Chicago WX Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Christmas day records via the NWS and EC sites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mississaugasnow Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Kind of surprised to see Toronto leads the most snow department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Kind of surprised to see Toronto leads the most snow department. 1872 Toronto. Very different place. And once again Tim, outstanding work. NWS WFO websites probably have this data readily accessible, but I know you had to sift through the EC data for Ottawa and Toronto to find those stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted December 20, 2011 Author Share Posted December 20, 2011 Kind of surprised to see Toronto leads the most snow department. Part of it may be the period of record. I used the downtown location for Toronto which has data going farther back than any other available site (including the NWS sites). Of course for instance, I'm not as well versed with Ontario records and the Ottawa data for YOW only goes back to 1938...not sure what the official site was before Macdonald-Cartier Airport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dendrite Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Kind of surprised to see Toronto leads the most snow department. Is that even right? 15" of snow and a record low of -15F? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 1872 Toronto. Very different place. And once again Tim, outstanding work. NWS WFO websites probably have this data readily accessible, but I know you had to sift through the EC data for Ottawa and Toronto to find those stats. Seeing that Torontos top 10 snowiest winters are all pre-1880 really intrigues me. Detroit did not keep continuous snowfall records before 1880 (spotty ones 1870-1879), but Lansing did since 1864, and it did not seem like it was necessarily snowier back then. Just like now, some snowy winters, some not. Toronto seems to be a different story. And yes, as usual, fantastic work Tim! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted December 20, 2011 Author Share Posted December 20, 2011 Is that even right? 15" of snow and a record low of -15F? Doh, I screwed up. The -15º is from 1851. Thanks for pointing that out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dendrite Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Doh, I screwed up. The -15º is from 1851. Thanks for pointing that out. Ha...I was gonna say. I was about to start Googling up on that storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mississaugasnow Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Is that even right? 15" of snow and a record low of -15F? Hahah kind of sad I didn't notice that. I guess there could be some sort of logical explanation (hybrid synoptic- LES from passing storm, followed by one of the biggest drop in temperatures haha) . But I would guess human error of some sort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmc76 Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Is that even right? 15" of snow and a record low of -15F? Also 1.50" of precip with -15 temps = would equal sick snow totals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted December 20, 2011 Author Share Posted December 20, 2011 Ha...I was gonna say. I was about to start Googling up on that storm. lol, you and me both. Hahah kind of sad I didn't notice that. I guess there are some sort of logical explanation (hybrid synoptic- LES from passing storm, then biggest drop in temperature haha) . But I would guess human error of some sort. Yeah, me. My bad. It's corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dendrite Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Also 1.50" of precip with -15 temps = would equal sick snow totals. Hard to tell with that. Usually with snowfall with temps that cold you get lousy snow growth...usually 10:1 in the form of columns and bullets. Basically sugary like snow crystals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottawa Blizzard Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Part of it may be the period of record. I used the downtown location for Toronto which has data going farther back than any other available site (including the NWS sites). Of course for instance, I'm not as well versed with Ontario records and the Ottawa data for YOW only goes back to 1938...not sure what the official site was before Macdonald-Cartier Airport. Ottawa took observations at the Central Experimental Farm http://www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/advanceSearch/searchHistoricDataStations_e.html?searchType=stnName&timeframe=1&txtStationName=Ottawa&searchMethod=contains&optLimit=yearRange&StartYear=1872&EndYear=1935&Month=12&Day=18&Year=2011&selRowPerPage=25&cmdStnSubmit=Search Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted December 20, 2011 Author Share Posted December 20, 2011 1872 Toronto. Very different place. And once again Tim, outstanding work. NWS WFO websites probably have this data readily accessible, but I know you had to sift through the EC data for Ottawa and Toronto to find those stats. Yeah the EC data is a little less friendly...but search and ye shall find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Seeing that Torontos top 10 snowiest winters are all pre-1880 really intrigues me. Detroit did not keep continuous snowfall records before 1880 (spotty ones 1870-1879), but Lansing did since 1864, and it did not seem like it was necessarily snowier back then. Just like now, some snowy winters, some not. Toronto seems to be a different story. And yes, as usual, fantastic work Tim! It fits into the AGW narrative quite nicely, except for the fact that places like Detroit and Chicago are getting snowier while our snow decline is localized. I haven't really investigated how ares just east of us (BUF, ALB, BOS) have done over the last 100 years. Maybe it's an E of 80W thing. I always leave open the possibility that measuring techniques were a bit off in the 19th century. Maybe the observer back then was measuring in drifts? But the biggest flaw in that argument is that if our reduced annual snowfall is a result of measuring error, the correction would have resulted in an abrupt and noticeable decrease at a fixed time. Instead, it's been a gradual process that continues to this day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottawa Blizzard Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 1872 Toronto. Very different place. And once again Tim, outstanding work. NWS WFO websites probably have this data readily accessible, but I know you had to sift through the EC data for Ottawa and Toronto to find those stats. Take a look at that month. lol http://www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climateData/dailydata_e.html?timeframe=2&Prov=ONT&StationID=5051&mlyRange=1840-01-01|2006-12-01&cmdB1=Go&Month=12&Year=1872&Day=19 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottawa Blizzard Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 It fits into the AGW narrative quite nicely, except for the fact that places like Detroit and Chicago are getting snowier while our snow decline is localized. I haven't really investigated how ares just east of us (BUF, ALB, BOS) have done over the last 100 years. Maybe it's an E of 80W thing. I always leave open the possibility that measuring techniques were a bit off in the 19th century. Maybe the observer back then was measuring in drifts? But the biggest flaw in that argument is that if our reduced annual snowfall is a result of measuring error, the correction would have resulted in an abrupt and noticeable decrease at a fixed time. Instead, it's been a gradual process that continues to this day. what do you think is causing it? AGW? Maybe 1000 years ago in the Medieval warm period snowfall totals sucked as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Take a look at that month. lol http://www.climate.w...ear=1872&Day=19 lol, 8 more inches on the 26th. That would be all my Christmas and birthday presents rolled into one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottawa Blizzard Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Take a look at that month. lol http://www.climate.w...ear=1872&Day=19 Over 3 feet of snow in one day with a high of around 2F? That must have been absolutely sick. So much for it being "too cold to snow", the most common form of weather b.s. you hear from people. I try to explain to people who say that that the colder it is, the faster the snow will accumulate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted December 20, 2011 Author Share Posted December 20, 2011 Ottawa took observations at the Central Experimental Farm http://www.climate.w...tnSubmit=Search Thanks. I'll use that in the future. BTW, I'm still working on the 1993-94 winter write up. Unfortunately the site I use for the U.S. data is down right now. Whenever it gets back up, I'll finish things up and post the info. In the meantime, I'm doing 2007-08...another banner Ottawa winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Thanks. I'll use that in the future. BTW, I'm still working on the 1993-94 winter write up. Unfortunately the site I use for the U.S. data is down right now. Whenever it gets back up, I'll finish things up and post the info. In the meantime, I'm doing 2007-08...another banner Ottawa winter. You can't do a writeup on 93-94 without talking about the arctic outbreak in January. Don't post too much though...I'm planning a thread on it next month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 what do you think is causing it? AGW? Maybe 1000 years ago in the Medieval warm period snowfall totals sucked as well. Interesting you mentioned that. If you look at the 1840s, the snowfall totals for those years were relatively tame. It wasn't until the 1860s and 1870s that we started getting consistently 80-100" of snow every year. That does seem to coincide with the "little ice age" period. But as Josh pointed out, Lansing, MI during the 1860s didn't appear to be any more snowy than it is today. So I don't know how to explain that, or why it's not like that anymore. AGW (or GW) would fit the bill, but again, why aren't Detroit and Chicago suffering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted December 20, 2011 Author Share Posted December 20, 2011 You can't do a writeup on 93-94 without talking about the arctic outbreak in January. Don't post too much though...I'm planning a thread on it next month. Of course. But to the last part, I make no promises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Here is Detroits Christmas Day snowfall and snow depth since 1906. Since an official "White Christmas" is a snow depth of 1" or greater at obs time, I highlighted the official White Christmases in blue. Since 1906...... 50 of the 105 Christmases have officially been white, with 1"+ snowdepth, so a 48% chance. 73 of the 105 Christmases have had a trace or more of snow on the ground, so a 70% chance 32 of the 105 Christmases have had zero snow on the ground, so a 30% chance So more or less, if you want the Bing Crosby, Courier and Ives "White Christmas" in Detroit, you have a 50/50 shot, regardless of what Grandpa tells ya Dec 25....Snowfall...Snow Depth 1906........0.......2" 1907........M......3" 1908........T.......T 1909........M......6" 1910........0.......6" 1911........0.......0 1912........0.......T 1913........0.......T 1914........0.......7" 1915......6.4".....7" 1916........0.......6" 1917........0.......0 1918........0.......0 1919........0.......1" 1920........T.......T 1921........0.......2" 1922........0.......2" 1923........M......T 1924........T.......4" 1925......0.1".....4" 1926........0.......0 1927........T.......0 1928........0.......T 1929......1.3"...12" 1930........0.......3" 1931........0.......0 1932........0.......0 1933........T.......0 1934......1.4".....3" 1935......3.2".....3" 1936........0.......0 1937........0.......1" 1938........0.......1" 1939........0.......0 1940........0.......0 1941........0.......0 1942........0.......1" 1943........0.......T 1944......2.2".....5" 1945......0.2".....2" 1946......0.2".....1" 1947......0.2".....2" 1948........0.......T 1949........0.......0 1950........0.......T 1951......6.2"...13" 1952........T.......0 1953........0.......T 1954........0.......0 1955........0.......0 1956......0.3".....T 1957........0.......0 1958......0.3".....2" 1959........0.......1" 1960........0.......3" 1961........T.......1" 1962......0.5".....2" 1963........T.......3" 1964........0.......0 1965......0.5".....T 1966........T.......4" 1967......1.3".....T 1968........0.......T 1969........T.......3" 1970......0.4".....T 1971........0.......0 1972........0.......0 1973........0.......7" 1974......0.4".....6" 1975......0.2".....2" 1976........T.......T 1977......0.2".....T 1978........T.......1" 1979........T.......0 1980........T.......3" 1981........0.......7" 1982........0.......0 1983........T.......2" 1984........T.......1" 1985........T.......3" 1986........0.......0 1987........0.......0 1988......0.1".....0 1989......1.8".....2" 1990........T.......5" 1991........0.......0 1992........T.......0 1993......0.3".....T 1994........0.......0 1995......0.8".....T 1996........T.......T 1997........T.......0 1998........0.......0 1999........0.......0 2000........0.......6" 2001......0.3".....T 2002......3.7".....6" 2003......1.4".....1" 2004........T.......6" 2005......0.5".....1" 2006........0.......0 2007........0.......T 2008......0.1".....7" 2009........0.......T 2010........T.......5" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Interesting you mentioned that. If you look at the 1840s, the snowfall totals for those years were relatively tame. It wasn't until the 1860s and 1870s that we started getting consistently 80-100" of snow every year. That does seem to coincide with the "little ice age" period. But as Josh pointed out, Lansing, MI during the 1860s didn't appear to be any more snowy than it is today. So I don't know how to explain that, or why it's not like that anymore. AGW (or GW) would fit the bill, but again, why aren't Detroit and Chicago suffering? Some things can't reasonably be explained. Toronto's snowfall decline may be one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Some things can't reasonably be explained. Toronto's snowfall decline may be one of them. Mostly blame myself since god or whatever higher power is out there hates me. If I end up going to law school in Windsor, watch Josh's run of amazing winters evaporate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted December 20, 2011 Author Share Posted December 20, 2011 Interesting you mentioned that. If you look at the 1840s, the snowfall totals for those years were relatively tame. It wasn't until the 1860s and 1870s that we started getting consistently 80-100" of snow every year. That does seem to coincide with the "little ice age" period. But as Josh pointed out, Lansing, MI during the 1860s didn't appear to be any more snowy than it is today. So I don't know how to explain that, or why it's not like that anymore. AGW (or GW) would fit the bill, but again, why aren't Detroit and Chicago suffering? Snowfall measuring and history remains sketchy at best, I truly believe. I mean what "technique" were people using in the mid-late 19th and early 20th centuries? That's not to say that we've perfected the craft now, but at least we seem to have a uniform idea/way of doing it. Of course I have the same questions about temperature data from "way back when"...but I suppose that's better served in another sub-forum here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Of course. But to the last part, I make no promises. 94 really did a good job maximizing the cold. The airmass was pretty brutal to begin with but there was a big snowstorm around the 17th which made it even colder than it otherwise would've been. You don't get down into the -30's in southern Indiana without everything breaking just right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mississaugasnow Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 It fits into the AGW narrative quite nicely, except for the fact that places like Detroit and Chicago are getting snowier while our snow decline is localized. I haven't really investigated how ares just east of us (BUF, ALB, BOS) have done over the last 100 years. Maybe it's an E of 80W thing. I always leave open the possibility that measuring techniques were a bit off in the 19th century. Maybe the observer back then was measuring in drifts? But the biggest flaw in that argument is that if our reduced annual snowfall is a result of measuring error, the correction would have resulted in an abrupt and noticeable decrease at a fixed time. Instead, it's been a gradual process that continues to this day. After quickly glancing at Buffalo and Rochester looks like there staying consistent (1940-1941 start). They both average substantially more snow then Toronto at 94and 99 inches. Buffalo and Rochester have beaten the average 27 times. They also have numerous average years (I kept average as give or take a couple inches) Buffalo's Low point 1948-1949 with 40.1 inches and a high point 199.4 inches 1976-1977. Rochester's low point 41.7 and high of 161.7 source:http://www.goldensnowball.com/yearly-winners-golden-award.htm. This was the quickest link I could find with what seems like reliable information Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Mostly blame myself since god or whatever higher power is out there hates me. If I end up going to law school in Windsor, watch Josh's run of amazing winters evaporate. Uh-Oh. Give me forewarning so I can book at least 3 trips up north that winter. j/k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.