Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,611
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

January 17-18 Winter Storm


Snowstorms
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Malacka11 said:

GHD II?

 

1 hour ago, Hoosier said:

That is the storm I thought of after seeing his post and before reading yours lol.  Generally speaking I think he's right though... the biggest ones typically are pointed ENE or NE.

48hrSnowTotalEnding7amMonday.png.1b908908b658492b6b37c387c09a7136.png

48hrSnowTotalEnding7amMonday_local.thumb.png.1c504b34c58137bb07afba11c5c7aed1.png

In fairness. Saginaw cnty only showing a 6-8" total per those maps (a little light for mby, so prolly up there as well), so hardly a Major for him. GHD-2 was a pretty rare W>>E big dog just going by memory Mid-Dec 2000 bliz is only other one like it in recent times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Gino27 said:

Right now it seems that north of I-70 will see some snow. It would have to take a much further south track for Indy, Cbus, and Pittsburgh to see anything significant.

Yeah, I don't think this was ever an 1-70 special, nor do I see it becoming one. I-80 crew has at least a shot, but even that's tbd. Might come down to whether you live 10 miles N or 10 miles S of the freeway.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, RogueWaves said:

Yeah, I don't think this was ever an 1-70 special, nor do I see it becoming one. I-80 crew has at least a shot, but even that's tbd. Might come down to whether you live 10 miles N or 10 miles S of the freeway.. 

Exactly but a few runs ago were advertising a decent front end thump before it changed over. Those are long long behind us.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need to look at the set up, not just what the 10:1 prints 100+ hours out

To go back to this and your original post, I don't think surface low track is that important early on. Barring major changes, with the air mass we'll have in place, evaporative cooling will further knock down temps aloft so that we'll start as snow.

 

But if you're trying to denote the areas favored to stay snow the entire event, then that's fair to start from the IL-WI border. Given latest data, I'd be surprised if most places, except maybe far southern CWA, don't start as snow and easily accumulate. The question becomes how quickly temps warm aloft with stout southerly flow and how much resistance is given by evaporative cooling. That's where the models rarely ever overestimate and often underestimate WAA. But even in this case, a solid front end thump can bring a few to several inches of snow prior to changeover.

 

That's what WPC is favoring in their day 5 outlook, with most of the CWA in 70-90% probs for 0.25"+ liquid equivalent in snow/sleet accums, supported by the GEFS and EPS. In fact, the 12z EPS (haven't looked at 18z yet) had 80+% probs for 24 hour 10:1 snow accums of 3"+ for I-80 and north.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

To go back to this and your original post, I don't think surface low track is that important early on. Barring major changes, with the air mass we'll have in place, evaporative cooling will further knock down temps aloft so that we'll start as snow.

 

But if you're trying to denote the areas favored to stay snow the entire event, then that's fair to start from the IL-WI border. Given latest data, I'd be surprised if most places, except maybe far southern CWA, don't start as snow and easily accumulate. The question becomes how quickly temps warm aloft with stout southerly flow and how much resistance is given by evaporative cooling. That's where the models rarely ever overestimate and often underestimate WAA. But even in this case, a solid front end thump can bring a few to several inches of snow prior to changeover.

 

That's what WPC is favoring in their day 5 outlook, with most of the CWA in 70-90% probs for 0.25"+ liquid equivalent in snow/sleet accums, supported by the GEFS and EPS. In fact, the 12z EPS (haven't looked at 18z yet) had 80+% probs for 24 hour 10:1 snow accums of 3"+ for I-80 and north.

 

 

 

Believe 18z ticked north. Might be noise level tbh..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe 18z ticked north. Might be noise level tbh..
Yep just looked, ticked north slightly, but can tell it also lost some of the beefier members, as the 24 hour mean came down over WI and far northern IL. At this point, can be considered noise level changes.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

00z GFS is not what you want to see for a good event...except for MN, central and northern WI, the UP and northern Lower MI.

The GFS, today, has trended toward sharper upper energy, which causes the surface feature to extend up into Minnesota.  It seems a bit weird.  The other models are not doing this.  Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GFS, today, has trended toward sharper upper energy, which causes the surface feature to extend up into Minnesota.  It seems a bit weird.  The other models are not doing this.  Any thoughts?
That is odd. 00z GEM looks close to what the general guidance consensus has been and nothing like the 00z GFS. If the GEFS (different physics package from op and all) diverges significantly from the operational, may have to chalk up the op to being an outlier if ECMWF is close to previous runs at 00z.

Overall, it's hard to ascribe much to one of the models handling a feature differently as being anything but something that can happen in this range. And With the main wave still well out over the Pacific, we'll have to wait and see. But want to see more support for an operational GFS like outcome before getting too concerned by it.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

That is odd. 00z GEM looks close to what the general guidance consensus has been and nothing like the 00z GFS. If the GEFS (different physics package from op and all) diverges significantly from the operational, may have to chalk up the op to being an outlier if ECMWF is close to previous runs at 00z.

Overall, it's hard to ascribe much to one of the models handling a feature differently as being anything but something that can happen in this range. And With the main wave still well out over the Pacific, we'll have to wait and see. But want to see more support for an operational GFS like outcome before getting too concerned by it.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

Just looking at 0z GEFS rolling in, it's definitely further south than the OP. Like you I'm not buying a GFS solution till I see more support. Curious to see if 0z euro holds firm or if we see a northern shift in the wave

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing about front end thumps is that you better get as much precip as you can while the thermal profiles are cold enough for snow. 

Speaking of that, expect considerable virga for a while.  Initial precip will get eaten alive with a dry layer like this.

floop-ecmwf_full-2020011400.850rh.conus.gif.8e034a8ba65a830a0e067f047cbef56f.gif

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...