Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,611
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

February 20-22 Winter Weather Threat


snowstormcanuck

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 405
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The 6z GFS has the look of a significant icing event for a large portion of S On. A baffin island block manages to form in advance of the system which forced the track further south. High over quebec is pretty strong and help's usher in an ENE flow, which although not an "ideal" setup, looks to do damage with an almost frozen lake ontario. Precip goes over to snow by the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a residual thread for the minor front end icing/back end slush that make occur with the two storms late next week/next weekend.

 

Of course, the 6z GFS broke continuity and is suggesting something not so minor. A further south solution does have support from the GGEM and EURO ensembles.

 

gfs_namer_192_850_temp_mslp_precip.gif

Interesting. Not sure that solution has any credence, but talk about heartbreak for Geos and those looking forward to ridding ourselves of snow pack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 6z GFS has the look of a significant icing event for a large portion of S On. A baffin island block manages to form in advance of the system which forced the track further south. High over quebec is pretty strong and help's usher in an ENE flow, which although not an "ideal" setup, looks to do damage with an almost frozen lake ontario. Precip goes over to snow by the end.

 

In addition to the blocking feature you've mentioned, because the 2nd s/w follows in such close proximity to the 1st one, the SE ridge isn't really allowed to rebuild. If the 2nd s/w slows down and is vigorous enough then it could still end up quite warm but we at least have a roadmap on how to avoid that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18z NAM has 17 inches for DLL

 

140220/1300Z 67 13008KT 31.4F FZRA 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.03|| 0.033 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.05|| 0.04 0| 0|100
140220/1400Z 68 13006KT 31.9F FZRA 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.05|| 0.049 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.10|| 0.09 0| 0|100
140220/1500Z 69 10006KT 32.1F FZRA 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.062 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.10|| 0.15 0| 0|100
140220/1600Z 70 07005KT 32.1F SNZRPL 0:1| 0.0|| 0.05|| 0.00|| 0.044 0:1| 0.0|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 0.20 13| 44| 44
140220/1700Z 71 04006KT 32.1F SNOW 11:1| 0.6|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.057 11:1| 0.6|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 0.26 100| 0| 0
140220/1800Z 72 02010KT 31.5F SNOW 10:1| 0.8|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.087 10:1| 1.5|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 0.34 100| 0| 0
----------------------------------------------+----++-----+-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+---
140220/1900Z 73 01012KT 31.4F SNOW 11:1| 1.1|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.105 10:1| 2.6|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 0.45 100| 0| 0
140220/2000Z 74 36011KT 31.0F SNOW 15:1| 2.4|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.154 12:1| 5.0|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 0.60 100| 0| 0
140220/2100Z 75 36013KT 30.8F SNOW 12:1| 3.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.238 12:1| 7.9|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 0.84 100| 0| 0
140220/2200Z 76 34013KT 31.0F SNOW 11:1| 1.6|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.149 12:1| 9.5|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 0.99 100| 0| 0
140220/2300Z 77 32016KT 31.2F SNOW 20:1| 2.8|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.144 13:1| 12.3|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 1.13 100| 0| 0
140221/0000Z 78 31022KT 31.4F SNOW 22:1| 3.1|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.141 14:1| 15.5|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 1.27 100| 0| 0
----------------------------------------------+----++-----+-------------++--------------++-------------++-----------+---+---
140221/0100Z 79 31023KT 31.5F SNOW 10:1| 1.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.094 14:1| 16.4|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 1.37 100| 0| 0
140221/0200Z 80 30022KT 31.7F SNOW 19:1| 0.5|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.027 14:1| 16.9|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 1.39 100| 0| 0
140221/0300Z 81 29023KT 31.4F SNOW 12:1| 0.1|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.006 14:1| 17.0|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 1.40 100| 0| 0
140221/0400Z 82 29025KT 28.5F 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.000 14:1| 17.0|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 1.40 0| 0| 0
140221/0500Z 83 29024KT 24.2F 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.000 14:1| 17.0|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 1.40 0| 0| 0
140221/0600Z 84 29023KT 20.6F 0:1| 0.0|| 0.00|| 0.00|| 0.000 14:1| 17.0|| 0.05|| 0.10|| 1.40 0| 0| 0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yep, if we fall an inch short or something it will be pretty funny

 

Then Milwaukee and Chicago will both be considered screwed out of potential records.  Ask Bowme anyway, he's pretty certain MKE had well over 100" of snow in 07-08, and it makes sense given the 120" totals that were sporadically recorded in the north and west suburbs that winter that they might have lowballed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...