MW/GL/OV Winter 2010-11 Talk

[Chicago WX]

Just talking out loud here, but I went and looked at all of the Novembers that had a trace or nothing in Chicago, and the resulting season snowfall total. Keep in mind that everything prior to 1942 was near the lakefront...1942 to 1980 at MDW...and from there on at ORD. Never the less, it doesn't paint a great picture for a good snow season if Chicago doesn't record more than a trace in November. This by no means is canceling winter...just throwing out some stats. Proceed with caution.

1999: 0.0" »»» 30.3"

2001: 0.0" »»» 31.1"

1890: T »»» 21.6"

1897: T »»» 36.8"

1899: T »»» 36.8"

1904: T »»» 34.1"

1905: T »»» 20.6"

1909: T »»» 43.7"

1913: T »»» 28.2"

1914: T »»» 19.0"

1923: T »»» 27.6"

1928: T »»» 30.1"

1934: T »»» 45.2"

1946: T »»» 34.1"

1948: T »»» 14.3"

1952: T »»» 23.4"

1963: T »»» 35.2"

1965: T »»» 24.9"

1973: T »»» 58.3"

1984: T »»» 39.1"

1990: T »»» 36.7"

1994: T »»» 24.1"

2003: T »»» 24.8"

[Powerball]

Just talking out loud here, but I went and looked at all of the Novembers that had a trace or nothing in Chicago, and the resulting season snowfall total. Keep in mind that everything prior to 1942 was near the lakefront...1942 to 1980 at MDW...and from there on at ORD. Never the less, it doesn't paint a great picture for a good snow season if Chicago doesn't record more than a trace in November. This by no means is canceling winter...just throwing out some stats. Proceed with caution.

1999: 0.0" »»» 30.3"

2001: 0.0" »»» 31.1"

1890: T »»» 21.6"

1897: T »»» 36.8"

1899: T »»» 36.8"

1904: T »»» 34.1"

1905: T »»» 20.6"

1909: T »»» 43.7"

1913: T »»» 28.2"

1914: T »»» 19.0"

1923: T »»» 27.6"

1928: T »»» 30.1"

1934: T »»» 45.2"

1946: T »»» 34.1"

1948: T »»» 14.3"

1952: T »»» 23.4"

1963: T »»» 35.2"

1965: T »»» 24.9"

1973: T »»» 58.3"

1984: T »»» 39.1"

1990: T »»» 36.7"

1994: T »»» 24.1"

2003: T »»» 24.8"

One notable thing I noticed is only two analogs (1973 and 1999) show up on that entire list, and not only was 1973 the lone top analog on here but it also has the highest seasonal snowfall total on this list.

Another thing that stands out about this list is other than 1984 they're all El-Ninos or neutral (can't find data prior to 1950).

So there isn't much of a correlation here.

EDIT, found some data pre-1950, and most of those were El-Ninos or Neutrals as well (except 1928).

[IWXwx]

One notable thing I noticed is only two analogs (1973 and 1999) show up on that entire list, and not only was 1973 the lone top analog on here but it also has the highest seasonal snowfall total on this list.

Another thing that stands out about this list is other than 1984 they're all El-Ninos or neutral (can't find data prior to 1950).

So there isn't much of a correlation here.

EDIT, found some data pre-1950, and most of those were El-Ninos or Neutrals as well (except 1928).

This tells me that during Nino/neutral years to not expect much Nov snow in Chicago. This also further implies that Nina years equates to measurable snow. If Chicago doesn't receive more than trace, it would be anomalous.

[Powerball]

This tells me that during Nino/neutral years to not expect much Nov snow in Chicago. This also further implies that Nina years equates to measurable snow. If Chicago doesn't receive more than trace, it would be anomalous.

It would be anomalous, but other than 1973-1974 (which was an above average winter) there's no way to anyone to make a correlation with Chicago's lack of November snowfall to the season's snowfall total in La Ninas.

[Chicago Storm]

It would be anamolous, but other than 1973-1974 (whcih was an above average winter) there's no way to anyone to make a correlation with Chicago's lack of November snowfall to the season's snowfall total in La Ninas.

Clearly you don't get the point.

[Chicago WX]

One notable thing I noticed is only two analogs (1973 and 1999) show up on that entire list, and not only was 1973 the lone top analog on here but it also has the highest seasonal snowfall total on this list.

Another thing that stands out about this list is other than 1984 they're all El-Ninos or neutral (can't find data prior to 1950).

So there isn't much of a correlation here.

EDIT, found some data pre-1950, and most of those were El-Ninos or Neutrals as well (except 1928).

No correlation implied. Again, just throwing out some stats. But take it for what it's worth.

[Powerball]

Clearly you don't get the point.

I see the point that's trying to be made, but this isn't a El-Nino, so it's a moot point.

With the lack of historic data (except one season) no one can really make that a dictation from the lack of snow in November to a seasons snowfall total in La Ninas.

[Powerball]

No correlation implied. Again, just throwing out some stats. But take it for what it's worth.

No problem. They're definitely interesting stats to note as we segway into winter.

[Chicago WX]

I see the point that's trying to be made, but this isn't a El-Nino, so it's a moot point.

With the lack of historic data (except one season) no one can really make that a dictation from the lack of snow in November to a seasons snowfall total in La Ninas.

I'll say it again...for the last time...there is no point being made. There is no correlation...it is simple stats about what transpired in seasons that saw a T or less snowfall in Chicago in November. I never equated it to La Nina, El Nino...whatever ENSO state it was at the time. But if you want to nitpick the numbers and throw out everything but Nina's, then be my guest. Hate to tell you this, but ENSO is not everything...and all Nina winters are not the same. But to be clear, I still expect Chicago to have an above normal season with snowfall. Geez...

[Powerball]

I'll say it again...for the last time...there is no point being made. There is no correlation...it is simple stats about what transpired in seasons that saw a T or less snowfall in Chicago in November. I never equated it to La Nina, El Nino...whatever ENSO state it was at the time. But if you want to nitpick the numbers and throw out everything but Nina's, then be my guest. Hate to tell you this, but ENSO is not everything...and all Nina winters are not the same. But to be clear, I still expect Chicago to have an above normal season with snowfall. Geez...

That we can agree with.

I apologize if I came off as nitpicky, I was pointing out a couple things that stood out to me on those statistics. Yes, it is true that all ENSO events aren't the same.

[Chicago WX]

That we can agree with.

I apologize if I came off as nitpicky, I was pointing out a couple things that stood out to me on those statistics. Yes, it is true that all ENSO events aren't the same.

No problem. We are good.

[michsnowfreak]

Just talking out loud here, but I went and looked at all of the Novembers that had a trace or nothing in Chicago, and the resulting season snowfall total. Keep in mind that everything prior to 1942 was near the lakefront...1942 to 1980 at MDW...and from there on at ORD. Never the less, it doesn't paint a great picture for a good snow season if Chicago doesn't record more than a trace in November. This by no means is canceling winter...just throwing out some stats. Proceed with caution.

1999: 0.0" »»» 30.3"

2001: 0.0" »»» 31.1"

1890: T »»» 21.6"

1897: T »»» 36.8"

1899: T »»» 36.8"

1904: T »»» 34.1"

1905: T »»» 20.6"

1909: T »»» 43.7"

1913: T »»» 28.2"

1914: T »»» 19.0"

1923: T »»» 27.6"

1928: T »»» 30.1"

1934: T »»» 45.2"

1946: T »»» 34.1"

1948: T »»» 14.3"

1952: T »»» 23.4"

1963: T »»» 35.2"

1965: T »»» 24.9"

1973: T »»» 58.3"

1984: T »»» 39.1"

1990: T »»» 36.7"

1994: T »»» 24.1"

2003: T »»» 24.8"

2009: T »»» 54.2"

I added 2009 for you

Ill do the same for Detroit. DTW has had a trace of snowfall so far this November

1896: T >>> 34.7"

1899: T >>> 69.1"

1901: T >>> 26.2"

1918: T >>> 15.2"

1934: T >>> 32.2"

1939: T >>> 32.2"

1944: T >>> 25.8"

1948: T >>> 13.7"

1952: T >>> 16.6"

1961: T >>> 28.1"

1963: T >>> 32.5"

1968: T >>> 17.1"

1990: T >>> 31.4"

1994: T >>> 33.5"

1998: 0 >>> 49.5"

1999: T >>> 23.7"

2001: 0 >>> 33.7"

2009: 0 >>> 43.7"

**********************

Novembers with between 0.1" & 0.5" of snow at Detroit and the following winter total

1881: 0.2" >>> 13.2"

1883: 0.5" >>> 50.3"

1885: 0.5" >>> 56.7"

1905: 0.3" >>> 29.4"

1908: 0.3" >>> 41.3"

1909: 0.3" >>> 46.8"

1912: 0.1" >>> 33.3"

1916: 0.5" >>> 34.2"

1919: 0.4" >>> 43.5"

1923: 0.3" >>> 37.7"

1935: 0.2" >>> 36.8"

1941: 0.5" >>> 23.4"

1945: 0.1" >>> 22.0"

1946: 0.3" >>> 30.0"

1962: 0.2" >>> 29.7"

1965: 0.2" >>> 15.4"

1973: 0.1" >>> 49.2"

2003: 0.4" >>> 24.1"

2004: 0.1" >>> 63.8"

2006: 0.1" >>> 30.3"

2007: 0.5" >>> 71.7"

As you can see, there were some horrible winters but also some great ones. And several of the bad winters on this list had plus sides (for instance, 1944-45 & 1962-63, despite having sub-30" snowfall totals, saw a solid 80 days with 1"+ snowcover).

Ive also seen snowy Novembers turn into crummy winters. For instance, since Ive began measuring snow in 1995, my SNOWIEST November (6.0") just so happened to fall in my LEAST snowy winter (27.2") of 1997-98. Or take the winter of 1932-33 for instance, when Detroit began the winter with a 9" snowstorm Nov 15/16. A promising start to winter, coming after the record warm 1931-32. Despite Novembers 10.1" total, the season ended with a TOTAL of 25.9". Winter began and ended with nice snowstorms (9.0" on Nov 15/16 and 6.0" on Mar 25), but saw VERY little in between.

Bottom line..........

You know that saying "the weather in November the winter will remember"? I dont buy it.

Also, low-snow Novembers are a growing trend here for some reason. In the decade of the 2000s, November snowfall averaged 1.1", the lowest of ANY decade since 1880 when records began. This is 1.7" BELOW the 1880-2000 average. Season snowfall in the 2000s ended at 45.3", 5.3" ABOVE the 1880-2000 average. What the 2000s did, basically, was see the 1880-2010 average snowfall for November edge down from 2.8" to 2.7", but see the season average rise from 40.0" to 40.4".

[IWXwx]

Josh, Maybe you can help me out with this. Detroit got clobbered with a generous snowstorm on Thanksgiving Eve/Morning back in the late '70's or early '80s. I remember this because for several years in that time-frame me and three friends from high school would go to watch the Lions play on Thanksgiving. I remember driving up from IN in light snow on Wed eve and that night as we got drunk in the hotel rain it really snowed. When we finally got to the Silverdome the next morning, the stadium was only a little over half full because of the weather.

Another funny thing about it was the entrances weren't very well treated and with the air pressure coming through the doors, people were getting blown about and busting their a**es. Anyway, I just can't remember the year.

[michsnowfreak]

Josh, Maybe you can help me out with this. Detroit got clobbered with a generous snowstorm on Thanksgiving Eve/Morning back in the late '70's or early '80s. I remember this because for several years in that time-frame me and three friends from high school would go to watch the Lions play on Thanksgiving. I remember driving up from IN in light snow on Wed eve and that night as we got drunk in the hotel rain it really snowed. When we finally got to the Silverdome the next morning, the stadium was only a little over half full because of the weather.

Another funny thing about it was the entrances weren't very well treated and with the air pressure coming through the doors, people were getting blown about and busting their a**es. Anyway, I just can't remember the year.

Well, you could be remembering Thanksgiving 1975, when 4.6" of wet snow fell on Thanksgiving, but I notice you said late 70s or early 80s. There were a 5.6"-snowstorm on Nov 28, 1977, but that was not Thanksgiving, and then a mammoth 19.3" snowstorm on Dec 1, 1974, which was Thanksgiving weekend. Think it was 1975?

[IWXwx]

Well, you could be remembering Thanksgiving 1975, when 4.6" of wet snow fell on Thanksgiving, but I notice you said late 70s or early 80s. There were a 5.6"-snowstorm on Nov 28, 1977, but that was not Thanksgiving, and then a mammoth 19.3" snowstorm on Dec 1, 1974, which was Thanksgiving weekend. Think it was 1975?

It may have been '75. That was the first year we went up. We went every year until '83. I didn't seem like the first year we went, but you are probably right. It was a cement snow, I do remember that.

[Trent]

Another funny thing about it was the entrances weren't very well treated and with the air pressure coming through the doors, people were getting blown about and busting their a**es. Anyway, I just can't remember the year.

They were always like that even up to when the Lions left for downtown in the early 2000s. You'd always get blown out of the doors after watching the Lions get blown away.

[michsnowfreak]

It may have been '75. That was the first year we went up. We went every year until '83. I didn't seem like the first year we went, but you are probably right. It was a cement snow, I do remember that.

Actually I checked and Im pretty sure it was that one, that started Wednesday (0.6") into Thanksgiving morning (4.6") for a storm total of 5.2" of cementy snow.

[snowstormcanuck]

Leadoff story on the 6 o'clock news was, and I'm paraphrasing despite the use of quotation marks, "Environment Canada predicts 2 to 3 times the normal snowfall across southern Ontario this winter". So for me, that would be, roughly, 100-150" of snow. Now, considering 2007-08, the best winter ever, only managed 80-90", I won't be holding my breath.

And frankly, I'm thinking the anchor woman or her writers just made that up. I can't imagine Environment Canada would be that outrageous with a prediction.

[IWXwx]

Leadoff story on the 6 o'clock news was, and I'm paraphrasing despite the use of quotation marks, "Environment Canada predicts 2 to 3 times the normal snowfall across southern Ontario this winter". So for me, that would be, roughly, 100-150" of snow. Now, considering 2007-08, the best winter ever, only managed 80-90", I won't be holding my breath.

And frankly, I'm thinking the anchor woman or her writers just made that up. I can't imagine Environment Canada would be that outrageous with a prediction.

I'm laughing about that, but after the winter you endured last year, it would be nice to see you get into triple digits.

[Chicago WX]

Leadoff story on the 6 o'clock news was, and I'm paraphrasing despite the use of quotation marks, "Environment Canada predicts 2 to 3 times the normal snowfall across southern Ontario this winter". So for me, that would be, roughly, 100-150" of snow. Now, considering 2007-08, the best winter ever, only managed 80-90", I won't be holding my breath.

And frankly, I'm thinking the anchor woman or her writers just made that up. I can't imagine Environment Canada would be that outrageous with a prediction.

Congrats!

What's the season snowfall record for Toronto anyway?

[snowstormcanuck]

I'm laughing about that, but after the winter you endured last year, it would be nice to see you get into triple digits.

It was hilarious. She made that ridiculous claim, then a met was interviewed who said explicity "near normal snowfall this winter", and then once that interview concluded, she said it again. Broadcast news sensationalism FTL.

Congrats!

What's the season snowfall record for Toronto anyway?

It's in and around 120", but that was back in the mid 1800s. Much different climate back then.

[Chicago WX]

It's in and around 120", but that was back in the mid 1800s. Much different climate back then.

"Modern day" record maybe?

Not to be a pain, but do you happen to have a top 10 snowiest season list available to post? I'm curious.

[snowstormcanuck]

"Modern day" record maybe?

Not to be a pain, but do you happen to have a top 10 snowiest season list available to post? I'm curious.

Post 1900 the record would be 83.1" in 1959-60 (came within 1" of breaking that in 2007-08).

Top 10. All in the 19th century. Top 6 all within the 11 year period between 1865 and 1876. Height of the "little ice age" maybe?

1869-70....123.5"

1872-73....114.1"

1866-67....113.7"

1874-75....100.0"

1870-71......99.9"

1875-76......98.1"

1851-52......98.1"

1882-83......92.5"

1868-69......86.8"

1854-55......84.1"

[Chicago WX]

Post 1900 the record would be 83.1" in 1959-60 (came within 1" of breaking that in 2007-08).

Top 10. All in the 19th century. Top 6 all within the 11 year period between 1865 and 1876. Height of the "little ice age" maybe?

1869-70....123.5"

1872-73....114.1"

1866-67....113.7"

1874-75....100.0"

1870-71......99.9"

1875-76......98.1"

1851-52......98.1"

1882-83......92.5"

1868-69......86.8"

1854-55......84.1"

Yeah, wow...all 19th century. Thanks for the list.

[michsnowfreak]

Having seen no measurable snow through late November sucks, and seeing a rainstorm followed by plummeting temps as soon as the rain ends with no snow sucks even more. HOWEVER when you look at the big picture, this is all probably good, it just maybe started a few weeks later than we would have liked. We were in a pattern of boring boring weather, couldnt buy a storm, for months. Everyone was honking about Nina winters being wet in our area, but still....couldnt buy precip. Well, mid-November the switched turned on, and the stormy pattern arrived. Not surprising that the first few storms are rainstorms. Still think good stuff is very close...

[Hoosier]

I don't know about anyone else, and although it's early, I'm awfully concerned about my winter outlook especially regarding temps. Previously, Don S had posted research which indicated heightened potential for blocking after winters with extreme episodes of blocking (like last year). December has started out very cold in the northern Plains and southeastward from there. AO is heading into the tank and overall the pattern doesn't look warm for the forseeable future. I guess I'm most concerned around the OV/southeast where I had positive anomalies and there's been massive negatives. The longer this goes, the harder it will be to eradicate.

[Chicago WX]

I don't know about anyone else, and although it's early, I'm awfully concerned about my winter outlook especially regarding temps. Previously, Don S had posted research which indicated heightened potential for blocking after winters with extreme episodes of blocking (like last year). December has started out very cold in the northern Plains and southeastward from there. AO is heading into the tank and overall the pattern doesn't look warm for the forseeable future. I guess I'm most concerned around the OV/southeast where I had positive anomalies and there's been massive negatives. The longer this goes, the harder it will be to eradicate.

Oh I think my outlook is in deep doo doo if this cold persists for the rest of December through the first week or so of January. I say those dates only because of Don's research of the 30-35 day "effect" of a "severe" negative AO. Of course what it really proves is I have A LOT to learn with regard to seasonal forecasting.

[Hoosier]

Oh I think my outlook is in deep doo doo if this cold persists for the rest of December through the first week or so of January. I say those dates only because of Don's research of the 30-35 day "effect" of a "severe" negative AO. Of course what it really proves is I have A LOT to learn with regard to seasonal forecasting.

There's going to be a lot of outlooks in trouble if this keeps up. Really fascinating to watch this unfold in the face of a Nina of this magnitude.

[buckeye]

Having seen no measurable snow through late November sucks, and seeing a rainstorm followed by plummeting temps as soon as the rain ends with no snow sucks even more. HOWEVER when you look at the big picture, this is all probably good, it just maybe started a few weeks later than we would have liked. We were in a pattern of boring boring weather, couldnt buy a storm, for months. Everyone was honking about Nina winters being wet in our area, but still....couldnt buy precip. Well, mid-November the switched turned on, and the stormy pattern arrived. Not surprising that the first few storms are rainstorms. Still think good stuff is very close...

i see the 156 hr gfs now has a coastal. this should be an indication to all of us that we may soon be tracking another OV/MW threat