Geos Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 So who's the hacker? Snowstorms or Toronto Blizzard? Lol, hey it looks like a truly good hit for you guys! You deserve it after 4 years of waiting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TugHillMatt Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Good sign. Good luck down there. Agreed! I believe you guys didn't even get an inch of snow last winter? Wow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckster2013 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 It's obvious that I'm not well liked on this forum. Back off a little...thanks. You're all right in my book. I don't know why some have to resort to snobbery and hostility. Just enjoy the storm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottawa Blizzard Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 If the RGEM verifies and we get 4-5", this storm was not a dud. Please make sure a few psychopathic NAM runs don't cloud your assessment. Oh agree, but news agencies in the city were all downgrading the storm. My Dad told me over Christmas dinner that he's heard on the radio that the storm had been downgraded. People's guard may be down...and Toronto drivers are awful in winter even when they are prepared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Step back here though. I'll have to bear hug the NAM. Step back versus the NAM? Well yeah, nothing's coming in as wet as that model. Split the difference. Not a bad way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TugHillMatt Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Interesting to see that by 24z there is 20-25dbz returns all the up to Blackrock! 20 dbz returns back into Chicago as well! I think this storm is going to pull a few good surprises. Toronto prediction: 25cm (~10") +/- 1cm. Did somebody say my name? Oh no, don't drag me back to my OCD (Obsessive Convective Disorder)... where I check the radar obsessively.... Thanks for the encouragement, Geos. Now if the NAM and GFS could just agree for once... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayPSU Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Wow. Agreement from both NAM and GFS now tonight for a historic blizzard for us here in Columbus, Ohio. Truly amazing, and yet still hard to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Hmm, I don't usually look at longer range models for storms in the observation period but the 0z GFS seemed more reasonable in terms of snowfall amounts in my area, around 6-9 inches. Again, I"ll be following modles like the RUC and Nam and RGEM more though. Any thoughts Canuck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted December 26, 2012 Author Share Posted December 26, 2012 Step back versus the NAM? Well yeah, nothing's coming in as wet as that model. Split the difference. Not a bad way to go. Yeah, it'd be hard not to be a step back from the NAM. But I was talking about a step back from the 18z GFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted December 26, 2012 Author Share Posted December 26, 2012 Hmm, I don't usually look at longer range models for storms in the observation period but the 0z GFS seemed more reasonable in terms of snowfall amounts in my area, around 6-9 inches. Again, I"ll be following modles like the RUC and Nam and RGEM more though. Any thoughts Canuck? No reason not to use the GFS in the short term. I bet you verification scores with that model are much better within 84 hours. GFS maintains the trend of a further north track with the ul compared to the 12z run, but not quite as amped up as the the 18z. I'm bumping my numbers from 2-5" to 3-7" for Toronto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottawa Blizzard Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Yeah, it'd be hard not to be a step back from the NAM. But I was talking about a step back from the 18z GFS. It's still good for us though. Looks like 4-6" for Toronto, maybe 8"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TugHillMatt Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 He'd be here, but they just got dialup last week. Sent from my Galaxy S III on Tapatalk! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TugHillMatt Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 You're all right in my book. I don't know why some have to resort to snobbery and hostility. Just enjoy the storm! Amen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Yeah, it'd be hard not to be a step back from the NAM. But I was talking about a step back from the 18z GFS. Gotcha. <optimism>Slight improvement over the 12z GFS though<optimism> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Organizing Low Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 prelim call 4-8 inches ottawa 6-10 inches montreal 8-14 inches N vermont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckster2013 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Radar showing some rain in Sw Indiana now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 No reason not to use the GFS in the short term. I bet you verification scores with that model are much better within 84 hours. GFS maintains the trend of a further north track with the ul compared to the 12z run, but not quite as amped up as the the 18z. I'm bumping my numbers from 2-5" to 3-7" for Toronto. . True but shorter range models are often better to use in nowcasting moments. But yeah, it was downplay indeed but I wouldn't be overly concerned, atleast the RGEM seemed to have moven up from the "whiff" lol. I agree with your call though, maybe 6z will be different? Has it initialized according to current observations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted December 26, 2012 Author Share Posted December 26, 2012 . True but shorter range models are often better to use in nowcasting moments. But yeah, it was downplay indeed but I wouldn't be overly concerned, atleast the RGEM seemed to have moven up from the "whiff" lol. I agree with your call though, maybe 6z will be different? Has it initialized according to current observations? GFS and NAM looked ok. RGEM looked a touch weak at the surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanceJA91 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 It's obvious that I'm not well liked on this forum. Back off a little...thanks. No problem here. Just slow down on the imby, and you will be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Link?, because not seeing those insane totals, not that they matter. Just curious where you're seeing this. lol I have access to the stormvista model page, and I clicked on Great Lakes region 4km high-res nam, 60-hr qpf total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Lock 'em up. Final call. LAF: 3-5" (Chad 3.8", Hoosier 4.3", me and blue 4.6") OKK: 5-7" IND: 8-10" MIE: 8-10" FWA: 4-6" KFickle: 4-6" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Rent Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Look at that little 15-20 blob in SE Indiana. Sent from my Galaxy S III on Tapatalk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 I HATE doing this....but I will make a guess. 5-7" for DTW. I will say 0.50" qpf at a 12-1 ratio, which would yield 6 inches of snow. Hope Im not a jinx...and if I bust hope its low I notice still that the GFS is notably faster than the NAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Rent Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Lock 'em up. Final call.LAF: 3-5" (Chad 3.8", Hoosier 4.3", Me and blue 4.6") OKK: 5-7" IND: 8-10" MIE: 8-10" FWA: 4-6" KFickle: 4-6" Chicakage just put 10+ southeast of 37/69, less than 4 northwest of LAF. Sent from my Galaxy S III on Tapatalk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowstorms Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 GFS and NAM looked ok. RGEM looked a touch weak at the surface. . Hmm well the RGEM did improve from the whiff lol, but depending what the 0z GGEM shows will depend what course of action EC will take lol. I think 15cm is a good call. Give or take -5 or +10 cm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 I have access to the stormvista model page, and I clicked on Great Lakes region 4km high-res nam, 60-hr qpf total. WOW.. That thing shows nearly a inch QPF here.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paweatherguy1 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Look at that little 15-20 blob in SE Indiana. Sent from my Galaxy S III on Tapatalk! THat looks significantly south of any other model. Indy barely makes 5 inches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Chicakage just put 10+ southeast of 37/69, less than 4 northwest of LAF. Sent from my Galaxy S III on Tapatalk! She huggin' the NAM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Organizing Low Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 good luck everyone im off to bed will check in tomorrow evening as we will be getting ready for the storm here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted December 26, 2012 Author Share Posted December 26, 2012 WOW.. That thing shows nearly a inch QPF here.. ok, maybe Josh wasn't mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.