Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

Overrunning Set-Up/Ice Storm 2/5-2/8


Frog Town

Recommended Posts

Temps stayed a bit warmer than expected here last night.  Should stay mostly cloudy to keep the diurnal rise in check, but given precip onset timing and dews not being terribly low, it's gonna be tough to get ice if we get more than a couple degrees above freezing this afternoon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 216
  • Created
  • Last Reply

A lot of the higher end guidance from last evening has come in warmer and a bit north this morning.

One thing that hurts is that the SFC flow becomes more easterly, instead of being more northerly...which will help bring in more modified air.

So there is high bust potential today...and at this point I'd say its more likely than not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both the RAP and HRRR showing what looks like a "lake shadow" effect, which would significantly cut into accretion totals for SW Michigan. Man, it has to be tough forecasting icing events. Yesterday, I was surprised that an ice storm warning wasn't issued by KGRR, and now it looks to be a potential non-event for a large portion of the southern counties. 

 

351060965_models-2019020512-f021.zr_acc.conus(1).gif.11714ef3cd7b2429d0c20cafe14c9d22.gif

models-2019020512-f021.zr_acc.conus.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Toro99 said:

Both the RAP and HRRR showing what looks like a "lake shadow" effect, which would significantly cut into accretion totals for SW Michigan. Man, it has to be tough forecasting icing events. Yesterday, I was surprised that an ice storm warning wasn't issued by KGRR, and now it looks to be a potential non-event for a large portion of the southern counties. 

 

351060965_models-2019020512-f021.zr_acc.conus(1).gif.11714ef3cd7b2429d0c20cafe14c9d22.gif

models-2019020512-f021.zr_acc.conus.gif

That is like an anti lake shadow.  Flow is out of the east in southwest MI so offshore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw Ricky's update which addresses the temperature underperformance south and other aspects...

 

Area Forecast Discussion
National Weather Service Chicago/Romeoville, IL
1222 PM CST Tue Feb 5 2019

.UPDATE...
1222 PM CST

Did not make any changes to the going Ice Storm Warning and Winter
Weather Advisory headlines for the freezing rain this
evening/tonight, and no changes yet to forecast ice accums. Start
time in western CWA looks to be around/after 4pm or so. There are
multiple challenges with the forecast that lessen confidence,
specifically temperature trends, road temps and response tonight
and duration of freezing rain and associated impacts. Mid day
temperatures are a mixed bag vs. most of the guidance, with upper
20s to low 30s I-80 and north and even a few pockets of mid 30s
where some filtered sun broke through the clouds. One thing is
clear, is that due to thicker low stratus in our south, models are
far too aggressive in warming those areas (many already had upper
30s by this hour), so did lower daytime temps well south of I-80
accordingly. Tough to say if lower starting point will allow for a
slightly longer icing risk, including a brief window in counties
currently without a headline, and will assess this for full
forecast issuance.

For areas farther north, big question is road temps. We only have
limited data access, with city of Chicago reporting to us a range
of 33-39F for road temps as of mid morning. Early Feb higher sun
angle is able to quickly raise road sfc temps, which with some
filtered sun over northern IL, this certainly could be the case
and something to keep in mind with respect to travel impacts
tonight. Suspect that outside of total ice accums that fall,
relatively mild road temps in/near downtown Chicago southward and
lag time to drop these may *somewhat* mitigate impacts,
especially on well treated and heavily traveled roads. In
addition, air temps should gradually inch back to and above 32F
overnight. For places that never make it to freezing today and
mostly in upper 20s to around 30 tonight, this will be less of an
issue, so think that interior (W/N/NW) Chicago suburbs out to
north central IL would have higher risk of more significant travel
impacts. For ice accretions on tree limbs and powerlines, east-
northeast winds sustained 10-15 mph with gusts to around 20 mph
are not overly strong, but could be enough for sporadic power
outages to result.

Other big question is how long sleet mixes in/is primary p-type in
parts of northern IL into this evening, especially in RFD
vicinity. Soundings do indicate enough low-level cold air for
refreezing potential until as late as 10-11pm. Longer duration of
sleet if/where that occurs would cut into ice accums. Finally, for
p-type overall, the possibility of isolated to widely scattered
thunderstorms could at least temporarily throw a wrench in and
force varied p-types. This would include sleet to even
graupel/snow pellets at times.

Castro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, cyclone77 said:

And also thundersnow with that blizzard back in Nov.  :snowing:

06z models and latest HRRR runs have scaled back quite a bit of precip for the DVN cwa.  May have a tough time getting more than a tenth or two of glazing if those models are correct.  

Yep, seems the trend continues with the 12z data. I can't complain about less Frz. rain though. Ha! Well any other Winter, maybe! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just posting for entertainment value as I know it's not very realistic but was pulling some NAM forecast soundings for my area for this evening and not only were a number of thunderstorm parameters getting tripped, but even some of the severe indices with surface temps just barely above freezing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Chicago Storm said:

ARR 35 and JOT 36.

This one might be over before it starts for some areas under headlines.

Meanwhile the area south of I-80 is still running cooler, especially on the IL side.  18z NAM is 1-3 degrees or so too high in those areas on a 2 hr prog.

Looks like somebody took a torch to Valpo.  

namconus_T2m_ncus_3.thumb.png.539401c1ececdfdd894667008c4e6ef2.png

il_sfc.gif.82a21e227a69bbeab4070970bee6f4c8.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DTX AFD gives no mention of an upgrade to warning. Pretty odd considering most models show above warning criteria ice accumulation. I guess they may be worried about a bust? But for Southeast Michigan this freezing rain will come right before the Wednesday morning commute which makes me think a warning would have been the right call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Moosey2323 said:

DTX AFD gives no mention of an upgrade to warning. Pretty odd considering most models show above warning criteria ice accumulation. I guess they may be worried about a bust? But for Southeast Michigan this freezing rain will come right before the Wednesday morning commute which makes me think a warning would have been the right call.

Remember that ice accretion and qpf arent the same. Still tomorrow morning should be interesting. After not having an ice storm in years (light glazes notwithstanding) we had one April 15th and then possibly tonight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GRR holds off on a warning as well while mentioning much more significant qpf amounts and possible accums reaching .75”.. their reasoning is due to major uncertainties on where the most precip will fall as well as limited wind thus impacts shouldn’t be too bad - plus with the surface temp rising tomorrow morning the ice will melt rather quickly.

 

My take on it is simple - there will be impacts during the Wednesday morning commute and the possibility of a third of an inch of ice. Regardless of the wind - there will be power outages, accidents and in some cases major disruptions in commerce. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Baum said:

I see LOT ain't backing down despite the trends, Tricky forecast to be sure. Probably best to side with the worst result when it comes to ice.

In a way they are fortunate it is an evening/overnight thing.  If you're going to bust you'd rather bust at night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Baum said:

I see LOT ain't backing down despite the trends, Tricky forecast to be sure. Probably best to side with the worst result when it comes to ice.

There's no way they would downgrade at this point...but it's pretty clear a significant ice threat is not happening in the metro, or even the suburbs at this point.

I-39 area on towards the QC has the best chance for highest amounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chicago Storm said:

There's no way they would downgrade at this point...but it's pretty clear a significant ice threat is not happening in the metro, or even the suburbs at this point.

I-39 area on towards the QC has the best chance for highest amounts.

I disagree about the burbs, but then again it may be the terminology about what is the suburbs and significant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hoosier said:

I disagree about the burbs, but then again it may be the terminology about what is the suburbs and significant.

I'll say the northern and western burbs at least get .1", enough to cover the advisory, especially the northern burbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Chicago Storm said:

Suburbs to me go out to DKB-Morris-IKK. Those areas on in to the main metro are out of the equation for decent icing.

I'm gonna disagree with some of that.  I think Dekalb over to Aurora and northwest Cook county get a several hour period of freezing rain.  I'm less confident on how efficient accretion will be given the expected temps and rates but I'd think a tenth or two at minimum.

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...