Yeah, still locked into at least the 5th wettest year on record but it would be a big fail to not move up the list. It was the wettest January to October for Chicago by a decent margin (46.12", second place is 43.74").
Could be near the records at ORD on the 26th. The 26th happens to be a vulnerable day with a record high of just 55... every other day from 12/23 through 12/31 has a record high of 61+. Record high min is 45 which also could be a close call.
I don't know if it's seeing all this bare ground or what but the month seems milder than it has been to date. Will be accelerating the positive departures for sure.
Good point. No guarantees on how individual storms work out, but if it does end up near/colder than average and wetter than average, you'd take your chances with that combination.
This is now among the 5% driest starts to December for Chicago.
Lowest December 1-20 precip:
0.10" 1941
0.11" 1896, 1962
0.13" 1872
0.15" 1988
0.16" 1913
0.17" 2019
0.18" 1989
0.21" 1900
0.23" 1930
If 0.06" or less falls through the 27th, which looks quite possible at this point, then it would be the second driest December through that day of the month. More substantial precip does look to occur as we get into the last few days of the year so the month is probably unlikely to finish super high on the dry list.
It is what it is. It is borderline impossible to have consistent winter with no breaks/thaws at any time the closer you get to 40N (really more like 41-42N). For areas that missed the recent storm in the OV, this Dec has been a little extreme in its suckiness but what are ya gonna do?
And there was the recent OV storm. The thing about Nino/Ninoish Decembers is that the snow works out sometimes but it's harder to pull off a cold and snow combination in December... there are exceptions of course.
This storm has put IND over 10" for the season. This is the tenth time that IND has received 10"+ snow by December 17. The list of years: 1899, 1932, 1966, 1977, 1989, 1996, 2005, 2007, 2010, 2019
Definitely a step forward. There will still be situations that the new zones don't really handle well, especially some early season snows when there may be a west/east gradient due to the warm lake. When those storms arise they can just go with lesser amounts near the lake wording.
Wasn't that long ago that storminess was showing up around/after Christmas. Perhaps we are in the lose the storm(s) phase of the modeling. Action either way would be nice.
True. I was talking more about snow amounts. For example at Chicago...
1998-99 minus the January storm: 29.3"
2014-15 minus the late Jan/early Feb storm: 31.4"
The problem with a winter like 2014-15 and even 1998-99 is that if you take away the huge storm from each, you are left with a fairly mediocre winter overall. Sure, I would sign up for a repeat if it meant getting the huge storm, but there are no guarantees that happens even if the progression is similar.
This upcoming stretch looks pretty annoying tbh. Mild/warm but not particularly warm/record breaking and lack of storminess.
Looking at record highs for Chicago for the stretch leading up to and just beyond Christmas, the record highs generally look safe. There are a couple somewhat vulnerable days in there with lower record highs but not sure the timing of the warmest days will be right.