Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,589
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

Dec 5-6 Round Two? NAM brings "sling-shot" Upper Low into SW and the fun has just begun!

wxhstn74

By wxhstn74,
in Lakes/Ohio Valley

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 447
  • Created
  • Last Reply
KokomoWX

KokomoWX

Posted
Posted

So true, so true. As Ive said...keep in mind, this is WITH the fact weve gotten so much snow the last how many years. (well actually, 3 out of the last 4 years have seen snow on the order of 180% of normal, the year in between was right near climo, or as many called it at the time, "worst winter ever" :lol: ). A truly craptastic winter, this board would self destruct lol. Although this isnt really a bust. Its a nam fantasy not come true, as usual :gun_bandana:

It is rather frustrating though when storms 60-72 hours out are still considered nothing more than fantasy. Hell, even a 30+ year veteran NWS met got suckered on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
michsnowfreak

michsnowfreak

Posted
Posted

It is rather frustrating though when storms 60-72 hours out are still considered nothing more than fantasy. Hell, even a 30+ year veteran NWS met got suckered on this one.

Oh I agree. Its a shame. And its almost unimaginable that in THIS day and age of technology, the models are as bad as they are. i will never forget a book I read years ago written in the 1950s when the first weather computers were in infancy. It said that by the 1980s weather models would be able to predict precisely (im paraphrasing the example they gave) "snow beginning at 11:02 am, ending at 5:17pm, accumulating 3.4 inches". LOL I still say stick to the farmers almanac. Now, while I wouldnt want to know EXACTLY what happens (take some of the fun out) it would be nice to not have NO idea with the models changing constantly. I will say, though, that if theres one thing it has taught me over the years, just like you would look at a nice long range forecast cautiously, do NOT look at a bad long range forecast and be too upset. It WILL change a hundred times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
A-L-E-K

A-L-E-K

Posted
Posted

Oh I agree. Its a shame. And its almost unimaginable that in THIS day and age of technology, the models are as bad as they are. i will never forget a book I read years ago written in the 1950s when the first weather computers were in infancy. It said that by the 1980s weather models would be able to predict precisely (im paraphrasing the example they gave) "snow beginning at 11:02 am, ending at 5:17pm, accumulating 3.4 inches". LOL I still say stick to the farmers almanac. Now, while I wouldnt want to know EXACTLY what happens (take some of the fun out) it would be nice to not have NO idea with the models changing constantly. I will say, though, that if theres one thing it has taught me over the years, just like you would look at a nice long range forecast cautiously, do NOT look at a bad long range forecast and be too upset. It WILL change a hundred times.

:rollseyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rainman

Rainman

Posted
Posted

I would turn that sucker on for 3 days straight! :)

BTW: rain looks to be done by 10am and yet DTX says another "surge" of moisture by late morning through the afternoon. Good forecasting! :facepalm:

Just out of curiosity, what did you see that is making you think that there won't be another surge of moisture? I think the WV loop is pretty convincing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nwohweather

nwohweather

Posted
Posted

Oh I agree. Its a shame. And its almost unimaginable that in THIS day and age of technology, the models are as bad as they are. i will never forget a book I read years ago written in the 1950s when the first weather computers were in infancy. It said that by the 1980s weather models would be able to predict precisely (im paraphrasing the example they gave) "snow beginning at 11:02 am, ending at 5:17pm, accumulating 3.4 inches". LOL I still say stick to the farmers almanac. Now, while I wouldnt want to know EXACTLY what happens (take some of the fun out) it would be nice to not have NO idea with the models changing constantly. I will say, though, that if theres one thing it has taught me over the years, just like you would look at a nice long range forecast cautiously, do NOT look at a bad long range forecast and be too upset. It WILL change a hundred times.

Wouldn't really need meteorologists if it was that easy to predict. Anyways folks why are we complaining so much? It's December 5th! Meteorological winter just started 4 days ago and we only average 38" of snow in Toledo anyways. Does everybody expect we have 10" of snow already or something? Take it easy folks we've got a long way to go

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpartyOn

SpartyOn

Posted
Posted

Oh I agree. Its a shame. And its almost unimaginable that in THIS day and age of technology, the models are as bad as they are. i will never forget a book I read years ago written in the 1950s when the first weather computers were in infancy. It said that by the 1980s weather models would be able to predict precisely (im paraphrasing the example they gave) "snow beginning at 11:02 am, ending at 5:17pm, accumulating 3.4 inches". LOL I still say stick to the farmers almanac. Now, while I wouldnt want to know EXACTLY what happens (take some of the fun out) it would be nice to not have NO idea with the models changing constantly. I will say, though, that if theres one thing it has taught me over the years, just like you would look at a nice long range forecast cautiously, do NOT look at a bad long range forecast and be too upset. It WILL change a hundred times.

Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Geos

Geos

Posted
Posted

Wouldn't really need meteorologists if it was that easy to predict. Anyways folks why are we complaining so much? It's December 5th! Meteorological winter just started 4 days ago and we only average 38" of snow in Toledo anyways. Does everybody expect we have 10" of snow already or something? Take it easy folks we've got a long way to go

Well said. I think a lot of us were getting used to early season snows the past 4 winters. Now we have to wait & with patience.

Woke up to large wet snowflakes here This morning from the lake!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rainman

Rainman

Posted
Posted

That'd be awesome if that comes true. 2-3" of snow here. Not too shabby

I think the WV looks pretty solid. After spending the better part of the last 2-3 days underestimating this wave, maybe the models will be playing catch up right up until the end and we'll end up overachieving. Maybe. "Maybe" :weight_lift:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hoosier

Hoosier

Posted
Posted

12z RGEM doesn't look too bad for N IN, NW OH, SE MI on east into southern ON.

Flips us over to snow here at the tail end this evening. For the time being, temp/dew going in the wrong direction...up to 39/37. Heavy drizzle.

I think we have a good chance of changing over to snow but probably not before 6 PM. Definitely looking like there could be a band of respectable amounts to the east/northeast. I think we'll be lucky to walk away with a coating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chicago WX

Chicago WX

Posted
Posted

I think we have a good chance of changing over to snow but probably not before 6 PM. Definitely looking like there could be a band of respectable amounts to the east/northeast. I think we'll be lucky to walk away with a coating.

Just some flakes and I'll consider it a victory for here. Agreed that north and east of us stand a good chance of seeing some accumulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chicago Storm

Chicago Storm

Posted
Posted

12z ECMWF...

LAF:

	
TUE 00Z 06-DEC   2.7	-1.8	1023	  96	  95	0.18	 560	 541  
TUE 06Z 06-DEC   1.2	-2.4	1024	  87	  91	0.07	 559	 540  
TUE 12Z 06-DEC   0.1	-3.9	1024	  73	  98	0.00	 556	 537  
TUE 18Z 06-DEC   0.4	-4.5	1024	  64	 100	0.01	 553	 534  
WED 00Z 07-DEC   0.9	-6.5	1023	  67	  94	0.01	 549	 531

IND:

TUE 00Z 06-DEC   2.3	 0.0	1022	  98	  99	0.47	 562	 544  
TUE 06Z 06-DEC   1.5	 0.1	1022	  92	  81	0.11	 562	 544  
TUE 12Z 06-DEC   1.0	-1.6	1023	  85	  90	0.00	 560	 542  
TUE 18Z 06-DEC   1.0	-2.1	1023	  76	  79	0.01	 557	 539  
WED 00Z 07-DEC   0.0	-4.3	1023	  77	  51	0.02	 553	 535

OKK:

TUE 00Z 06-DEC   1.6	-1.0	1023	  99	  97	0.29	 560	 541  
TUE 06Z 06-DEC   0.8	-1.5	1023	  90	  89	0.14	 560	 541  
TUE 12Z 06-DEC   0.2	-2.6	1024	  79	  97	0.00	 558	 539  
TUE 18Z 06-DEC  -0.2	-4.0	1023	  71	  98	0.01	 554	 535  
WED 00Z 07-DEC  -0.2	-5.8	1023	  73	  88	0.02	 550	 532

FWA:

TUE 00Z 06-DEC   1.4	-0.9	1023	  98	  97	0.28	 560	 541  
TUE 06Z 06-DEC   0.5	-1.4	1023	  89	  90	0.21	 560	 541  
TUE 12Z 06-DEC  -0.3	-2.7	1024	  81	  94	0.00	 558	 539  
TUE 18Z 06-DEC   0.1	-3.6	1023	  76	  99	0.01	 554	 536  
WED 00Z 07-DEC   0.2	-5.6	1022	  81	 100	0.03	 549	 532  
WED 06Z 07-DEC  -1.4	-6.2	1022	  74	  63	0.01	 547	 529

BTL:

TUE 00Z 06-DEC   2.2	-4.2	1025	  67	  75	0.01	 557	 537  
TUE 06Z 06-DEC  -0.2	-3.7	1025	  69	  63	0.02	 556	 536

ADG:

TUE 00Z 06-DEC   1.3	-1.3	1024	  94	  98	0.17	 559	 540  
TUE 06Z 06-DEC  -0.4	-1.8	1023	  86	  98	0.22	 558	 540

TDZ:

TUE 00Z 06-DEC   1.8	-0.3	1023	  99	 100	0.32	 561	 542  
TUE 06Z 06-DEC   0.9	-1.3	1022	  96	  99	0.40	 560	 542  
TUE 12Z 06-DEC   1.0	-1.8	1022	  89	  87	0.01	 559	 541

DTW:

TUE 00Z 06-DEC   1.6	-1.3	1024	  93	  98	0.15	 559	 540  
TUE 06Z 06-DEC   0.6	-1.9	1023	  88	  99	0.25	 558	 540  
TUE 12Z 06-DEC   0.6	-2.6	1023	  85	  94	0.01	 557	 538

PTK:

TUE 00Z 06-DEC   1.4	-2.7	1025	  81	  95	0.05	 558	 539  
TUE 06Z 06-DEC   0.2	-2.8	1023	  81	  97	0.12	 557	 538  
TUE 12Z 06-DEC   0.2	-3.4	1024	  82	  80	0.01	 555	 536

YKF:

 
TUE 00Z 06-DEC   1.9    -0.6    1024	  98	  99    0.15	 560	 541   
TUE 06Z 06-DEC   0.7    -1.5    1022	  92	  99    0.33	 557	 540   
TUE 12Z 06-DEC  -0.9    -1.9    1022	  86	  91    0.06	 557	 539

YYZ:

 
TUE 00Z 06-DEC   3.4    -0.1    1024	  92	  98    0.16	 561	 542   
TUE 06Z 06-DEC   1.3    -1.6    1022	  96	  98    0.36	 558	 540   
TUE 12Z 06-DEC   0.8    -1.7    1022	  85	  89    0.11	 557	 540

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chicago WX

Chicago WX

Posted
Posted

12z ECMWF...

LAF:

	
TUE 00Z 06-DEC   2.7	-1.8	1023	  96	  95	0.18	 560	 541  
TUE 06Z 06-DEC   1.2	-2.4	1024	  87	  91	0.07	 559	 540  
TUE 12Z 06-DEC   0.1	-3.9	1024	  73	  98	0.00	 556	 537  
TUE 18Z 06-DEC   0.4	-4.5	1024	  64	 100	0.01	 553	 534  
WED 00Z 07-DEC   0.9	-6.5	1023	  67	  94	0.01	 549	 531

DAB. Upon further inspection....0.0". :cry:

Thanks Joe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...