wisconsinwx Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 If the system this weekend doesn't produce, then I say yes to that as well. The nickel and dimer's are boring at this point.h Look at the trends. Every early February storm so far has teased us with amplification potential only to suppress a bit (not as much with this weekend storm, but the point still remains). In 12 hours, the GFS Ensembles for this next weekend storm went from good to suppressed into Ohio for the decent snow band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geos Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Look at the trends. Every early February storm so far has teased us with amplification potential only to suppress a bit (not as much with this weekend storm, but the point still remains). In 12 hours, the GFS Ensembles for this next weekend storm went from good to suppressed into Ohio for the decent snow band. Yeah it's pretty clear... I get my wish of 60 straight day of snow cover. Any additional days are a bonus. 60" for the season seems a lock and 70" is possible. Not going to wish for anything more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Now I bet if Detroit were in the bullseye at this range, this POS storm would continue trending NW. The one time we could a 25-50 mile NW shift is when the models want to hold steady on a solution, if not shift the opposite direction. It's March 2008 all over again. I'm ready for Spring after this. The models have held this same exact track to/near Wheeling for days now. Sorry but NOT ONE STORM has done that up here as some others tried to suggest. I honestly cannot think of a storm that has ever done this up this way? Usually it goes north and then south and vice versa up till the last possible second. And i'll bet that it holds right where it is and thus where the storm will go. Not gonna be any last second shift nw with this. I am near certain of it now. What i wouldn't give to see this happen here. Less stress involved. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitelakeroy Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Now I bet if Detroit were in the bullseye at this range, this POS storm would continue trending NW. The one time we could a 25-50 mile NW shift is when the models want to hold steady on a solution, if not shift the opposite direction. It's March 2008 all over again. The models have held this same exact track to/near Wheeling for days now. Sorry but NOT ONE STORM has done that up here as some others tried to suggest. I honestly cannot think of a storm that has ever done this up this way? Usually it goes north and then south and vice versa up till the last possible second. And i'll bet that it holds right where it is and thus where the storm will go. Not gonna be any last second shift nw with this. I am near certain of it now. What i wouldn't give to see this happen here. Less stress involved. lol As Harry knows very well this is my major %#$& %$#@ Complaint about this area. GHD was the worst. It was nearly perfect in the model for Southern MI for like 5 days only to shift NW like 6-12 hours before it hit. Oh yeah that March 2008 where we could not get any real shift at all (especially when all the other storms that winter had decent NW trends ... yeah ... the one storm this area needed that NW trend ). Models pretty NEVER hold in this area but do so in other areas. But I must admit ... oddly the RGEM has done the best that I have ever seen for MBY. Not perfect but pre-Christmas and the Jan 5th storm it was fairly steady starting about 3 days out (not the other models at all though). That RGEM gave me something I don't think I have ever experienced before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppsRunner Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Wait...Im confused...Buckeye made a very valid point that this winter when a storm pegs Detroit it doesnt miss, which is true. Not thinking he is talking 12.5"+, just that when a storm pegs us it hits. I dont really know if anyone can expect that much from Feb 4/5? Feb 8/9 stay tuned though. And I also disagree about being relentlessly teased this winter...we have not had a single storm underperform here. We were the jackpot Dec 14th & Dec 31-Jan 2, so the closest to a tease would be Jan 5/6 as there were 12"+ totals NW of DTW...but DTW still got the higher end of what they expected, they just didnt get the stalled out front pre-storm that hit NW of town which in the end made there be a swath of 12-17" (if it hit here, we would probably hear it was tainted because almost half was from the front pre-storm ). Actually, if you REALLY want to get technical, for a few hours that evening DTW area got heavier snowfall than areas in the sweet spot for that storm did, its just we got barely an inch from the front pre-storm while areas to our NW got 5-7". Im actually a bit amused by the whole thing this winter, because there has been SO little to actually complain about, the usual complainers are grasping for more straws than they usually need to Don't forget KTOL recorded 13" too, so you guys got "screwed" (11"?) in both directions. We feel your pain in the TOL area... 12" is record biggest snowstorm for FDY. But then again what difference does 2" make when youre shoveling? Ultimately it's just a number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Don't forget KTOL recorded 13" too, so you guys got "screwed" (11"?) in both directions. We feel your pain in the TOL area... 12" is record biggest snowstorm for FDY. But then again what difference does 2" make when youre shoveling? Ultimately it's just a number. Yep TOL had 13.0" with the Jan 5th storm...yet the snow depth was 12" at TOL and 16" at DTW that day The obsession over that number (12") is funny...let me explain to you how it goes.... DTW is having as historic a winter as they come, but whenever they do get their next storm of 12"+ do not for a MINUTE think there wont be a grocery list of what is wrong with it. The complaint is simply the "Im bored and thats about the only thing I can complain about" go-to line. It is brought up when ANY storm is tracked, MOST of which do NOT have 12"+ potential from the GET-GO. Its just said over and over again when theres nothing else to be said. Then earlier this winter I have seen a 5" storm in Cincinatti and an 8" storm in Philly get praised by various folks in this area for heavy snow rates of the storm. I was like... ? I cant count the times in years past we have had awesome rates or surprise storms or what not but at the end all you hear is "but...nope...its not officially 12.0". It was actually funny watching two storms in one week produce just under 2 FEET of snow at DTW in Jan and what some took out of it was that it wasnt 12" in one storm. And all i could remember was the jealousy of a 5" snowstorm in OH not 4 weeks before. What Im getting at is...if it truly IS about the 12"+ storm...Im actually praying that DTW does get some 2-day long boring 14" snowstorm just for the kicks of it. Ive seen my share of thundersnow in the more boring 10" storms as they say, so bring on a 48-hour, 1-mile visibility, 2mph wind 14" snowstorm It would also be funny if we have 2 feet of snow with about 3.5" water content on the ground next week at this time (which is certainly possible with tomorrow nights snow and next weekends POSSIBLE snow) and we still have "why cant DTW get a foot" comments here I also would like to point something out that has not been said. the Dec 31-Jan 2 snowfall at DTW was 12.3". The first 1.2" was technically a separate system...and thats totally the way it SHOULD go in the books imo (an 11.1" storm)...but when I have perused MANY other NWS offices snowstorm lists and saw 3 & 4 day events listed as one storm...curiosity got the better of me and I looked at obs and sure enough there were huge breaks in snowfall. Lets just say in many other offices that storm would go in the books for a storm total of 12.3" not 11.1". Its such a trivial thing, but hey, the obsession is supposedly about that number..right I will be the first to admit that storm was just a nonstop boring snowfall over 48 hours. Nothing exciting from that standpoint, but I have seen many exciting storms put down for lack of that amount...so so be it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 classic^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 classic^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloWeather Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Yep TOL had 13.0" with the Jan 5th storm...yet the snow depth was 12" at TOL and 16" at DTW that day The obsession over that number (12") is funny...let me explain to you how it goes.... DTW is having as historic a winter as they come, but whenever they do get their next storm of 12"+ do not for a MINUTE think there wont be a grocery list of what is wrong with it. The complaint is simply the "Im bored and thats about the only thing I can complain about" go-to line. It is brought up when ANY storm is tracked, MOST of which do NOT have 12"+ potential from the GET-GO. Its just said over and over again when theres nothing else to be said. Then earlier this winter I have seen a 5" storm in Cincinatti and an 8" storm in Philly get praised by various folks in this area for heavy snow rates of the storm. I was like... ? I cant count the times in years past we have had awesome rates or surprise storms or what not but at the end all you hear is "but...nope...its not officially 12.0". It was actually funny watching two storms in one week produce just under 2 FEET of snow at DTW in Jan and what some took out of it was that it wasnt 12" in one storm. And all i could remember was the jealousy of a 5" snowstorm in OH not 4 weeks before. What Im getting at is...if it truly IS about the 12"+ storm...Im actually praying that DTW does get some 2-day long boring 14" snowstorm just for the kicks of it. Ive seen my share of thundersnow in the more boring 10" storms as they say, so bring on a 48-hour, 1-mile visibility, 2mph wind 14" snowstorm It would also be funny if we have 2 feet of snow with about 3.5" water content on the ground next week at this time (which is certainly possible with tomorrow nights snow and next weekends POSSIBLE snow) and we still have "why cant DTW get a foot" comments here I also would like to point something out that has not been said. the Dec 31-Jan 2 snowfall at DTW was 12.3". The first 1.2" was technically a separate system...and thats totally the way it SHOULD go in the books imo (an 11.1" storm)...but when I have perused MANY other NWS offices snowstorm lists and saw 3 & 4 day events listed as one storm...curiosity got the better of me and I looked at obs and sure enough there were huge breaks in snowfall. Lets just say in many other offices that storm would go in the books for a storm total of 12.3" not 11.1". Its such a trivial thing, but hey, the obsession is supposedly about that number..right I will be the first to admit that storm was just a nonstop boring snowfall over 48 hours. Nothing exciting from that standpoint, but I have seen many exciting storms put down for lack of that amount...so so be it! You should go to school to be a statistician. It seems to be your calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 You should go to school to be a statistician. It seems to be your calling. If I recall, he's a University of Michigan graduate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 If my fortune falters and my fantabulous February fails I'll fervently faint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowMeHunter Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 classic^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 But anyways, we can split hairs about what Detroit HAS gotten until we're blue in the face. The fact is, until Detroit gets its own March 2008, GHD 2011, etc., the complaint about the lack of a big dog remains valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 But anyways, we can split hairs about what Detroit HAS gotten until we're blue in the face. The fact is, until Detroit gets its own March 2008, GHD 2011, etc., the complaint about the lack of a big dog remains valid. Oh and btw...I agree COMPLETELY about the BIG dogs like you just mentioned (18"+). But this splitting hairs and obsessing over eleven-point-some inches instead of twelve-point-oh inches when DTW just recorded its all-time snowiest month since 1874 is ridiculous. I mean...would one 12.5" storm (and nothing else) the first week of January REALLY look better than two storms - 11.1" and 11.0" - like DTW got this first week of January? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 Oh and btw...I agree COMPLETELY about the BIG dogs like you just mentioned (18"+). But this splitting hairs and obsessing over eleven-point-some inches instead of twelve-point-oh inches when DTW just recorded its all-time snowiest month since 1874 is ridiculous. I mean...would one 12.5" storm (and nothing else) the first week of January REALLY look better than two storms - 11.1" and 11.0" - like DTW got this first week of January? 1. They're not big dogs. 2. One was a long duration grinder. Might as well had gotten 2-4" in a couple hours. It would have been the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 1. They're not big dogs. 2. One was a long duration grinder. Might as well had gotten 2-4" in a couple hours. It would have been the same thing. Oh come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 1. They're not big dogs. 2. One was a long duration grinder. Might as well had gotten 2-4" in a couple hours. It would have been the same thing. Cars dont get stuck in the street from 2-4" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Oh come on. Morning of January 2nd. 2-4", same thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 Cars dont get stuck in the street from 2-4" Depends on the drifts. But anyways, 11" over 48 hours is roughly the equivalent to 1.5" every 6 hours. Compare that to NYE '08 where the northern suburbs saw 14-16" in 8 hours. Clearly it pales in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Depends on the drifts. But anyways, 11" over 48 hours is roughly the equivalent to 1.5" every 6 hours. Compare that to NYE '08 where the northern suburbs saw 14-16" in 8 hours. Clearly it pales in comparison. It pales in comparison to me getting 6" in 3 hours Dec 19, 2008...it pales in comparison to me getting 3.5" in 2 hours last Sunday. It pales in comparison to a lot of things. But it doesnt change the fact that 13" of snow fell from the morning of Dec 31st to the morning of January 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 It pales in comparison to me getting 6" in 3 hours Dec 19, 2008...it pales in comparison to me getting 3.5" in 2 hours last Sunday. It pales in comparison to a lot of things. And thus my gripe!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chargers09 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormtrackertf Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 This winter leaves absolutely no complaints but for once in my life it really would really be cool to get a legit blizzard. Like a 15"+ monster with all kinds of hype and 60 mph winds or something, kinda like GHD in Chicago. In that sense, I can kinda see Powerball's complaints, because that would make an entire winter. Detroit literally SUCKS for that kind of potential because if a storm is that powerful it cuts straight up the Detroit river and gives us rain. And if it digs eastward, the Atlantic ocean usually ends up trolling us and transferring it off the coast.Outside of that, it really doesn't get much better than early January was this year in Detroit. That was easily, sans 1999, the most snow I've ever seen here all at once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wisconsinwx Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 1. They're not big dogs. 2. One was a long duration grinder. Might as well had gotten 2-4" in a couple hours. It would have been the same thing. 1-2" per hour rates are darn good, and you're implying that's what you had for parts of the storm, long duration or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 1-2" per hour rates are darn good, and you're implying that's what you had for parts of the storm, long duration or not. lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Oh and by the way...since everyones so obessed with it..Ithielz mentioned that other than 1999, he had never seen as much snow on the ground as this past Jan. It got me thinking about the blizzard that kicked it all off. I can have my doubts about some of DTWs other storms that dropped over 11" but less than 12", but I have no doubt in my mind DET got 12"+ from the blizzard of '99. You see....from 1996-2005 DTW's snow measurments were taken by the FAA, and were constantly lowballed (to be honest, it was probably, if lucky, one step ahead of YYZ's current nipher joke....which is why them reporting 12.2" on 1-22-05 makes me think they had 15" ). DTW reported 11.3" with that storm. So I decided to go to the NCDC coop site and check all the coops from the immediate area. And guess what...EVERY...SINGLE...ONE...had 12"+. In fact...even Grosse Pt had 12"! We are talking a spotter who, if a wind drive 4-inch snowstorm blew the board clean, they would certainly report a T. Mt Clemens..16.9" Ann Arbor.....16.9" Monroe.........13.0" Dearborn......12.5" Ypsilanti........12.2"Grosse Pt.....12.0" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wisconsinwx Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 lol. Do you disagree, I might've seen those rates once this winter at best. You can lol all you want, but it's not going to change the unrealistic expectations you seem to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pondo1000 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Is NAM the new "king"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 Oh and by the way...since everyones so obessed with it..Ithielz mentioned that other than 1999, he had never seen as much snow on the ground as this past Jan. It got me thinking about the blizzard that kicked it all off. I can have my doubts about some of DTWs other storms that dropped over 11" but less than 12", but I have no doubt in my mind DET got 12"+ from the blizzard of '99. You see....from 1996-2005 DTW's snow measurments were taken by the FAA, and were constantly lowballed (to be honest, it was probably, if lucky, one step ahead of YYZ's current nipher joke....which is why them reporting 12.2" on 1-22-05 makes me think they had 15" ). DTW reported 11.3" with that storm. So I decided to go to the NCDC coop site and check all the coops from the immediate area. And guess what...EVERY...SINGLE...ONE...had 12"+. In fact...even Grosse Pt had 12"! We are talking a spotter who, if a wind drive 4-inch snowstorm blew the board clean, they would certainly report a T. Mt Clemens..16.9" Ann Arbor.....16.9" Monroe.........13.0" Dearborn......12.5" Ypsilanti........12.2" Grosse Pt.....12.0" I've always thought about that with Blizzard of 1999. Too bad there isn't enough reliable information to determine it one way or another (and thus I put it in the "N/A" pile). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pondo1000 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Euro really sux anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.