HillsdaleMIWeather Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Yes, too weak because it doesn't bring Hillsdale their blizzard. I'd be perfectly fine with 3 inches in November, I just don't get from a meteorological standpoint how that happened. ^See Stebo Above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 euro looks completely reasonable and a solid advisory event for the heart of the metro a weak sheared out system has always been in play and in the remaining members in the amped/north camp are prone to being amped and north Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundersnow12 Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 You know it's bad when wisconsinwx is taking shots at Hillsdale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchaumburgStormer Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Still looks like 6-7" across I-88 into Chicago but the surface reflection looks pretty mehCorrect me if I am wrong, but didn't the euro consistently under do moisture last season in the cold sector?Edit: stebo slid an answer in while I was typing. Great minds think alike: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Yes, too weak because it doesn't bring Hillsdale their blizzard. Or... because of meteorological reason like I mention above. Hell weak would help out for myself but I also know the Euro isn't realistic compared to previous run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 You know it's bad when wisconsinwx is taking shots at Hillsdale gonna be a good winter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wisconsinwx Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Or... because of meteorological reason like I mention above. Hell weak would help out for myself but I also know the Euro isn't realistic compared to previous run. That could be true, the reason I was taking a shot at Hillsdale is he has annoyingly been on the south train with little to no reasoning, and now when it is less amped up he says it has to be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveNay Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 I'll be the contrarian. I say it's going to be a swing and a miss. 1.5" @ DKB Holding firm. Just because.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HillsdaleMIWeather Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 That could be true, the reason I was taking a shot at Hillsdale is he has annoyingly been on the south train with little to no reasoning, and now when it is less amped up he says it has to be wrong. Or because from a met perspective, the Euro gives no way for the system to weaken that fast other than it just wants it to? The Euro had this problem on the Superbowl Storm as well if I remember on a few close runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Holding firm. Just because.... too low Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chargers09 Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Consider lurking and posting less. Back on topic: I'd still take the Euro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wisconsinwx Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Man, the WRF NMM really is north when I looked at the simulated radar. Obviously too far north, but the fact that we have some northern outliers makes you wonder whether a super weak run like the Euro could happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilbertfly Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 feeling decent about my 5.2 ORD and 3.8 MBY as a doable blend at the moment still Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrisale Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Looks like the NAM and CMC are pretty much in perfect agreement on track. GFS about 130-150 miles NW. 12Z cyclone tracking: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimillman Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 feeling decent about my 5.2 ORD and 3.8 MBY as a doable blend at the moment still I still like my 2-4 call from a few days ago in the city proper. I would say 5 miles inland could see more like 4-7, up north by Geos I think someone could pull 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geos Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the euro consistently under do moisture last season in the cold sector? Edit: stebo slid an answer in while I was typing. Great minds think alike: In several instances, yes. Thinking the EURO is a bit too dry myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Pass on the Euro. It's better than nothing, but only slightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted November 19, 2015 Author Share Posted November 19, 2015 This storm will be the first measurable snow of the season for Chicago. Here are the largest first measurable snowfalls of the season for Chicago. In some cases I had to check the old maps to see what was going on as there would be measurable snow 3 or 4 days in a row, but sometimes it was clear that it was separate storms, so those cases where it was clearly separate storms were not included. Should note that daily snowfall data was missing for a few years. 10/18-20/1989: 6.3" 12/6-7/1994: 6.1" 11/17-19/1927: 4.9" 11/15/1940: 4.8" 11/3/1951: 4.4" 10/26-27/1967: 4.4" 11/24/2004: 4.3" 11/12-14/1959: 4.1" 11/5/1896: 4.0" 11/23-25/1947: 3.9" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homedis Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 feeling decent about my 5.2 ORD and 3.8 MBY as a doable blend at the moment still I think thats a smart call. Maybe an inch more for both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilbertfly Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 I still like my 2-4 call from a few days ago in the city proper. I would say 5 miles inland could see more like 4-7, up north by Geos I think someone could pull 8. Certainly some pros/cons - caveats in city proper by the lake... Your numbers look good / seem to fit the envelope decently at this point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundersnow12 Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 This storm will be the first measurable snow of the season for Chicago. Here are the largest first measurable snowfalls of the season for Chicago. In some cases I had to check the old maps to see what was going on as there would be measurable snow 3 or 4 days in a row, but sometimes it was clear that it was separate storms, so those cases where it was clearly separate storms were not included. Should note that daily snowfall data was missing for a few years. 10/18-20/1989: 6.3" 12/6-7/1994: 6.1" 11/17-19/1927: 4.9" 11/15/1940: 4.8" 11/3/1951: 4.4" 10/26-27/1967: 4.4" 11/24/2004: 4.3" 11/12-14/1959: 4.1" 11/5/1896: 4.0" 11/23-25/1947: 3.9" Sweetness. Let's see if I can get 6.4" on the ruler at ORD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homedis Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 This storm will be the first measurable snow of the season for Chicago. Here are the largest first measurable snowfalls of the season for Chicago. In some cases I had to check the old maps to see what was going on as there would be measurable snow 3 or 4 days in a row, but sometimes it was clear that it was separate storms, so those cases where it was clearly separate storms were not included. Should note that daily snowfall data was missing for a few years. 10/18-20/1989: 6.3" 12/6-7/1994: 6.1" 11/17-19/1927: 4.9" 11/15/1940: 4.8" 11/3/1951: 4.4" 10/26-27/1967: 4.4" 11/24/2004: 4.3" 11/12-14/1959: 4.1" 11/5/1896: 4.0" 11/23-25/1947: 3.9" Dang we have a chance at actually beating most of those Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homedis Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Sweetness. Let's see if I can get 6.4" on the ruler at ORD Make a snow pile around the ruler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted November 19, 2015 Author Share Posted November 19, 2015 ECMWF has run dry sometimes. I wouldn't use absolutes and say that is definitely what's going on now...it could be on the right track...but I will feel better after the 00z runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilbertfly Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 wpc update....not liking the 12Z Euro... THE 12Z ECMWF TRENDED A BIT WEAKER/SUPRESSED WITHTHE WAVE...AWAY FROM THE AGREEMENT SHOWN BY THE 12Z NAM/00Z ECMWFAND EVEN THE 00Z/12Z CMC. THE 12Z ECMWF IS NOT PREFERRED OVER THE00Z ECMWF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baum Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 This storm will be the first measurable snow of the season for Chicago. Here are the largest first measurable snowfalls of the season for Chicago. In some cases I had to check the old maps to see what was going on as there would be measurable snow 3 or 4 days in a row, but sometimes it was clear that it was separate storms, so those cases where it was clearly separate storms were not included. Should note that daily snowfall data was missing for a few years. Also, think we didn't see a flake after that until January. 10/18-20/1989: 6.3" 12/6-7/1994: 6.1" 11/17-19/1927: 4.9" 11/15/1940: 4.8" 11/3/1951: 4.4" 10/26-27/1967: 4.4" 11/24/2004: 4.3" 11/12-14/1959: 4.1" 11/5/1896: 4.0" 11/23-25/1947: 3.9" That 1989 number is a flat out joke. Snowed for about 6-7 hours with a cover on the grass. Remember it well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 That 1989 number is a flat out joke. Snowed for about 6-7 hours with a cover on the grass. Remember it well. i was 5 pretty sure we got buried Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted November 19, 2015 Author Share Posted November 19, 2015 That 1989 number is a flat out joke. Snowed for about 6-7 hours with a cover on the grass. Remember it well. It's funny to look at the high temperatures back then...80s a few days before that storm and 70s a few days after. Truly an island of snow/cold. Shouldn't see as dramatic of an effect this time as far as melting/compaction/not sticking, but definitely could be one of those where what falls is not all on the ground at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baum Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 i was 5 pretty sure we got buried Lake effect for you ...even then:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Santa Clause Posted November 19, 2015 Share Posted November 19, 2015 Good luck guys, especially Chicago proper having fun tracking this from afar. My uncle in north suburbs is pumped for any accums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.