Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

January 20-? Cold snap


Ottawa Blizzard

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 793
  • Created
  • Last Reply

JB has been busting forehead veins over this coming pattern for the last three days in his columns, here is an excerpt from today using Chicago as a marker:

 

What happens after that is the stuff legends are made of. Again, that ITS EVEN ON THE TABLE... this outbreak comes south over the pole and reaches the lakes day 10-11 ( upper support) and that it comes after what is a major cold outbreak that is coming day 5-8 should startle even the most stoic among you.

I cant believe this, this is the worst it could possibly get in a place like Chicago. Even if 15 warmer at night, its severe

A week with average highs near -5 and average lows near -20, with one night near -30.

What is startling is this was the warmer of the models in the last 2 outbreaks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JB has been busting forehead veins over this coming pattern for the last three days in his columns, here is an excerpt from today using Chicago as a marker:

 

What happens after that is the stuff legends are made of. Again, that ITS EVEN ON THE TABLE... this outbreak comes south over the pole and reaches the lakes day 10-11 ( upper support) and that it comes after what is a major cold outbreak that is coming day 5-8 should startle even the most stoic among you.

I cant believe this, this is the worst it could possibly get in a place like Chicago. Even if 15 warmer at night, its severe

A week with average highs near -5 and average lows near -20, with one night near -30.

What is startling is this was the warmer of the models in the last 2 outbreaks

Ah yes reminders of JB's vodka cold from seasons past. Only to see a warm up, and then storms and rumors of storms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JB has been busting forehead veins over this coming pattern for the last three days in his columns, here is an excerpt from today using Chicago as a marker:

 

What happens after that is the stuff legends are made of. Again, that ITS EVEN ON THE TABLE... this outbreak comes south over the pole and reaches the lakes day 10-11 ( upper support) and that it comes after what is a major cold outbreak that is coming day 5-8 should startle even the most stoic among you.

I cant believe this, this is the worst it could possibly get in a place like Chicago. Even if 15 warmer at night, its severe

A week with average highs near -5 and average lows near -20, with one night near -30.

What is startling is this was the warmer of the models in the last 2 outbreaks

LOL ohh JB. That has NEVER happened before in Chicago. If ORD goes 7 straight days with a mean temperature of -12.5F you can rewrite all the weather record books and cast aside any infamous winter cold outbreaks of the past as in another universe.

now, a day maybe...but a WEEK...oh boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he's actually been pretty good this year...although that's because it's been a hype-worthy season so far.   

Yes, he has been pretty good this year, with less clowning around in his videos ( I confess that I have a Weatherbell subscription tfor December, January, February).

 

There are threads devoted to him and other personalities in the NYC and Philly sub-forums. I'll say what I said there. He is guilty of overhyping, but he has done a reasonable job this year. I don't think it will get as cold in Chicago and NYC as he thinks though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL ohh JB. That has NEVER happened before in Chicago. If ORD goes 7 straight days with a mean temperature of -12.5F you can rewrite all the weather record books and cast aside any infamous winter cold outbreaks of the past as in another universe.

now, a day maybe...but a WEEK...oh boy.

Well, maybe back in the nineteenth century, say, in January 1857 it got that cold. David Ludlum has a whole chapter devoted to Midwest winters back then that you would just love.

 

http://www.amazon.com/American-Winters-1821-1870-History-Weather/dp/0933876246

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL ohh JB. That has NEVER happened before in Chicago. If ORD goes 7 straight days with a mean temperature of -12.5F you can rewrite all the weather record books and cast aside any infamous winter cold outbreaks of the past as in another universe.

now, a day maybe...but a WEEK...oh boy.

 

That would have to stress the hell out of infrastructure...even in a place like Chicago.   Maybe that's why he has also been describing the coming pattern as one that will have a similar economic impact on the U.S. as a major landfall hurricane.

 

seriously ....he said that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would have to stress the hell out of infrastructure...even in a place like Chicago.   Maybe that's why he has also been describing the coming pattern as one that will have a similar economic impact on the U.S. as a major landfall hurricane.

 

seriously ....he said that

Yeah, he said that and shouldn't have. I really like his passion for the weather and the interesting ideas he brings to the table but come on Joe. Tone it down. Also, there's no way this gets as cold as 1917-1918. Too much urban heat island.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it was Josh who said it best last year. JB is like a NAM clown map.

That was me :)

 

Dont get me wrong....this cold snap could be historic, and this winter may certainly be talked about for years to come as we have already had a record cold outbreak (and many of us very heavy snow). But when JB says things like that...its just like when someone says "I remember the blizzard of '78....we had 5 feet of snow with 12 foot drifts". You are taking an epic event and exaggerating it greatly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, he said that and shouldn't have. I really like his passion for the weather and the interesting ideas he brings to the table but come on Joe. Tone it down. Also, there's no way this gets as cold as 1917-1918. Too much urban heat island.

 

I will say this for JB, at least he updates vids once or twice a day.  I'm still waiting for DT's This Week In Weather video he promised would be posted by 5pm.....

 

....December 13th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL ohh JB. That has NEVER happened before in Chicago. If ORD goes 7 straight days with a mean temperature of -12.5F you can rewrite all the weather record books and cast aside any infamous winter cold outbreaks of the past as in another universe.

now, a day maybe...but a WEEK...oh boy.

 

 

I agree.  It's going to get cold, possibly extremely cold, but what JB is suggesting for intensity/duration is pretty over the top. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a link I posted on the Minnesota Forecaster site, I am known there as Randyinchamplin. You may as I suggest open new windows so you can see the maps and my comments about the up coming cold snap, possible recording breaking if we see light winds and mostly clear skies.

 

http://www.minnesotaforecaster.com/2014/01/grading-jan-13-14-storm-and-what-was.html?showComment=1389928095174#c7461059259802412046

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What JB is saying is not going to happen. He is hyping this up way too much. If the area doesn't see any significant snow cover increase before this cold shot, it'll probably end up being warmer than last week. 1-4" of snow on the ground across the area doesn't have the same effect as the 10-16" did last week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not usually one to complain about extremes but goddamn this heating cycle is gonna break the bank 

 

Thermostats already fixed on 62 and we're probably gonna end up moving it lower if this pans out  :arrowhead:

It is what it is...just pay it, after all if we want a good snowy winter, especially over most of this subforum we need a good cold winter, can't have it both ways.  BTW MSP just got it's largest 24 hr snowfall this winter the other day, a whooping 4.4" congrats to most of this subforum for a higher than normal snowfall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What JB is saying is not going to happen. He is hyping this up way too much. If the area doesn't see any significant snow cover increase before this cold shot, it'll probably end up being warmer than last week. 1-4" of snow on the ground across the area doesn't have the same effect as the 10-16" did last week.

 

Still have the Sat clipper ahead of the cold as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What JB is saying is not going to happen. He is hyping this up way too much. If the area doesn't see any significant snow cover increase before this cold shot, it'll probably end up being warmer than last week. 1-4" of snow on the ground across the area doesn't have the same effect as the 10-16" did last week.

 

I have no idea what JB is saying, but any snowfall fall on the ground fresh or not, with what the models are showing will not allow the temps to modify much as it approaches you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deep snow cover needed for real cold temps is a myth. Quite a few of the historical cold shots for LAF had 1-4" of snow depth. 

 

For example, something I wrote up for the early Jan arctic shot, based off the CPC analogs at the time. Snow depth bolded for each date. Hell, one of the shots had nothing on the ground.

 

1963-01-19 

1963-01-21: -14 (WL)

1963-01-22: -13 (WL)

1963-01-23: -13 (WL)

1963-01-24: -16 (WL)

1963-01-25: -9 (WL)

1963-01-26: -3 (WL)

1963-01-27: -4 (WL)

1963-01-28: -15 (WL)

1963-01-29: -15 (WL)

Snow cover 1-3"

 

1967-12-28

1967-12-31: -14 (LAF)

1968-01-01: -18 (LAF), -19 (WL)

1968-01-02: -15 (WL)

Snow cover 1-2"

 

1985-12-26

1985-12-25: -4 (WL)

1985-12-26: -5 (WL)

Snow cover 1"

 

1999-01-03

1999-01-04: -9 (LAF), -6 (WL)

1999-01-05: -20 (LAF), -20 (WL)

1999-01-06: -16 (WL)

1999-01-07: -6 (LAF) -7 (WL)

1999-01-08: -5 (WL)

Double digit snow cover

 

2008-01-20

2008-01-20: -1 (LAF), -2 (WL)

2008-01-21: -2 (WL)

Snow cover 3-4"

 

1963-01-13

1963-01-13: -2 (WL)

1963-01-14: -2 (WL)

1963-01-15: -8 (WL)

1963-01-16: -8 (WL)

No snow cover

 

1968-01-02

1968-01-02: -15 (WL)

1968-01-04: -5 (LAF), -2 (WL)

1968-01-05: -6 (LAF), -7 (WL)

1968-01-07: -11 (LAF), -11 (WL)

1968-01-08: -13 (LAF), -11 (WL)

1968-01-09: -10 (WL)

Snow cover 2-3"

 

1999-01-08

1999-01-08: -5 (WL)

1999-01-09: -10 (LAF)

1999-01-10: -11 (LAF), -12 (WL)

Double digit snow cover

 

1994-01-15

1994-01-15: -16 (LAF)

1994-01-16: -14 (LAF)

1994-01-17: -4 (LAF)

1994-01-18: -19 (LAF)

1994-01-19: -23 (LAF)

1994-01-20: -21 (LAF)

1994-01-21: -14 (LAF)

1994-01-22: -10 (LAF)

Snow cover 2-4"

 

1962-01-10

1962-01-09: -4 (LAF)

1962-01-10: -11 (LAF)

1962-01-11: -11 (LAF)

1962-01-12: -9 (LAF)

Snow cover 3"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I looked up some stats for Chicago and the most consecutive days with a high temp of -5F or lower is 3, which occurred in December 1983.  The most consecutive nights with a low temp of -20F or lower is 2, which has occurred more than once.  Records in Chicago go back to 1872 so you can kinda get an idea of how rare it would be for what JB is suggesting to come to pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deep snow cover needed for real cold temps is a myth. Quite a few of the historical cold shots for LAF had 1-4" of snow depth. 

 

For example, something I wrote up for the early Jan arctic shot, based off the CPC analogs at the time. Snow depth bolded for each date. Hell, one of the shots had nothing on the ground.

 

1963-01-19 

1963-01-21: -14 (WL)

1963-01-22: -13 (WL)

1963-01-23: -13 (WL)

1963-01-24: -16 (WL)

1963-01-25: -9 (WL)

1963-01-26: -3 (WL)

1963-01-27: -4 (WL)

1963-01-28: -15 (WL)

1963-01-29: -15 (WL)

Snow cover 1-3"

 

1967-12-28

1967-12-31: -14 (LAF)

1968-01-01: -18 (LAF), -19 (WL)

1968-01-02: -15 (WL)

Snow cover 1-2"

 

1985-12-26

1985-12-25: -4 (WL)

1985-12-26: -5 (WL)

Snow cover 1"

 

1999-01-03

1999-01-04: -9 (LAF), -6 (WL)

1999-01-05: -20 (LAF), -20 (WL)

1999-01-06: -16 (WL)

1999-01-07: -6 (LAF) -7 (WL)

1999-01-08: -5 (WL)

Double digit snow cover

 

2008-01-20

2008-01-20: -1 (LAF), -2 (WL)

2008-01-21: -2 (WL)

Snow cover 3-4"

 

1963-01-13

1963-01-13: -2 (WL)

1963-01-14: -2 (WL)

1963-01-15: -8 (WL)

1963-01-16: -8 (WL)

No snow cover

 

1968-01-02

1968-01-02: -15 (WL)

1968-01-04: -5 (LAF), -2 (WL)

1968-01-05: -6 (LAF), -7 (WL)

1968-01-07: -11 (LAF), -11 (WL)

1968-01-08: -13 (LAF), -11 (WL)

1968-01-09: -10 (WL)

Snow cover 2-3"

 

1999-01-08

1999-01-08: -5 (WL)

1999-01-09: -10 (LAF)

1999-01-10: -11 (LAF), -12 (WL)

Double digit snow cover

 

1994-01-15

1994-01-15: -16 (LAF)

1994-01-16: -14 (LAF)

1994-01-17: -4 (LAF)

1994-01-18: -19 (LAF)

1994-01-19: -23 (LAF)

1994-01-20: -21 (LAF)

1994-01-21: -14 (LAF)

1994-01-22: -10 (LAF)

Snow cover 2-4"

 

1962-01-10

1962-01-09: -4 (LAF)

1962-01-10: -11 (LAF)

1962-01-11: -11 (LAF)

1962-01-12: -9 (LAF)

Snow cover 3"

 

 

Upstream snowcover is also pretty important in terms of big cold but it takes longer to search for. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea what JB is saying, but any snowfall fall on the ground fresh or not, with what the models are showing will not allow the temps to modify much as it approaches you.

 

January of 2003 was a great example of scant snow cover and cold. The first day of the biggest blast of cold air there was probably only 1-1.5" of snow on the ground. First night was pretty brutal, -7°, but then the temperatures for the following couple days ended up being warmer than predicted. I've got a bit more snow than that now, but it isn't fresh snow. With Sunday's low to mid 30s and wind, alot of that fresh snowfall will compact and become part of the glacier that's already out there.

 

This time around if there isn't much more snow than there is now, I'm going to say the first night of the Arctic blast will be noteworthy, but then the days following will be above guidance.

 

Nice stats list Chicago Wx. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...