are warmer on Mt Rainier, night temperatures are about the same for Rainier and Mt. Washington.

 

I think that whichever time periods are compared, Mt Rainier would probably still be colder because of the colder day temperatures.  As mentioned before low temperatures on Mt Washington can drop to colder than Rainier ever gets.

 

Edit:  This might be boring to some, but after some searching, I was able to find the old notebooks where I collected some of the Rainier and Paradise info, as well as Mt Washington, long before the internet:

 

982373.JPG

 

982374.JPG

 

982379.JPG


I would start with writing the easy to obtain stations (such as Mt Washington) alphabetically on the right side of the notebook and then overtime fill in more stations on the left (at the same time updating the extremes).   A trip down memory lane, at least for me (I started these notebooks of weather data in October 1988, at the age of 14).

 

As a random example on page of yearly extremes I compiled for a weather station, all by hand, and pre-internet, this one for Salt Lake City:

 

982375.JPG

To show that I really did compile data accurately and correctly, compare my old notebooks to the now available internet database:

 

982376.JPG

 

Notice that they match perfectly.    :)  I have confidence in the data for that webpage, since I feel that I gathered it correctly. 

 

That's cool stuff. Brought back memories for me too. I first really got into the weather in 1994, when I was 11 years old. I used to write down the max/min for PDX every day using pencil and paper. Daily records too, whenever I could catch them on the 5 o'clock news. We weren't subscribing to any newspapers at the time, so watching the weather segment on the news was literally my only source of weather information. I still have all my old weather notes from the 1990's. 


  • Jesse likes this

#76
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:24 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

But not enough to overcome 8,000 feet of elevation difference...and that's the point.


For instance, despite that elevation difference, Mt. Washington is (based on everything we know) a much windier location. Can you figure why this might be? :)
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#77
wx_statman

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:24 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2398 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

FWIW, here's the raw geopotential heights (to extract from) between Feb 1970 and Feb 1980.

05BABBF0-41D0-4CAF-87B1-628406286DE8_zps

Accounting for the pressure differentials and summit altitudes, here's the corresponding air temperatures @ 600mb and 700mb, respectively.

54E92414-3457-49C6-8184-F95C84910A3E_zps

5C447C6C-ECE2-4C38-9D32-3E0ADC406333_zps

 

As has been pointed out by others, continental-scale reanalysis isn't going to prove anything regarding actual temperatures at the summits. We have two sources of data, both of which show Mt. Rainier as colder than Mt. Washington. Both year round and during DJF.

 

And once again, there's the question of common sense. 


  • Black Hole likes this

#78
Scott

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:26 PM

Scott

    Forum Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 226 posts
  • LocationNear Craig Colorado

FWIW, here's the raw geopotential heights (to extract from) between Feb 1970 and Feb 1980.

05BABBF0-41D0-4CAF-87B1-628406286DE8_zps

Accounting for the pressure differentials and summit altitudes, here's the corresponding air temperatures @ 600mb and 700mb, respectively.

54E92414-3457-49C6-8184-F95C84910A3E_zps

5C447C6C-ECE2-4C38-9D32-3E0ADC406333_zps

 

I am not trying to argue, but I'm confused as to why you used 600 and 700 mb.  Maybe I'm not seeing it or am thinking along different lines?

Shouldn't it be ~610 for Mt Washington and ~453 for Rainier?    Shouldn't these be the ones that are compared? (600 vs 450 to make it easy).



#79
wx_statman

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:26 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2398 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

For instance, despite that elevation difference, Mt. Washington is (based on everything we know) a much windier location. Can you figure why this might be? :)

 

You're drifting off topic now. You've been proven wrong. Man up, and learn. 



#80
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:28 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

As has been pointed out by others, continental-scale reanalysis isn't going to prove anything regarding actual temperatures at the summits. We have two sources of data, both of which show Mt. Rainier as colder than Mt. Washington. Both year round and during DJF.

And once again, there's the question of common sense.


Note the New Hamshire temperature profile averages approximately 10*C colder than the WA temperature profile. In other words, it makes up for as much (or more) the temperature differential by altitude as would be expected under the relevant hydrostatic lapse rates.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#81
Phil

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:34 PM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

I am not trying to argue, but I'm confused as to why you used 600 and 700 mb. Maybe I'm not seeing it or am thinking along different lines?

Shouldn't it be ~610 for Mt Washington and ~453 for Rainier? Shouldn't these be the ones that are compared? (600 vs 450 to make it easy).


Just using the simple conversion.

http://www.srh.noaa....ressurealtitude

http://www.srh.noaa....eConversion.pdf

Unfortunately ESRL doesn't have an 800mb option, it just jumps from 700mb to 850mb.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#82
Jesse

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:40 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15608 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

That's cool stuff. Brought back memories for me too. I first really got into the weather in 1994, when I was 11 years old. I used to write down the max/min for PDX every day using pencil and paper. Daily records too, whenever I could catch them on the 5 o'clock news. We weren't subscribing to any newspapers at the time, so watching the weather segment on the news was literally my only source of weather information. I still have all my old weather notes from the 1990's.


How interesting. Starting in 1997 (when I was 11) I kept a daily journal which included the high and low at VUO, complete with little icon-like pictures I drew alongside it to illustrate what the day's weather had looked like. I kept a journal like that all through high school and a bit beyond.

I resumed something similar my three years out in Stevenson, this time generally writing a small note on the weather event(s) of the day, along with the high and low.

#83
Jesse

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:43 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15608 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')
Love your input here, Scott. High mountain climatology is a fascinating area of study. Hope to see more posts from you.
  • wx_statman likes this

#84
wx_statman

Posted 11 September 2016 - 10:49 PM

wx_statman

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2398 posts
  • LocationPortland, OR

How interesting. Starting in 1997 (when I was 11) I kept a daily journal which included the high and low at VUO, complete with little icon-like pictures I drew alongside it to illustrate what the day's weather had looked like. I kept a journal like that all through high school and a bit beyond.

I resumed something similar my three years out in Stevenson, this time generally writing a small note on the weather event(s) of the day, along with the high and low.

 

I kept paper logs all the way until 2000, when I got my first girlfriend.  :lol:



#85
Black Hole

Posted 12 September 2016 - 07:00 AM

Black Hole

    Daily Contributor

  • Admin
  • 1190 posts
  • LocationBountiful, Ut 84010 ~4575ft

Just using the simple conversion.

http://www.srh.noaa....ressurealtitude

http://www.srh.noaa....eConversion.pdf

Unfortunately ESRL doesn't have an 800mb option, it just jumps from 700mb to 850mb.

 

Definitely larger than a 100 mb difference between the two stations though, and so this already bad continental scale reanalysis comparison is even worse. The resolution on these maps is something like 50-100 km by the looks of how smoothed it is. You could do somewhat better by using those equations you listed to estimate the pressure and temperature at each of the summits even though there are also problems with that. For example, the different thermal profiles mean that the equation may over or underestimate the T/P changes. 


BS Atmospheric Science University of Utah May 2015

PhD Candidate Atmospheric Sciences

 

--Emphasis on: Forecasting, Mountain Weather, Numerical Weather Prediction, Data Assimilation

 

Winter 2016/17 Snow:
Nov 17: 3.2", 23: 1.6", 28: 9.2" (14)

Dec 1: .5", 16: 2.5", 25: 13" (16)

Jan 2: 5", 3: 2.4", 4: 7.7", 12: 1", 19: 1.2", 21: 13", 23: 6", 24: 1", 25: 3.7", 26: 2.5" (43.5) 

Feb 11: .5", 23: 6.5", 27: 4.5" (13.5)

Mar 5: 5.5" (5.5)

Apr 8: 2", 9: 1.8" (3.8)

May 17: 1" (1)
Total: 96.3"

Lowest Temp: 2F


#86
Black Hole

Posted 12 September 2016 - 07:00 AM

Black Hole

    Daily Contributor

  • Admin
  • 1190 posts
  • LocationBountiful, Ut 84010 ~4575ft

Somebody should find the DJF averages for Mt. Washington over 9 year periods and see if they can even find anything comparable to what was actually observed at Rainier for its 9 year period. 


BS Atmospheric Science University of Utah May 2015

PhD Candidate Atmospheric Sciences

 

--Emphasis on: Forecasting, Mountain Weather, Numerical Weather Prediction, Data Assimilation

 

Winter 2016/17 Snow:
Nov 17: 3.2", 23: 1.6", 28: 9.2" (14)

Dec 1: .5", 16: 2.5", 25: 13" (16)

Jan 2: 5", 3: 2.4", 4: 7.7", 12: 1", 19: 1.2", 21: 13", 23: 6", 24: 1", 25: 3.7", 26: 2.5" (43.5) 

Feb 11: .5", 23: 6.5", 27: 4.5" (13.5)

Mar 5: 5.5" (5.5)

Apr 8: 2", 9: 1.8" (3.8)

May 17: 1" (1)
Total: 96.3"

Lowest Temp: 2F


#87
Jesse

Posted 12 September 2016 - 07:14 AM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15608 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

I kept paper logs all the way until 2000, when I got my first girlfriend. :lol:


I kept them through my first couple. Geek is chic!

#88
Phil

Posted 12 September 2016 - 07:34 AM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

Definitely larger than a 100 mb difference between the two stations though, and so this already bad continental scale reanalysis comparison is even worse. The resolution on these maps is something like 50-100 km by the looks of how smoothed it is. You could do somewhat better by using those equations you listed to estimate the pressure and temperature at each of the summits even though there are also problems with that. For example, the different thermal profiles mean that the equation may over or underestimate the T/P changes.


I'm aware, thanks. I wasn't trying to suggest the two profiles above represented summit temperatures. I was only comparing the difference between the two locations' temperatures aloft.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#89
Eujunga

Posted 12 September 2016 - 09:02 AM

Eujunga

    Forum Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts

That's cool stuff. Brought back memories for me too. I first really got into the weather in 1994, when I was 11 years old. I used to write down the max/min for PDX every day using pencil and paper. Daily records too, whenever I could catch them on the 5 o'clock news. We weren't subscribing to any newspapers at the time, so watching the weather segment on the news was literally my only source of weather information. I still have all my old weather notes from the 1990's. 

 

 

How interesting. Starting in 1997 (when I was 11) I kept a daily journal which included the high and low at VUO, complete with little icon-like pictures I drew alongside it to illustrate what the day's weather had looked like. I kept a journal like that all through high school and a bit beyond.

I resumed something similar my three years out in Stevenson, this time generally writing a small note on the weather event(s) of the day, along with the high and low.

 

 

I kept paper logs all the way until 2000, when I got my first girlfriend.  :lol:

 

 

I kept them through my first couple. Geek is chic!

 

I was keeping my own sort of half-assed handwritten weather records before any of you were sperm yet :)

 

 

Wx_Notebook01.jpg


  • iFred, BLI snowman, IbrChris and 1 other like this

Tujunga, CA (15 miles N of Downtown L.A.) - Elev. 1,860 ft.

 

Eugene, OR (5 miles SSW) - Elev. 850 ft.


#90
IbrChris

Posted 12 September 2016 - 09:09 AM

IbrChris

    Moderating Meteorologist

  • Meteorologist
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1901 posts
  • LocationTigard, OR and Portland, OR (work)

My thoughts as a meteorologist after reading this thread:
 

* Mt Rainier is probably colder on average than Mt Washington (summit of both) in the winter (DJF) and annualized timeframes.

* I think it's tough to say which has a higher mean wind speed (though with a typically stronger jet Mt Washington probably sees higher absolute wind speeds than Rainier).

Let's examine H7 and H5 windspeeds (annual mean)

Rainier proxies:
UIL (1966-2014): 21 kts (H7), 34 kts (H5)
SLE (1956-2014): 21 kts (H7), 34 kts (H5)

Washington proxies:
PWM and GYX (1948-2014): 18 kts (H8), 27 kts (H7), 41 kts (H5)
ALB (1948-2014): 20 kts (H8), 28 kts (H7), 41 kts (H5)

Summit of Mt Washington is 6,288' or about 800 mb.
Summit of Rainier is 14,411' or about 590 mb (~600 mb).

H8, H7 and H5 annual mean temps at the same locations (deg C):
UIL: 3, -4, -19
SLE: 5, -2, -18

PWM/GYX: 2, -4, -19
ALB: 3, -3, -18

700 mb and 500 mb temps are pretty similar, annualized, at both Washington and Rainier meaning Rainier's summit is certainly colder than Mt Washington on average.

 

Wind speeds are tough to predict at Rainier as the summit is higher (expected higher winds) but broader (more surface friction at summit level versus a smaller summit area like Washington), so I can't say for certain which has stronger mean winds. I wouldn't be surprised if Rainier averaged lower on its summit (Columbia Crest), but potentially a location near the edge of the summit like Liberty Cap could average higher than Mt Washington. Winds on the windward aspects of the summit are likely stronger than those on the summit itself and on the leeward aspects.


  • Scott likes this

The Pacific Northwest: Where storms go to die.


#91
Phil

Posted 12 September 2016 - 09:53 AM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.
I have to concede my position on average summit temperatures. I thought I'd read a solid piece of literature on the issue somewhere, but I cannot find it.

Talked about the topic with one of my professors (Dynamicist w/ a PhD in mesoscale meteorology), and he basically just tore into me before sarcastically expressing his "profound disappointment" :lol:
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#92
Black Hole

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:04 AM

Black Hole

    Daily Contributor

  • Admin
  • 1190 posts
  • LocationBountiful, Ut 84010 ~4575ft

Great news Phil! Sorry for being a jerk to you :) 

 

Anyway, it was a fun debate. 


BS Atmospheric Science University of Utah May 2015

PhD Candidate Atmospheric Sciences

 

--Emphasis on: Forecasting, Mountain Weather, Numerical Weather Prediction, Data Assimilation

 

Winter 2016/17 Snow:
Nov 17: 3.2", 23: 1.6", 28: 9.2" (14)

Dec 1: .5", 16: 2.5", 25: 13" (16)

Jan 2: 5", 3: 2.4", 4: 7.7", 12: 1", 19: 1.2", 21: 13", 23: 6", 24: 1", 25: 3.7", 26: 2.5" (43.5) 

Feb 11: .5", 23: 6.5", 27: 4.5" (13.5)

Mar 5: 5.5" (5.5)

Apr 8: 2", 9: 1.8" (3.8)

May 17: 1" (1)
Total: 96.3"

Lowest Temp: 2F


#93
Phil

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:44 AM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

Great news Phil! Sorry for being a jerk to you :)

Anyway, it was a fun debate.


It's no problem at all. In the end, as much as we bicker, we're just a big, dysfunctional family with a strange, shared hobby. :)

Somehow I screwed up the hydrostatic equation for the ALR I was using...so yeah, I'm kinda somber right now. That's just incompetence on my part. However, I honestly don't have any "pride" invested here. I really thought I was correct.

To be fair, though, as much as I love PRISM, I'd still avoid invoking it in circumstances like this. Though I'm not sure there's much more we can actually do, at least without more concrete observational data for Rainier.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#94
IbrChris

Posted 12 September 2016 - 10:56 AM

IbrChris

    Moderating Meteorologist

  • Meteorologist
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1901 posts
  • LocationTigard, OR and Portland, OR (work)

I have to concede my position on average summit temperatures. I thought I'd read a solid piece of literature on the issue somewhere, but I cannot find it.

Talked about the topic with one of my professors (Dynamicist w/ a PhD in mesoscale meteorology), and he basically just tore into me before sarcastically expressing his "profound disappointment" :lol:

It's cool...I don't think any less of you. It led to an interesting discussion. In the absence of actual observations on Rainier the only real data to look at is proxy data from soundings...but IMO it's inconclusive which location has a higher mean wind speed with the limited data available.


The Pacific Northwest: Where storms go to die.


#95
Scott

Posted 12 September 2016 - 11:00 AM

Scott

    Forum Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 226 posts
  • LocationNear Craig Colorado
* Mt Rainier is probably colder on average than Mt Washington (summit of both) in the winter (DJF) and annualized timeframes.

 

 

Thanks Chris; that's the conclusion I have as well.

 

The 10C/18F temperature change for similar altitudes in New England vs. Mt Rainier just wouldn't be enough to compensate for the altitude.  That would mean that the temperature change between 6288 feet and 14,411 feet would have to be less than 18F, which is unlikely.

 

Anyway, it was an interesting discussion if even if it got out of hand at times.

 

I have to say that even though indications are that Rainier is a little colder in winter, comparing the winter temperatures on Rainier vs. Mt Washington to me actually makes Mt. Washington more impressive, not less.   All indications I have say that winter temperatures on Mt Washington (6288 feet) are equivalent to about 13,000 feet on Mt Rainier.   This is very impressive since Mt Washington is less than half that elevation.    It also means that Mt Washington is colder in winter than all other Cascade Peaks, besides Rainier.    It must also be mentioned that even if Rainier is as windy as Mount Washington, that a 100 mph wind (or any other speed) has a lot more force at 6288 feet than it would at 14,411 feet.

Anyway, I guess I have to accept some responsibility for starting the debate since it was my webpage that seems to have started it.  ;)   When I created it, I never knew that it would start such a debate.

 

That said, my two biggest hobbies are weather and mountains, so discussing mountain weather combines both of them.   I love weather mountain statistics and have climbed more than 2000 mountains and always pay attention to the weather conditions.

 

And just for fun, here's a photo of me shielding my face from the cold from a -85F windchill on the old chart (a less impressive -58F on the new chart):

 

40311.jpg

 

I'm in the mountains in all kinds of weather.  ;)

 

In the absence of actual observations on Rainier the only real data to look at is proxy data from soundings

 

I wonder how the data I provided on Mt Rainier compares with the proxy data?   It will be interesting to compare.

 

Anyway, back to the most interesting topic of Peter Sinks!


  • iFred, Phil, BLI snowman and 1 other like this

#96
Phil

Posted 12 September 2016 - 11:06 AM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.

It's cool...I don't think any less of you. It led to an interesting discussion. In the absence of actual observations on Rainier the only real data to look at is proxy data from soundings...but IMO it's inconclusive which location has a higher mean wind speed with the limited data available.


Thanks.

From what I've read, the topography of the White Mountain range itself plays a significant role in accelerating the winds on Mount Washington. I'm pretty sure Mt. Washington takes the cake on this one, but I'll see if I can find anything else about it on google scholar.

If the NWS point-click forecasts are any indication, though, it's probably Mt. Washington.
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#97
Phil

Posted 12 September 2016 - 11:10 AM

Phil

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12839 posts
  • LocationCabin John, MD.
FWIW, here are the NWS point-click wind forecasts for both locations.

http://forecast.weat...55#.V9b9NcT3aJI

http://forecast.weat...04#.V9b9ksT3aJK
Personal Weather Station, Live Stream on Wunderground: https://www.wundergr...BETHE62#history

Warm season 2017
Thunderstorm days: 10
Severe days: 5
Rain total: 11.58"
Highs at/above 90*F: 16
Warmest high: 99.4*F
Warmest low: 79.7*F

#98
IbrChris

Posted 12 September 2016 - 11:43 AM

IbrChris

    Moderating Meteorologist

  • Meteorologist
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1901 posts
  • LocationTigard, OR and Portland, OR (work)

Thanks.

From what I've read, the topography of the White Mountain range itself plays a significant role in accelerating the winds on Mount Washington. I'm pretty sure Mt. Washington takes the cake on this one, but I'll see if I can find anything else about it on google scholar.

If the NWS point-click forecasts are any indication, though, it's probably Mt. Washington.

I tend to agree with this because looking at Albany and Portland, ME sounding archives the 700 mb wind speed (28 knots) averages below the Mt Washington mean wind speed (35 mph or 30 knots), even though the summit is considerably below 700 mb pressure level.

I can also see the wind on Mt Washington being more extreme in absolute terms (231 mph) but the mean speed falling below Mt Rainier's. Not surprising given Rainier is around 590-600 mb. Bottom line is I can't say either way with any confidence at this point.


The Pacific Northwest: Where storms go to die.


#99
Black Hole

Posted 12 September 2016 - 07:25 PM

Black Hole

    Daily Contributor

  • Admin
  • 1190 posts
  • LocationBountiful, Ut 84010 ~4575ft

I deleted a lot of the mean posts, but left posts of value for future readers as there was a lot of good stuff in there. 


  • IbrChris likes this

BS Atmospheric Science University of Utah May 2015

PhD Candidate Atmospheric Sciences

 

--Emphasis on: Forecasting, Mountain Weather, Numerical Weather Prediction, Data Assimilation

 

Winter 2016/17 Snow:
Nov 17: 3.2", 23: 1.6", 28: 9.2" (14)

Dec 1: .5", 16: 2.5", 25: 13" (16)

Jan 2: 5", 3: 2.4", 4: 7.7", 12: 1", 19: 1.2", 21: 13", 23: 6", 24: 1", 25: 3.7", 26: 2.5" (43.5) 

Feb 11: .5", 23: 6.5", 27: 4.5" (13.5)

Mar 5: 5.5" (5.5)

Apr 8: 2", 9: 1.8" (3.8)

May 17: 1" (1)
Total: 96.3"

Lowest Temp: 2F


#100
IbrChris

Posted 12 September 2016 - 09:32 PM

IbrChris

    Moderating Meteorologist

  • Meteorologist
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1901 posts
  • LocationTigard, OR and Portland, OR (work)
Looking at Utah Climate Center the low of 6.5 F was the lowest Sept low at Peter Sinks so far during the era of permanent recording instrumentation at the site (2010-present). July and Aug both saw teens this year, the first summer since 2010 when both months recorded a low < 20F. Can we eclipse the -51 which is the current record low since 2010 this winter? Fingers crossed.

The Pacific Northwest: Where storms go to die.