Snowstorms Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I'll tell you what. I'll suspend my edict to toss the NAM for 20 minutes while we digest the 18z GFS. Barring a substantive shift with that model, I think this is just a typical garbage 18z NAM run. I concur with the amounts you posted. Seems reasonable. Storm does get sampled tonight, so tonight's runs will be vital 13z RUC at 24 hours looks interesting. And about your sig....you should say 2009 lol since Jan 2009 had two-three decent storms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wisconsinwx Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Yeah that's too low. I think 4-6" with isolated higher amounts would be a good call for Milwaukee. My earlier call of 1-3" for here still looks good. I'll go with 2" here, and 1-1.5" for the QC. Lock it in. They might be a step behind the models. Last night 3-5 would've probably been a good call, but if anything the trends have been positive the last 12 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppsRunner Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 IWX WWA going with 3-7" for just west of me... take it an' run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wisconsinwx Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I would say the IA/WI/IL border area pretty much east to L Michigan still looks the best atm for the higher amounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone77 Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 DVN wisely chopped amounts down in the new ZF. Point here dropped from 7 to 3 inches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Seems reasonable. Storm does get sampled tonight, so tonight's runs will be vital 13z RUC at 24 hours looks interesting. And about your sig....you should say 2009 lol since Jan 2009 had two-three decent storms. I didn't record a single storm in Jan 2009 that dropped 6"/12 hours. One storm, Jan 17-18, dropped about 7" over the course of 18 hours. And neither Pearson nor downtown recorded a single 6"+ storm that month, within 12 hours or otherwise. So I stand by 2008. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gosaints Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Is the GFS gonna go NAM on us?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Nam was wrong with clipper, had no snow at all about 25 miles south of 1-80. GFS was closest, Why is the NAM going to be right tommorow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gosaints Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Nam was wrong with clipper, had no snow at all south of 1-80. GFS was closest, Why is the NAM going to be right tommorow? I dont think anyone says it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I didn't record a single storm in Jan 2009 that dropped 6"/12 hours. One storm, Jan 17-18, dropped about 7" over the course of 18 hours. And neither Pearson nor downtown recorded a single 6"+ storm that month, within 12 hours or otherwise. So I stand by 2008. You and I have different measuring tallies. Jan 2009 did not feature decent and strong storms but alot of overrunning events, plus it was quite cold. 18z GFS looks slightly south of the 18z Nam thru 24 I'd rather wait till 0z so lets see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Nam was wrong with clipper, had no snow at all about 25 miles south of 1-80. GFS was closest, Why is the NAM going to be right tommorow? I agree with your conclusion but your reasoning is faulty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gosaints Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 GFS looks more generous with the precip over a larger area than it has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I agree with your conclusion but your reasoning is faulty. I had no reasoning, so how could it be faulty? All I said is what happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 You and I have different measuring tallies. Jan 2009 did not feature decent and strong storms but alot of overrunning events, plus it was quite cold. 18z GFS looks slightly south of the 18z Nam thru 24 I'd rather wait till 0z so lets see. 1. Official measurements are all that count. And yeah, Jan 2009 was a wintry month. Did not feature a true winter storm (ie, warning criteria storm) though. 2. Compare whether the 18z GFS is north of the 12z GFS. That's what matters. I don't care enough to do it myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I had no reasoning, so how could it be faulty? All I said is what happened. I would disagree with your premise about the NAM not having snow south of I-80 in regards to today's system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I had no reasoning, so how could it be faulty? All I said is what happened. You're implying that because the NAM sucked bag today, it's going to suck bag tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundersnow12 Posted January 19, 2012 Author Share Posted January 19, 2012 GFS still looks good for here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 1. Official measurements are all that count. And yeah, Jan 2009 was a wintry month. Did not feature a true winter storm (ie, warning criteria storm) though. 2. Compare whether the 18z GFS is north of the 12z GFS. That's what matters. I don't care enough to do it myself. Seems slightly further north, Yeah Jan 2009 the last "true" Winter month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 1. Official measurements are all that count. And yeah, Jan 2009 was a wintry month. Did not feature a true winter storm (ie, warning criteria storm) though. 2. Compare whether the 18z GFS is north of the 12z GFS. That's what matters. I don't care enough to do it myself. Well, it actually gets the 0.10" isohyet north of us, so that's gotta be an improvement over the 12z GFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 You're implying that because the NAM sucked bag today, it's going to suck bag tomorrow. Wouldn't that be reasonable to expect if it is in such a close time frame? I mean if it was 2 days away from now it could be right then, but we should at least wait until 00z runs once it corrects with current conditions? Instead of the old data? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastFromTheEast Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 GFS still looks good for here. Yep looks good for a lot of us The northern cutoff edge of the .25+ QPF is further north as well compared to 12z up here in S. WI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toronto blizzard Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Well, it actually gets the 0.10" isohyet north of us, so that's gotta be an improvement over the 12z GFS. Well the models have been trending north with each run today so that is some good news. I will make my preliminary call now but it could change after tonight's 00z runs. Right now 1-3" seems like a reasonable call for YYZ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toronto4 Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I didn't record a single storm in Jan 2009 that dropped 6"/12 hours. One storm, Jan 17-18, dropped about 7" over the course of 18 hours. And neither Pearson nor downtown recorded a single 6"+ storm that month, within 12 hours or otherwise. So I stand by 2008. Don't forget about March 23rd, 2011. Just over 6" (16 cm) fell in downtown Toronto. Or the strong Lake Ontario LES event on January 8th which also dumped 16 cm. Back on topic, the 18z runs were an improvement. The 00z runs tonight will determine if it's game on or not for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilbertfly Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 sampling and high res both commence this evening . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Wouldn't that be reasonable to expect if it is in such a close time frame? I mean if it was 2 days away from now it could be right then, but we should at least wait until 00z runs once it corrects with current conditions? Instead of the old data? Hypothetically speaking, say a model was too far south with an arctic front. Then that could have implications with how it handled a subsequent wave traversing the front. But there has to be some sort of causality. Just because a model allegedly (see Hoosier's post) mishandled the placement of some snow with a lead system, doesn't mean that it will invariably mishandle key features with a storm on its heels. They're completely independent in my mind, except with that causal link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Well the models have been trending north with each run today so that is some good news. I will make my preliminary call now but it could change after tonight's 00z runs. Right now 1-3" seems like a reasonable call for YYZ. 12z NAM trended north from an extreme southerly solution at 6z. Aside from that, I'd say the 12z runs were a wash. GFS actually trended south a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 12z ECMWF LSE: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -13.5 -13.8 1024 71 99 0.19 543 525 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -14.3 -13.9 1024 79 75 0.09 544 526 MSN: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -13.8 -12.3 1024 71 100 0.13 545 527 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -13.2 -12.1 1023 83 98 0.24 545 528 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -17.2 -12.5 1024 83 32 0.01 547 529 MKE: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -12.3 -13.4 1024 69 100 0.07 546 527 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -9.4 -12.3 1021 82 98 0.30 546 529 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -9.6 -13.2 1022 77 50 0.05 546 530 SBM: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -12.6 -15.4 1025 64 100 0.05 542 524 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -12.0 -13.9 1023 82 98 0.16 543 525 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -14.7 -14.1 1023 84 42 0.01 544 526 CID: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -10.0 -7.2 1021 65 95 0.06 551 535 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -10.0 -9.1 1021 80 86 0.08 550 534 DVN: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -8.5 -6.7 1021 50 90 0.04 552 536 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -8.2 -7.4 1020 76 89 0.08 551 535 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -12.7 -7.7 1022 83 42 0.01 551 534 PIA: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -4.1 -3.5 1018 53 95 0.01 554 540 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -6.3 -4.0 1020 72 54 0.02 553 538 RFD: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -10.5 -9.9 1023 68 100 0.09 549 532 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -9.4 -8.6 1021 85 99 0.23 549 533 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -11.9 -9.8 1022 87 48 0.04 549 532 ORD: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -7.6 -9.9 1023 69 100 0.06 550 532 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -6.4 -7.7 1020 86 99 0.22 549 534 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -6.5 -8.5 1020 87 60 0.11 549 533 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -7.3 -9.3 1022 78 20 0.01 551 534 SAT 18Z 21-JAN -3.3 -6.5 1024 70 22 0.01 556 537 MDW: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -7.7 -9.2 1023 68 99 0.04 550 533 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -6.6 -7.1 1020 83 99 0.17 550 534 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -6.7 -7.9 1020 85 65 0.11 550 534 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -5.6 -8.4 1022 78 18 0.01 552 535 SAT 18Z 21-JAN -4.0 -5.4 1024 71 21 0.01 556 537 DEC: SAT 06Z 21-JAN -4.0 -0.9 1018 73 77 0.04 556 541 VPZ: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -8.2 -8.1 1023 57 100 0.02 551 534 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -7.5 -5.6 1020 76 100 0.10 551 536 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -7.3 -6.9 1020 85 85 0.14 550 535 LAF: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -3.4 -1.3 1018 51 84 0.01 555 541 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -4.9 -2.3 1018 84 92 0.14 554 540 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -8.7 -2.8 1021 84 29 0.01 554 538 IND: SAT 06Z 21-JAN -2.5 1.2 1016 82 97 0.07 556 543 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -5.1 -0.6 1019 83 44 0.03 556 541 OKK: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -4.3 -1.5 1019 54 88 0.02 554 540 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -5.2 -2.6 1018 86 98 0.18 553 539 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -8.0 -3.2 1021 86 31 0.02 554 538 FWA: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -5.8 -3.1 1020 66 100 0.07 552 537 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -5.9 -4.3 1019 87 98 0.19 552 537 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -8.2 -4.9 1021 84 29 0.02 552 536 HAO: SAT 06Z 21-JAN -0.9 3.4 1015 89 99 0.10 558 546 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -2.4 1.0 1017 85 76 0.08 557 543 DAY: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -2.2 -0.5 1019 50 81 0.01 556 541 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -2.3 1.6 1016 83 100 0.08 556 543 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -4.3 -0.7 1018 86 66 0.09 555 541 CMH: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -2.1 -0.9 1020 53 91 0.01 556 540 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -2.1 1.5 1016 82 98 0.06 555 543 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -3.3 -0.8 1017 88 77 0.14 555 542 TDZ: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -5.7 -7.2 1022 72 100 0.11 551 533 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -5.1 -5.7 1019 89 99 0.25 550 535 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -7.4 -7.6 1021 85 28 0.05 551 535 CLE: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -4.8 -8.1 1023 64 100 0.04 551 533 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -5.1 -4.9 1019 87 99 0.24 550 535 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -4.1 -6.2 1019 85 57 0.13 550 536 MKG: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -7.4 -15.5 1024 66 100 0.02 544 526 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -7.9 -12.9 1022 83 99 0.24 545 528 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -10.6 -12.1 1022 84 67 0.05 545 528 GRR: FRI 18Z 20-JAN -7.5 -13.0 1024 55 100 0.01 545 527 SAT 00Z 21-JAN -8.9 -11.5 1022 85 100 0.21 546 528 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -12.5 -11.0 1022 89 84 0.10 545 529 BTL: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -8.5 -8.9 1022 80 100 0.22 548 531 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -9.2 -8.7 1021 88 96 0.16 547 531 ADG: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -7.4 -7.9 1022 77 99 0.15 549 532 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -8.0 -6.7 1020 89 98 0.25 548 533 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -11.3 -7.8 1022 83 18 0.02 550 533 DTW: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -7.7 -10.0 1023 76 99 0.12 548 530 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -8.2 -7.7 1021 88 99 0.24 547 531 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -12.3 -9.1 1022 84 18 0.02 548 532 PHN: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -10.6 -12.6 1025 82 99 0.07 545 526 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -10.3 -10.8 1022 85 99 0.15 545 528 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -11.5 -11.1 1022 82 20 0.01 546 529 YKF: SAT 00Z 21-JAN -8.7 -14.5 1025 63 100 0.01 542 523 SAT 06Z 21-JAN -8.8 -12.9 1022 80 100 0.09 542 526 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -12.6 -12.7 1021 79 47 0.02 543 527 YYZ: SAT 06Z 21-JAN -6.6 -13.6 1022 73 100 0.08 541 524 SAT 12Z 21-JAN -7.5 -13.2 1021 75 66 0.03 542 526 Personally, and it's probably easy for me to say being an outsider to the event, I'd just print these off and expect that to fall in your respective backyards. You know, just to make it less stressful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Don't forget about March 23rd, 2011. Just over 6" (16 cm) fell in downtown Toronto. Or the strong Lake Ontario LES event on January 8th which also dumped 16 cm. Back on topic, the 18z runs were an improvement. The 00z runs tonight will determine if it's game on or not for us. LES doesn't count as a winter storm. You make a good point about March 23, 2011, although I just eked out 6" and Pearson didn't make it. But I think people should look to the spirit, rather that the letter of my sig. The spirit is: we've been getting screwed left right and centre for several winters now notwithstanding the fact that we've hobbled a few arguable "storms" together. This is way off topic. Any of my Toronto friends want to continue this debate, feel free to PM me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nwohweather Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 Personally, and it's probably easy for me to say being an outsider to the event, I'd just print these off and expect that to fall in your respective backyards. You know, just to make it less stressful. I'm probably the millionth person to ask but where do you get these at? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 I'm probably the millionth person to ask but where do you get these at? Accuweather (subscription service). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.