Pittsburgh/Western PA Weather

[Burghblizz]

For the third week in a row we can say...

"The middle of the week storm looks like it can be big....."

18Z GFS gives us a foot, while beating the hell out of eastern Kentucky with over 20". Wonder in what way things will go wrong, eh? (wide left, wide right, or off the crossbar)

But let's bring it home guys

[passmaster16]

For the third week in a row we can say...

"The middle of the week storm looks like it can be big....."

18Z GFS gives us a foot, while beating the hell out of eastern Kentucky with over 20". Wonder in what way things will go wrong, eh? (wide left, wide right, or off the crossbar)

But let's bring it home guys

That would be nice burgh, we're due for a big one this year

[Burghblizz]

Total so far: 36.3

Yeah, great post. It's not like you guys have been above normal in December and almost double normal in January, and almost at normal with the two snowiest months yet to come. If that were the case, then you would look really silly.

Unless of course you making fun of the idiots in the mid-Atlantic/Philly threads then in that case, well played

I have to agree that this winter has kinda sucked. Another football analogy...

Your fantasy QB is 30 for 45 for 375 and 2 TD's and 2INT's. You're thinking pretty nice day. Then you ask a fan of the actual real team and he says that the two INT's were pick six's, while the 2 TD's were garbage time in a 31-17 loss. That's a losing effort despite the nice stats!

Moral of the story....stats can be deceiving. We haven't come through in the clutch. Just an insane number of close calls and big storms finding a home elsewhere. And while I always like cold and snow, it does kind of wear on you to be this cold for 10 weeks.....always brushing an inch of snow off your car.....but then having to see the big one go bye bye. So I do get what he is saying...

[Digger]

...we're due for a big one this year

No, we had a big one last year. Remember?

(And that's not just Digger hating snow. It would be quite an anomaly to have a 12+ storm here two years in a row.)

[passmaster16]

No, we had a big one last year. Remember?

(And that's not just Digger hating snow. It would be quite an anomaly to have a 12+ storm here two years in a row.)

Sorry but I don't agree. Yes before last year, we've had a few years of winters without any big storms, but prior to that we have also had a few years in a row where we've gotten big storms. I believe it's cyclical and I believe that with last year, we're heading into a couple year stretch of stormier winters. This year has definitely been a stormy one just a few misses so far.

[weatherman5416]

With the 1 year anniversary of last year's "blizzard", just thought I would share some pictures I had. Should refresh everyone's memory pretty quickly!

[blackngoldrules]

For the third week in a row we can say...

"The middle of the week storm looks like it can be big....."

18Z GFS gives us a foot, while beating the hell out of eastern Kentucky with over 20". Wonder in what way things will go wrong, eh? (wide left, wide right, or off the crossbar)

But let's bring it home guys

As long as we don't have Scott Norwood directing this storm toward us, maybe we have a shot at this one. Seriously though, I'm not holding my breath at this point. Still a week away, so plenty of time for it to do what the rest have done so far. We'll see.

[Digger]

Sorry but I don't agree. Yes before last year, we've had a few years of winters without any big storms, but prior to that we have also had a few years in a row where we've gotten big storms. I believe it's cyclical and I believe that with last year, we're heading into a couple year stretch of stormier winters. This year has definitely been a stormy one just a few misses so far.

Ok, I probably should have chosen a higher number than 12", but here it is, from the NWS site:

FREQUENCY OF HEAVY SNOWFALLS

Snowfalls of 16 inches or more...............once in 15 years

Snowfalls of 13-15 inches or more............once in 5 years

Snowfalls of 8-12 inches or more.............once every two years

Snowfalls of 5 inches or more................twice a year

So, even at 13", in order for it to average out to once in 5 years, twice in two years would be a statistical anomally. Two in a row would then require eight years without one to meet the average. I didn't say it couldn't happen. I just didn't agree that we are "due".

(On edit: Because, if we went four years without a 12" storm, you'd argue that we were indeed "due", because statistically, we should have one every two years, right?)

And I could be wrong again, but my sense of what constitues a "big one" in everybody's mind is probably influenced by what others have gotten multiple times this year--those 16"+ dumpings make 12" look light by comparison. So, no, we're even less "due" for one of those.

Maybe somebody has a handle on, or would enjoy researching, when we last had 16"+ two years in a row?

[Burghblizz]

Ok, I probably should have chosen a higher number than 12", but here it is, from the NWS site:

So, even at 13", in order for it to average out to once in 5 years, twice in two years would be a statistical anomally. Two in a row would then require eight years without one to meet the average. I didn't say it couldn't happen. I just didn't agree that we are "due".

(On edit: Because, if we went four years without a 12" storm, you'd argue that we were indeed "due", because statistically, we should have one every two years, right?)

And I could be wrong again, but my sense of what constitues a "big one" in everybody's mind is probably influenced by what others have gotten multiple times this year--those 16"+ dumpings make 12" look light by comparison. So, no, we're even less "due" for one of those.

Maybe somebody has a handle on, or would enjoy researching, when we last had 16"+ two years in a row?

That breakdown has been on the NWS site for years and years. I've never been a fan of those categories.

Climo as I see it? Let's look at the the last 35 years.

- I can count 8 storms in the past 35 years that were either officially over 12", or the vast majority of the area was. So that's about 1 every 4 to 5 years. For example, did you get a foot of more in Dec '92 and Jan '96? Exactly....so I gotta count them

- In that same period there were 5 storms that were over 15" (again, you have to be a little flexible here. Jan '94 was a 20" storm downtown, so that 14" airport total is meaningless.. Jan '78 was 14.8" I think, but who cares about .2"). So about once every 7 years.

-In that period, there were 3 20" storms (again, I'll take the downtown total for Jan 1994)....so I'll call that a once a decade or 12 year storm. The official totals argues it's less frequent, but I would rather look at what we know to be the average impact, not the airport total.

So we can officially conclude we are NOT "due" for a 15" or 20" or 25" storm. Maybe we can argue that we should be jealous since areas that should not be getting consistent poundings are. That's fair. Our bitching is justified relative to what has been going on around us.

Where we ARE due and have been due?? I think the garden variety 7" to 11" thump has seemed to vanish. We have had some storms where we scratch and claw our way to 7" or 8" over the course of 2 or 3 days. But it seems like we used to get a lot more of those solid, synoptic, warning criteria snows. This is more anecdotal than anything because these are less memorable as far as listing them year by year. But it seems like we should be good for more than we've gotten.

So we are not necessarily due for the "big one".....we are due for the "kinda big one"

-

[north pgh]

Ok, I probably should have chosen a higher number than 12", but here it is, from the NWS site:

So, even at 13", in order for it to average out to once in 5 years, twice in two years would be a statistical anomally. Two in a row would then require eight years without one to meet the average. I didn't say it couldn't happen. I just didn't agree that we are "due".

(On edit: Because, if we went four years without a 12" storm, you'd argue that we were indeed "due", because statistically, we should have one every two years, right?)

And I could be wrong again, but my sense of what constitues a "big one" in everybody's mind is probably influenced by what others have gotten multiple times this year--those 16"+ dumpings make 12" look light by comparison. So, no, we're even less "due" for one of those.

Maybe somebody has a handle on, or would enjoy researching, when we last had 16"+ two years in a row?

Here below is one of my favorites I remember growing up.

Back to Back Snowstorms (Within two weeks of each other)

1890 25.9" Dec 16-18 13.2" Dec 25-27

2010 21.1" Feb 5-6 7.9" Feb 9-10

1978 12.2" Jan 16-18 14.8" Jan 19-21********

1994 13.9" Jan 3-4 5.8" Jan 17-18

1978.......I was in 10th grade and I went out shoveling snow on the 18th and made a ton of money. After the second storm I went back to the same houses and made more money. I remember the people were gracious but not as happy having to pay me again. I remember how hard the second storm was to shovel because there was nowhere to pile the snow. One of the houses had a driveway with walls on the side. After the second storm I had to walk the snow across the street to pile it because it was too high on the sides. I believe we were off school most of the week.

[Burghblizz]

Here below is one of my favorites I remember growing up.

Back to Back Snowstorms (Within two weeks of each other)

1890 25.9" Dec 16-18 13.2" Dec 25-27

2010 21.1" Feb 5-6 7.9" Feb 9-10

1978 12.2" Jan 16-18 14.8" Jan 19-21********

1994 13.9" Jan 3-4 5.8" Jan 17-18

1978.......I was in 10th grade and I went out shoveling snow on the 18th and made a ton of money. After the second storm I went back to the same houses and made more money. I remember the people were gracious but not as happy having to pay me again. I remember how hard the second storm was to shovel because there was nowhere to pile the snow. One of the houses had a driveway with walls on the side. After the second storm I had to walk the snow across the street to pile it because it was too high on the sides. I believe we were off school most of the week.

That Jan '94 total has to be the least representative total ever. Listen to Denardo rattling off totals around the 4:00 mark....

[blackngoldrules]

That Jan '94 total has to be the least representative total ever. Listen to Denardo rattling off totals around the 4:00 mark....

I got 27" from that storm in southwestern Westmoreland County. Some areas got over 30", and I'm not talking about the mountains either.

[Digger]

Something else you have to consider is that the larger storms also count as being part of the "or more" thresholds for the smaller storms. Your once-in-five-years 13"-15" storm is also one of your once-in-two-years 8"-12" storms. In a ten year period you don't get five 12" storms plus two 15 inchers...

[north pgh]

That Jan '94 total has to be the least representative total ever. Listen to Denardo rattling off totals around the 4:00 mark....

I've said before that when this storm happened I was living in Plum and worked downtown. I made it in to work in about 2 hours at 7:00 am. I was on the 7th floor and it snowed so hard you could barely see the buildings across the street. I was allowed to leave at 1:00 and it took me about 2 hours to get home on the parkway east. When I got to my plan off of 286 in Plum I couldn't make it up the hill and had to abandon my car and walk. I believe in Plum we had about 24 inches and I couldn't believe that the airport only reported 14.

[passmaster16]

Ok, I probably should have chosen a higher number than 12", but here it is, from the NWS site:

So, even at 13", in order for it to average out to once in 5 years, twice in two years would be a statistical anomally. Two in a row would then require eight years without one to meet the average. I didn't say it couldn't happen. I just didn't agree that we are "due".

(On edit: Because, if we went four years without a 12" storm, you'd argue that we were indeed "due", because statistically, we should have one every two years, right?)

And I could be wrong again, but my sense of what constitues a "big one" in everybody's mind is probably influenced by what others have gotten multiple times this year--those 16"+ dumpings make 12" look light by comparison. So, no, we're even less "due" for one of those.

Maybe somebody has a handle on, or would enjoy researching, when we last had 16"+ two years in a row?

My intent wasn't to get into a big statistical analysis, lol. In fact I never even looked at the stats. When I say we're due, I was thinking of a 10" inch over the course of a day or two not a 12"+ event. I don't want to argue about it because quite honestly it's not worth arguing about

[north pgh]

Something else you have to consider is that the larger storms also count as being part of the "greater than" thresholds for the smaller storms. Your once-in-five-years 13"-15" storm is also one of your once-in-two-years 8"-12" storms. In a ten year period you don't get five 12" storms plus two 15 inchers...

One thing to keep in mind Digger is that the NWS has not changed those numbers in a long while. I had those numbers in my signature up until last year because we were due last year. We hadn't had a 10+ snow since the Feb. 2003 storm until last year so in essence we went 7 years without a storm over 10. That alone shoots down the theory of once in two year 8-12 inch storms. I know odds are against it but who's to say we don't get big ones in back to back years or sooner or later we will have a 1978 where we get 2 in one week.

[Digger]

(On edit: Because, if we went four years without a 12" storm, you'd argue that we were indeed "due", because statistically, we should have one every two years, right?)

I don't want to argue about it because quite honestly it's not worth arguing about

I didn't mean you'd "argue" argue. I just mean that you'd likely espouse that position, in this friendly discussion.

[Burghblizz]

Something else you have to consider is that the larger storms also count as being part of the "or more" thresholds for the smaller storms. Your once-in-five-years 13"-15" storm is also one of your once-in-two-years 8"-12" storms. In a ten year period you don't get five 12" storms plus two 15 inchers...

Agreed.....

To summarize my thinking....

"historic storms" --> doing great lately compared to climo

"seasonal totals" --> doing fine lately compared to climo

"big storms" ---> I think we are still lacking in the 8"+ storms over the past couple decades, even if you consider the huge storms count as one too.

"missed storms" --> absurd considering the chances.

I think it's the last 2 categories that has everyone a little frustrated.

[Digger]

One thing to keep in mind Digger is that the NWS has not changed those numbers in a long while. I had those numbers in my signature up until last year because we were due last year. We hadn't had a 10+ snow since the Feb. 2003 storm until last year so in essence we went 7 years without a storm over 10. That alone shoots down the theory of once in two year 8-12 inch storms.

But that's exactly what I meant when I said (somebody) would argue that because we had not had one of that size that we were indeed due. I don't think it shoots down the theory, but it points out that the statistical anomally can be used to support to an argument about whether we're due (or not.)

(I was trying to remember who had "We're due in their signature.)

[Digger]

I think it's the last 2 categories that has everyone a little frustrated.

Not me, but you all knew that...

(I'll take this opportunity to point out too, that as recently as 10 years ago, my philosophy about winter was "All I want is ten feet of snow, two inches at a time", because we plow at 2"+ . I've been plowing for 19 years, and I'm just burned out...)

[joecon]

Carefull--you are giving your age away with the Scott Norwood Mention!!

As long as we don't have Scott Norwood directing this storm toward us, maybe we have a shot at this one. Seriously though, I'm not holding my breath at this point. Still a week away, so plenty of time for it to do what the rest have done so far. We'll see.

[blackngoldrules]

Well, the GFS has been trending next Thursday's storm more and more ots with each run and the 18z is no different. The Canadian, NOGAPS and DGEX still send the storm up toward us. Haven't checked out the latest Euro on that one yet. Still something to watch anyway.

As far as tomorrow's system is concerned, The GFS and NAM seem to keep swapping solutions on this one. When one tracks the storm more inland, the other takes it off the coast. Right now it's the GFS's turn with the inland solution while giving us some decent QPF. NAM gives us very little now. Temps may still be an issue with a forecast reaching the mid 30s, last I checked. It'll be interesting to see if these two keep bouncing around as we get closer.

[CoraopolisWx]

Temps are colder right now than forecasted, might not mean anything because of the limited precip with this system.

Side note: I noticed lately that the PIT NWS is going over 12 hrs at times in between forecast updates, not sure why.

Also the discussions at times seem so weak compared to other offices. I know we agreed to not complain about them, but all the other regional offices are much better detailed.

[north pgh]

Temps are colder right now than forecasted, might not mean anything because of the limited precip with this system.

Side note: I noticed lately that the PIT NWS is going over 12 hrs at times in between forecast updates, not sure why.

Also the discussions at times seem so weak compared to other offices. I know we agreed to not complain about them, but all the other regional offices are much better detailed.

They had gotten better but they have regressed lately.

LOL at the nam taking our 1-3 inches and moving the storm west and strengthening giving western ohio and Indiana 4 inches of snow and giving us 1 inch or less.

I guess the detour sign drove it right away from here and next weeks storm will probably drive it up the coast so NY and Philly can get dumped on again.

[blackngoldrules]

They had gotten better but they have regressed lately.

LOL at the nam taking our 1-3 inches and moving the storm west and strengthening giving western ohio and Indiana 4 inches of snow and giving us 1 inch or less.

I guess the detour sign drove it right away from here and next weeks storm will probably drive it up the coast so NY and Philly can get dumped on again.

Even though the detour sign is over PA, notice that Philly sits just outside of the detour sign!

[north pgh]

Even though the detour sign is over PA, notice that Philly sits just outside of the detour sign!

Now the GFS gives us a good hit tomorrow.

I don't know what to think about these models.

I just might go looking out the window like I used to when I was little.

[CoraopolisWx]

Now the GFS gives us a good hit tomorrow.

I don't know what to think about these models.

I just might go looking out the window like I used to when I was little.

Lol, Yeah that's probably your best option.

Temps are creeping back up a bit, but still colder than forecasted earlier today.

TWC is holding on to 1-3" for tommorow, while the NWS has gone back to a rain /snow mix.

We'll see what the 850's are tommorow morning.

[RitualOfTheTrout]

Looks like today's system might be an over performer!

For those to the NW of us.

NAM looks pretty dry for our area, and a bit warm. Radar and current temps seem to indicate the NAM is doing pretty good. NWS seems to be leaning towards another dryslot issue.

ALTHOUGH THE MID LEVEL HEIGHT FIELDS ARE PROGGED TO CLOSE,

ENCROACHING DRY SLOT MAY PUT A DAMPER ON THE WHOLE SCENARIO VIA

ICE NUCLEI ELIMINATION. IN ADDITION, WITH SURFACE LOW CROSSING

NEAR PITTSBURGH, OR POINTS NORTH DEPENDING ON MODEL, SURFACE

TEMPERATURES MAY RISE ABOVE FREEZING AT ALL BUT NEAR-INTERSTATE

80 LOCATIONS. AT ANY RATE, FOR THE MORNING ISSUANCE, WILL STAY

WITH THE MORE GLOOMY FORECAST, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF FREEZING

RAIN POTENTIAL.

Oh well, Lets go Steelers!!

[north pgh]

Looks like today's system might be an over performer!

For those to the NW of us.

NAM looks pretty dry for our area, and a bit warm. Radar and current temps seem to indicate the NAM is doing pretty good. NWS seems to be leaning towards another dryslot issue.

ALTHOUGH THE MID LEVEL HEIGHT FIELDS ARE PROGGED TO CLOSE,

ENCROACHING DRY SLOT MAY PUT A DAMPER ON THE WHOLE SCENARIO VIA

ICE NUCLEI ELIMINATION. IN ADDITION, WITH SURFACE LOW CROSSING

NEAR PITTSBURGH, OR POINTS NORTH DEPENDING ON MODEL, SURFACE

TEMPERATURES MAY RISE ABOVE FREEZING AT ALL BUT NEAR-INTERSTATE

80 LOCATIONS. AT ANY RATE, FOR THE MORNING ISSUANCE, WILL STAY

WITH THE MORE GLOOMY FORECAST, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF FREEZING

RAIN POTENTIAL.

Oh well, Lets go Steelers!!

It's pretty amazing that this storm on the models yesterday has shifted 200 miles to the west in 12 hours. This never happens to benefit us. Only to move the storm away from us.

[Paweatherguy1]

It's pretty amazing that this storm on the models yesterday has shifted 200 miles to the west in 12 hours. This never happens to benefit us. Only to move the storm away from us.

Yeah...actually in the last two days it's moved from off the coast and a good hit for eastern pa to a hit 500 miles west...just purely amazing.