December 24-25 Snowstorm

[patrick7032]

Yeah I remember when I rattled the cage....I ended up being right when I said it would track from north of Peoria to north central or northern Ohio....and that was 102 hours out...the verified track was from the KRFD area to the KFWA to KTOL area....so I was REAL close....and it has not gone turbo NW nor stayed the same....not sure why you think those tenancies have occurred.

Didn't mean that in an arrogant way or anything....was just saying....the trend has been to shift north each run some this year....which is a typical trend for years....but just want to make sure what I said didn't come across the wrong way....csnavy made a good post earlier why this may happen and his reasoning is very valid when looking at the upstream pattern.

[patrick7032]

man that would be a perfect track for you

Which is EXACTLY WHY it WONT happen.

[buckeye]

Yeah I remember when I rattled the cage....I ended up being right when I said it would track from north of Peoria to north central or northern Ohio....and that was 102 hours out...the verified track was from the KRFD area to the KFWA to KTOL area....so I was REAL close....and it has not gone turbo NW nor stayed the same....not sure why you think those tenancies have occurred.

how much rain did you guys get on the frontend of that one?

[patrick7032]

Actually, what it is going to do is shoot a low from central Iowa to NW Ohio which in turn will form a secondary along the Ohio River...

U could see the track that you are saying and then have something similar to what you want....by the time it hit the Toledo area I could see a elongated trough to the ESE towards the DC area where secondary cyclogenisis would occur.

[patrick7032]

how much rain did you guys get on the frontend of that one?

We had 1.06 rain and then 5.5 snow....temp crashed 9F in one hour.

[buckeye]

It cracks me up....if you visit the MA or NE region threads, they have professional mets who explain in a relatively solid meterological fashion why the gfs is too far north and just burped. Then you read the mets in the mw section and they have perfectly sound reasoning as well, as to why the gfs is finally trending towards a reasonable solution.

lol...i just wish we had a met from ohio to lobby our cause

[patrick7032]

So essentially the ideal track for your area which no model is close to. Ok. Could happen I guess.

Nah....and ideal track for me is KIND to KCLE...this would still be south for me and would put the heaviest snows between the 70 and 80 corridors.

[buckeye]

no matter what happens,....if there is to be a significant nw shift I would expect the euro to begin sniffing it out relatively quickly, within the next 2 or 3 runs. If any model is going to correctly call a stronger wound up and northerly system, that's the expertise of the euro.

That being said, if it does show it, it's pretty much a done deal.

[patrick7032]

It cracks me up....if you visit the MA or NE region threads, they have professional mets who explain in a relatively solid meterological fashion why the gfs is too far north and just burped. Then you read the mets in the mw section and they have perfectly sound reasoning as well, as to why the gfs is finally trending towards a reasonable solution.

lol...i just wish we had a met from ohio to lobby our cause

Isn't a matter of lobbying....to me it doesn't matter if I get nailed every other day or go go months being dry....and feel free to post some of those comments....but if you look at the last storm where the GFS was way south of the other models by 200 miles or more....and do a statistical analysis of the GFS model at a 120 hour versus 24 hour forecast you would see it deviates NW on average by 120 miles over the last few years....and that has always been a model bias of the GFS going way back.

[JoMo]

It cracks me up....if you visit the MA or NE region threads, they have professional mets who explain in a relatively solid meterological fashion why the gfs is too far north and just burped. Then you read the mets in the mw section and they have perfectly sound reasoning as well, as to why the gfs is finally trending towards a reasonable solution.

lol...i just wish we had a met from ohio to lobby our cause

Yeah I read that. Remember "Woof"?

[JoMo]

Isn't a matter of lobbying....to me it doesn't matter if I get nailed every other day or go go months being dry....and feel free to post some of those comments....but if you look at the last storm where the GFS was way south of the other models by 200 miles or more....and do a statistical analysis of the GFS model at a 120 hour versus 24 hour forecast you would see it deviates NW on average by 120 miles over the last few years....and that has always been a model bias of the GFS going way back.

Then how do you explain the Euro being farther south than the GFS?

[patrick7032]

no matter what happens,....if there is to be a significant nw shift I would expect the euro to begin sniffing it out relatively quickly, within the next 2 or 3 runs. If any model is going to correctly call a stronger wound up and northerly system, that's the expertise of the euro.

That being said, if it does show it, it's pretty much a done deal.

I agree with you...I would say about 2 runs is correct for the shift to occur if it does....and I might be completely wrong....actually hope I am so we can "shear the wealth" with the snow....so the folks from STL to Ohio get a white Christamas. Would prefer that to be honest.

[TheWeatherPimp]

I agree with you...I would say about 2 runs is correct for the shift to occur if it does....and I might be completely wrong....actually hope I am so we can "shear the wealth" with the snow....so the folks from STL to Ohio get a white Christamas. Would prefer that to be honest.

[buckeye]

Isn't a matter of lobbying....to me it doesn't matter if I get nailed every other day or go go months being dry....and feel free to post some of those comments....but if you look at the last storm where the GFS was way south of the other models by 200 miles or more....and do a statistical analysis of the GFS model at a 120 hour versus 24 hour forecast you would see it deviates NW on average by 120 miles over the last few years....and that has always been a model bias of the GFS going way back.

i wasn't picking on you Pat....and you made a very good case and reason for what you believe. But that's my point, the mets from the MA are making equally good points for the low staying more south like previous gfs solutions. There is always going to be a backyard bias among mets, i don't care what anyone says. You see it all the time AFDs across the region. They always make the case why their region could/should get thumped.....but that's their job in a way, to watch out for the public in their 'neck of the woods'.

My comment about lobbying was tongue and cheek. It would be nice however to have a met from our backyard that also gave us meterologically-backed hope as well.

[AppsRunner]

14.8"... give me a break.

[patrick7032]

Then how do you explain the Euro being farther south than the GFS?

What do you mean....not every model is going to agree with the GFS....and I haven't done an analysis of that model before....just one on a NAM versus GFS comparison....to me I don't get too excited about model runs until the energy is inside the RAOB network....even if every model shows me getting 2 feet I remain 'grounded" until the mid and upper level energy is inside the RAOB network for two launches....then I tend to have more confidence in model initilizations....but even the Euro and CMC have trended slightly north the last few runs....until the Tuesday evening launch it's open season for anyone.

[JoMo]

What do you mean....not every model is going to agree with the GFS....and I haven't done an analysis of that model before....just one on a NAM versus GFS comparison....to me I don't get too excited about model runs until the energy is inside the RAOB network....even if every model shows me getting 2 feet I remain 'grounded" until the mid and upper level energy is inside the RAOB network for two launches....then I tend to have more confidence in model initilizations....but even the Euro and CMC have trended slightly north the last few runs....until the Tuesday evening launch it's open season for anyone.

They have actually both trended south from their previous runs? (on last nights 00z to 12z today)

Ohhhhhh, You must be talking about in your backyard and I must be talking about my area. I think I see now. :-p

[dilly84]

Isn't a matter of lobbying....to me it doesn't matter if I get nailed every other day or go go months being dry....and feel free to post some of those comments....but if you look at the last storm where the GFS was way south of the other models by 200 miles or more....and do a statistical analysis of the GFS model at a 120 hour versus 24 hour forecast you would see it deviates NW on average by 120 miles over the last few years....and that has always been a model bias of the GFS going way back.

One difference. It isn't just the gfs.

[patrick7032]

i wasn't picking on you Pat....and you made a very good case and reason for what you believe. But that's my point, the mets from the MA are making equally good points for the low staying more south like previous gfs solutions. There is always going to be a backyard bias among mets, i don't care what anyone says. You see it all the time AFDs across the region. They always make the case why their region could/should get thumped.....but that's their job in a way, to watch out for the public in their 'neck of the woods'.

My comment about lobbying was tongue and cheek. It would be nice however to have a met from our backyard that also gave us meterologically-backed hope as well.

Oh I know you weren't picking on me but I appreciate it....I just wanted to make sure I wasn't sounding like an arrogant one...or coming across that way....and those mets may be right....the model may have different bias for that region since they get secondary cyclogenisis which changes the ballgame completely....I was saying to go ahead and post their comments if you want out of curiosity that's all....to me you can never have enough data regardless of who is saying it or what model.

[Harry]

Bunch of weenies..The storm is gonna split and one piece is gonna head east and slow down along i70 and the other piece is gonna dive to the gulf and make a hard left across GA/E.TN/E.KY and into Ohio up i71 where it will go BOOM with the energy meeting it at i70 in Columbus! It will then crawl n to Lake Huron and reach 950mb.. :weenie:

Nice pipe dream huh?

Seriously.. I would wait atleast a few days before getting worked up with this event. I am sure the models will toss everything out including that kitchen sink. Keep a eye on the Atlantic and Canada though.

FWIW.. The euro ensembles have tracks ranging from WI/UP of MI to a track across the ole south and off the SC/GA coast and out to sea.

[csnavywx]

i wasn't picking on you Pat....and you made a very good case and reason for what you believe. But that's my point, the mets from the MA are making equally good points for the low staying more south like previous gfs solutions. There is always going to be a backyard bias among mets, i don't care what anyone says. You see it all the time AFDs across the region. They always make the case why their region could/should get thumped.....but that's their job in a way, to watch out for the public in their 'neck of the woods'.

My comment about lobbying was tongue and cheek. It would be nice however to have a met from our backyard that also gave us meterologically-backed hope as well.

I kind of already did for your region in mentioning the PV anomaly cruising SW into Quebec. If that feature is faster/stronger, the storm's track will tend to get suppressed somewhat as it comes east. How much is dependent upon the strength of the storm and the PV anom.

For regions further west, there won't be this type of suppression, and the main issue there is phasing and an ever-sensitive type of cyclogenesis. In this case, I do think there will be a phase as the system comes east of the mean longwave ridge axis. Question is, how quickly? But even then it may not matter as much if we get deep cyclogenesis going ahead of time.

[Indystorm]

Yes, model convergence and consistency is definitely the key. But that 18z GFS sure is interesting for us here in Northern IN not only for synoptic snow potential but LES. At 162 hrs. you have a 1036 anticyclone over northern MN and a 984 low over New Jersey. Would make for a repeat of the U.S. 421 snow blast we had recently from Michigan City down to Westville and Wanatah IN.

[baroclinic_instability]

What do you mean....not every model is going to agree with the GFS....and I haven't done an analysis of that model before....just one on a NAM versus GFS comparison....to me I don't get too excited about model runs until the energy is inside the RAOB network....even if every model shows me getting 2 feet I remain 'grounded" until the mid and upper level energy is inside the RAOB network for two launches....then I tend to have more confidence in model initilizations....but even the Euro and CMC have trended slightly north the last few runs....until the Tuesday evening launch it's open season for anyone.

We spoke on this in the weather and forecasting discussion forum a while back, but studies have shown satellite data has nearly closed the gap completely regarding data over the oceans. RAOBS still catch moisture that satellite feeds cant, but quite often they can catch the winds in the upper troposphere very well. GOES satellite derived winds are pretty darned good. West coast folks are a good example...they don't get to "wait" until a system has been observed by RAOB network for 2 successive launches. Just saying. Off hour runs have become very good because of this. Not saying having a system in the RAOB network isn't nice, but we can still forecast well before it is within the network.

http://www.emc.ncep....H500mb_day4.png

[csnavywx]

We're talking about waiting until this wave hits the upper air network to make judgement calls, but it's doing just that over Alaska. The piece of jet energy that will become this storm is currently over the Bering Strait and Western Alaska, and surface observations from it should have been ingested in the 18Z runs. The 00Z runs should have upper air obs as well.

[patrick7032]

We spoke on this in the weather and forecasting discussion forum a while back, but studies have shown satellite data has nearly closed the gap completely regarding data over the oceans. RAOBS still catch moisture that satellite feeds cant, but quite often they can catch the winds in the upper troposphere very well. GOES satellite derived winds are pretty darned good. West coast folks are a good example...they don't get to "wait" until a system has been observed by RAOB network for 2 successive launches. Just saying. Off hour runs have become very good because of this.

http://www.emc.ncep....H500mb_day4.png

I know and wouldn't expect them to....and yes the teleconnections are much improved....especially with the third center in Greenland coming online (see Comet models on remote sensing)....but estimates CAN AND NEVER WILL replace ACTUAL observations....both are key ingredients though....and you need both.

[baroclinic_instability]

I know and wouldn't expect them to....and yes the teleconnections are much improved....especially with the third center in Greenland coming online (see Comet models on remote sensing)....but estimates CAN AND NEVER WILL replace ACTUAL observations....both are key ingredients though....and you need both.

I never said they would. I just see that comment all the time as if we shouldn't even bother to forecast until something is within the RAOB network. Gets old, especially in this day and age when satellite data has become that good. I don't disagree though, RAOB data is nice to have, especially for short-term severe wx forecasting it helps a lot having that data. When it comes to upper tropospheric winds, etc., the satellites get us most of the information we need.

[Hoosier]

I never said they would. I just see that comment all the time as if we shouldn't even bother to forecast until something is within the RAOB network. Gets old, especially in this day and age when satellite data has become that good.

Yeah I think that is a big misconception that is out there. Just because something isn't in the RAOB network doesn't mean it isn't getting sampled. RAOBS help but even that is a fairly small amount of data. This ties in with that thread in the main forum about data limitations and how the rate of improvement is slowing down. Some pretty good discussion there and I'd encourage folks to check out that thread if they haven't yet.

[baroclinic_instability]

Here is the mentioned thread by Hoosier. Good read for those interested in the models themselves.

http://www.americanw...-models-so-bad/

[Harry]

Well since some of you seem to think that the raobs are not needed etc how about putting a call out now? We can come back and visit it after the storm?

[baroclinic_instability]

Well since some of you seem to think that the raobs are not needed etc how about putting a call out now? We can come back and visit it after the storm?

No I am not saying they are worthless, far from it.

We need some west coasters here to comment, haha. They have to deal with this on a daily basis--forecasting without the full suite of surface/RAOB data most other forecasters have access to when putting together their forecasts.