Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

Feb. 6-7th Storm Potential


Chicago Storm

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply
5 minutes ago, Hoosier said:

Could be quite a windbag if the deeper solutions pan out.  General setup with a deep low and strong CAA looks conducive for a period of strong winds.

3 things the way I see it. 

1) Where the PNA trough sets up and how much it digs out West

2) The strength of the PV around Hudson Bay (for CAD)

3) The initial overrunning event on Feb 3rd-4th has an impact on how everything plays out afterwards 

Could mean the difference between a track like the Euro or the GFS and whether some areas in the sub-forum get frozen precipitation, to start off atleast.

How was the 12z Euro in terms of precipitation? Thanks! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Indystorm said:

I know I'll suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune by being the warminista, but I hope the Euro cuts nw at the progged strength shown on this run and increases the warm sector and prospects for svr southward from central IL and IN.  18z GFS is warm and stormy.

A little early to get too deep into the severe threat, but there's been a consistent signal for good mid level lapse rates along with decent moisture return for this time of year. The GFS is actually showing CAPE of 1000 J/kg (elevated) all the way north near the IA/MO border, which is notable at this distance.  System evolution/track will obviously affect the magnitude/location of any severe threat, but barring some drastic falling apart, I'd say there's a pretty good chance of a severe threat somewhere in this sub.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Hoosier said:

The number of sub 980 mb members in the WI/MI area is striking

gfs-ememb_lowlocs_eus_23.png

That actually is quite surprising, makes you wonder if we will trend toward a stronger system closer on in. Usually when the ensembles have a signal this strong, the op plays catch up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big question is how far south the wave can dig as it crosses the Rockies ala kinda like GHD II did and get pressure falls as far south as possible on the lee side of the Rockies ahead of the s/w amplifying. The GFS has now trended 5 runs in a row of its usual baby step mode regarding improvements over the Pacific where both the lead wave and stronger ULL come ashore. 

The baroclinic zone coming down with the CAA advection is very impressive and any wave coming over it can really spin up a low up fast and furious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thundersnow12 said:

The big question is how far south the wave can dig as it crosses the Rockies ala kinda like GHD II did and get pressure falls as far south as possible on the lee side of the Rockies ahead of the s/w amplifying. The GFS has now trended 5 runs in a row of its usual baby step mode regarding improvements over the Pacific where both the lead wave and stronger ULL come ashore. 

The baroclinic zone coming down with the CAA advection is very impressive and any wave coming over it can really spin up a low up fast and furious. 

This.

That "PV trending amplified" discussion that Ricky brought up awhile ago via I believe Dr. Gensini (I believe for 11/17/13 and GHD II) is ringing in my mind right now. The synoptics here are a bit reminiscent, although obviously I don't expect anything on the order of magnitude of the former severe wise. The SE could have some problems though on that front especially if this thing decides to shift more amplified like last night's Euro run or some of the 18z GEFS members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Euro op is south of the GEFS, and even it deposits the main snow area from Wisconsin to Michigan.  Not expecting anything more than a few rain showers, followed by some wind-blown flurries for the DVN area.  If the storm could slow down some, then I'd be more optimistic at getting some heavier showers, and perhaps a thunder threat.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, andyhb said:

This.

That "PV trending amplified" discussion that Ricky brought up awhile ago via I believe Dr. Gensini (I believe for 11/17/13 and GHD II) is ringing in my mind right now. The synoptics here are a bit reminiscent, although obviously I don't expect anything on the order of magnitude of the former severe wise. The SE could have some problems though on that front especially if this thing decides to shift more amplified like last night's Euro run or some of the 18z GEFS members.

A number of the CIPS analogs had severe wx in the Ohio Valley.  Wasn't as supportive farther north, but I wouldn't rule it out if the track is right.  Given the decent mid level lapse rates being progged -- and in close proximity to the surface low -- dews into the mid/upper 50s or so may be enough for notable severe chances.  If we get a deeper/more amplified outcome, I think there's gonna be serious concern even in this region.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Hoosier said:

A number of the CIPS analogs had severe wx in the Ohio Valley.  Wasn't as supportive farther north, but I wouldn't rule it out if the track is right.  Given the decent mid level lapse rates being progged -- and in close proximity to the surface low -- dews into the mid/upper 50s or so may be enough for notable severe chances.  If we get a deeper/more amplified outcome, I think there's gonna be serious concern even in this region.  

The severe threat alone makes it worth keeping an eye on. I have no meteorology to back this up, but the track record this winter has been for storms to verify much weaker than depicted at 120+, no matter the model, so I'm not holding my breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feb. 3 12z GFS has 988 low over Chi-town at 18z Tuesday and  985 low ne of Grand Rapids at 00z that evening.  Concern for svr is increasing for the Ohio Valley, central Il and In if this continues with good lapse rates and near 1000 surface CAPE at 102 hrs Tuesday afternoon.  We'll see what the Euro says shortly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, harrisale said:

Euro more in line with the GFS now, actually bounced back north of the GFS solution.

Looking like a rainer for most.

Impending warm-up a few days after the storm, which looks to last for the better part of February as the EPO ridge retrogrades and we get a massive trough over Alaska.

Stick a fork in this winter, we"ll be lucky to get another 6" total for the remainder of the season, lol.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DVN going with a non-event for the cwa.  Don't see much reason to disagree.  GFS looks too aggressive/unrealistic with the wraparound snows.  Earlier runs of the Euro had that as well to some extent, but has begun backing off on it.  

 

Rain should be expected from Monday evening through
Tuesday morning, with a chance for showers and thunderstorms in the
east. While this is possible, the confidence is not overly high
measurable rain, as we may have some issues with mid level
saturation. Should rain fail, drizzle should be widespread, thus I`m
not going to get too concerned about pops, in the end, wet is wet on
day 4.

As the low moves to the east Tuesday afternoon, aggressive cold
advection, possibly with snow showers and low visibility per 12Z
GFS, will arrive. Though the 12Z GFS indicates a winter event, the
12Z GEM and ECMWF miss the CWA from the main impacts, showing a
mainly dry CAA event. We will stick with lower chance pops for snow
Tuesday afternoon and night.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Thundersnow12 said:

One of the weirder looking wraparound/trowal features I've seen modeled from us on east along I-80. Could argue close to blizzard like conditions. 925mb pushing 50kts 

Yeah, hard to put a lot of stock in it yet, but it would be a little consolation prize.

The odds of a really significant snow around here are about nonexistent, so at this point I'm actually hoping for a farther north solution to get a little deeper into the warm sector.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't follow the Forbes Torcon a whole lot, but I saw this image circulating around.

 

16299443_10154306871303201_7460515606405598440_n.jpg

 

At this point, the GFS looks a little too veered with surface winds for my liking, but perhaps it's overdoing it a bit.  Even as is, maybe just enough low level turning.  In any case, I can't imagine Dr. Forbes has made too many maps like this in early February.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Hoosier said:

Don't follow the Forbes Torcon a whole lot, but I saw this image circulating around.

 

16299443_10154306871303201_7460515606405598440_n.jpg

 

At this point, the GFS looks a little too veered with surface winds for my liking, but perhaps it's overdoing it a bit.  Even as is, maybe just enough low level turning.  In any case, I can't imagine Dr. Forbes has made too many maps like this in early February.

GFS is notorious for being too veered at the surface with strong systems. It will be interesting to see what the NAM has once it gets closer in range with respect to low level flow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hoosier said:

Yeah, hard to put a lot of stock in it yet, but it would be a little consolation prize.

The odds of a really significant snow around here are about nonexistent, so at this point I'm actually hoping for a farther north solution to get a little deeper into the warm sector.  

I will say Alek is optimistic about this one..

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...