Western Pa / Pittsburgh area Winter Discussion ❄️☃️

[Ahoff]

9 minutes ago, Rd9108 said:

Euro just refuses to bring any real significant arctic air into the area. The GFS has held steady on below zero temps next week. 

Yesterday there were a few runs where the Euro was bringing in well below 0 weather.  I saw -12 one run and -18 in another.

[TimB]

13 minutes ago, Ahoff said:

Yesterday there were a few runs where the Euro was bringing in well below 0 weather.  I saw -12 one run and -18 in another.

Yes, this is a reversal from yesterday. The 0z Euro yesterday had us at -18 Monday morning while the GFS had us at +12. Now the GFS has us at -13 and the Euro has us at +4.

The biggest problem I see is that the GFS is taking us to -13 almost entirely on CAA, with clouds sticking around that whole night.

Regardless, that is the only morning that has a chance at bottoming out below zero in this pattern. The models have been out of phase all month, save for maybe that time early last week they both agreed we’d be bottoming out around -10 yesterday, today, and tomorrow, and both were of course wrong.

[meatwad]

[Rd9108]

16 minutes ago, meatwad said:

2-4 would be a nice little quick hitter. 

[Ahoff]

1 hour ago, TimB84 said:

Yes, this is a reversal from yesterday. The 0z Euro yesterday had us at -18 Monday morning while the GFS had us at +12. Now the GFS has us at -13 and the Euro has us at +4.

The biggest problem I see is that the GFS is taking us to -13 almost entirely on CAA, with clouds sticking around that whole night.

Regardless, that is the only morning that has a chance at bottoming out below zero in this pattern. The models have been out of phase all month, save for maybe that time early last week they both agreed we’d be bottoming out around -10 yesterday, today, and tomorrow, and both were of course wrong.

That’s the point, these models have flipped back and forth each day.  One shows brutal cold one day while the other shows regular cold, then they reverse.  We’ll see what happens, it’s not the end of the world if it doesn’t go below 0, or below 8 or whatever.  It will again at some point, if it isn’t this year it will be another year.  It’s been a great winter regardless.

[TimB]

21 minutes ago, Ahoff said:

That’s the point, these models have flipped back and forth each day.  One shows brutal cold one day while the other shows regular cold, then they reverse.  We’ll see what happens, it’s not the end of the world if it doesn’t go below 0, or below 8 or whatever.  It will again at some point, if it isn’t this year it will be another year.  It’s been a great winter regardless.

I fully agree with that. A few good snowfalls will do a lot to boost my spirits. I think it’s really just that unseasonably cold periods are fewer and farther between than they used to be in this warming world (and I don’t say that in a partisan way, as climate change is not a political concept, it’s a scientific one), so it excites me when such anomalous cold is hinted at by the models.

With that being said, I think we probably end up in the low single digits either above or below zero Monday morning, which is just fine and dandy with me.

[Mailman]

GFS coming in hot D6.

[TimB]

4 minutes ago, Mailman said:

GFS coming in hot D6.

We have some model agreement! (Though the GFS is almost certainly too cold with that system, QPF looks good for our area on both models).

[Ahoff]

50 minutes ago, TimB84 said:

I fully agree with that. A few good snowfalls will do a lot to boost my spirits. I think it’s really just that unseasonably cold periods are fewer and farther between than they used to be in this warming world (and I don’t say that in a partisan way, as climate change is not a political concept, it’s a scientific one), so it excites me when such anomalous cold is hinted at by the models.

With that being said, I think we probably end up in the low single digits either above or below zero Monday morning, which is just fine and dandy with me.

I disagree, if we look at climate change we are looking at anomolous warmth in the Artic, that warmth is displacing cold, and it has to go somewhere.  The bulk of this season it has been stationed over Siberia into Europe, an area that was very warm last winter.  Siberia had one of its coldest Decembers ever.  That artic cold does continue to drop down, just hasn't visited here since 2019, heck it's only in the midwest not too far away.  Will it visit this year, maybe, maybe not?  But this did not define whether the winter was a winner or not.

[Ahoff]

FYI, UK this morning sent our temperatures on Monday to all time record levels.

[TimB]

1 hour ago, Ahoff said:

I disagree, if we look at climate change we are looking at anomolous warmth in the Artic, that warmth is displacing cold, and it has to go somewhere.  The bulk of this season it has been stationed over Siberia into Europe, an area that was very warm last winter.  Siberia had one of its coldest Decembers ever.  That artic cold does continue to drop down, just hasn't visited here since 2019, heck it's only in the midwest not too far away.  Will it visit this year, maybe, maybe not?  But this did not define whether the winter was a winner or not.

In winter, yes, absolutely 100% correct. And I also fully agree that we have had a fantastic winter compared to the last five or so.

I suppose my comments regarding periods of anomalous cold being exceedingly rare these days are not directed specifically to winter but rather to any time of the year. For example, we are currently at 8 consecutive months of above normal temperatures at PIT (which wouldn’t be alarming on its own, other than the fact that it’s part of a trend which includes a period of 18 consecutive months within the past few years). When was the last time we had even four consecutive below normal months? But that’s another topic for another day, as it distracts from the matter at hand, which is seeing just how high our snow total for this winter can go. 

[KPITSnow]

Anecdotally, I feel that this summer was one of the most brutally hot I remember, and until this year I felt that we kept 50-60 degree temps consistently through December.

alberta clippers and LES used to be staples in the fall months but have disappeared. When is the last time we had a true clipper?

[Ahoff]

3 minutes ago, KPITSnow said:

Anecdotally, I feel that this summer was one of the most brutally hot I remember, and until this year I felt that we kept 50-60 degree temps consistently through December.

alberta clippers and LES used to be staples in the fall months but have disappeared. When is the last time we had a true clipper?

Clippers and lake effect a staple in the Fall?  I don't recall that.

This summer was hot, especially July.  Maybe just because of that stretch of 8 straight 90 degree days, and 12 total overall.  It didn't feel all that humid (relative to normal humid), maybe due to being in drought conditions.  Also, the drought and overall drier trend since May has been welcome, after two of the rainforest years ever.

[TimB]

1 hour ago, KPITSnow said:

Anecdotally, I feel that this summer was one of the most brutally hot I remember, and until this year I felt that we kept 50-60 degree temps consistently through December.

alberta clippers and LES used to be staples in the fall months but have disappeared. When is the last time we had a true clipper?

July 2020 was the hottest July and second hottest month (just behind Aug. 1995) ever recorded in Pittsburgh since observations moved to Pittsburgh International in 1948.

Feb. 2017 and 2018 are the two hottest Februarys ever recorded at Pittsburgh International.

March 2012. April 2017. May 2018. Sept. 2018 and 2015. Nov. 2015. Dec. 2015. All hottest of said month ever recorded at Pgh International. In other words, in 73 years of records being kept at PIT, eight of the twelve months of the year have been the hottest on record in just 9 years.

[Ahoff]

Just out of curiosity, how much warmer do we think the City of Pittsburgh (somewhere in the city limits but not downtown) would be vs. KPIT?  The weather app on my phone shows a difference from my location (in the city) and KPIT mostly of 2 degrees.

So, do we really think those records from the 1880s and 1890s or even the early 1900s would be that much different at the airport?  I mean the City wasn't hugely built up then, and even if it were 2 degrees different, many of those records would still be standing.

[Rd9108]

NAM trended a little north for the stronger wave at the end of the week. We might be in the game it this continues. 

[Burghblizz]

3 minutes ago, Ahoff said:

Just out of curiosity, how much warmer do we think the City of Pittsburgh (somewhere in the city limits but not downtown) would be vs. KPIT?  The weather app on my phone shows a difference from my location (in the city) and KPIT mostly of 2 degrees.

So, do we really think those records from the 1880s and 1890s or even the early 1900s would be that much different at the airport?  I mean the City wasn't hugely built up then, and even if it were 2 degrees different, many of those records would still be standing.

I think pre-1950 they were at the KAGC site. Similar elevation, just a tad south 

[Ahoff]

4 minutes ago, Burghblizz said:

I think pre-1950 they were at the KAGC site. Similar elevation, just a tad south 

Ok.  I thought they took observations on the North Side before KPIT.

[Mailman]

0z GFS seems as though it's gonna deliver the goods again.

[Ecanem]

The nws seems to think we are getting more than most models are saying.  Assuming because they are using ratios much higher than 10:1. 

[TimB]

8 hours ago, Mailman said:

0z GFS seems as though it's gonna deliver the goods again.

But 6z GFS comes into agreement with 0z Euro that the Tuesday storm will be mostly rain/ice with very little snow. Hopefully the cold air can stand its ground.

[TimB]

9 hours ago, Ahoff said:

Just out of curiosity, how much warmer do we think the City of Pittsburgh (somewhere in the city limits but not downtown) would be vs. KPIT?  The weather app on my phone shows a difference from my location (in the city) and KPIT mostly of 2 degrees.

So, do we really think those records from the 1880s and 1890s or even the early 1900s would be that much different at the airport?  I mean the City wasn't hugely built up then, and even if it were 2 degrees different, many of those records would still be standing.

It’s an interesting discussion, to be sure. But the only way to discuss the warmth of the past few years is to compare it to data where it can be compared apples to apples, which unfortunately only goes back to 1948. And 8 months now have recorded a higher average at some point last decade than they ever did in the 60+ years preceding that.

In addition to the site where the measurements were taken, I’m going to take an educated guess that there are differences in how they were taken (technology, methods, etc.). Just as an example, I can’t be the only one who thinks that the 77.2 average for September 1881, five degrees higher than any other September, is more than a little suspect. As such, I can’t compare records set in 1881 to observations taken today. Not sure if folks are generally in agreement with this or not.

 

[Ahoff]

1 hour ago, Ecanem said:

The nws seems to think we are getting more than most models are saying.  Assuming because they are using ratios much higher than 10:1. 

This already came down from 3-4" yesterday, so they look to be adjusting down.

[Ahoff]

6 minutes ago, TimB84 said:

It’s an interesting discussion, to be sure. But the only way to discuss the warmth of the past few years is to compare it to data where it can be compared apples to apples, which unfortunately only goes back to 1948. And 8 months now have recorded a higher average at some point last decade than they ever did in the 60+ years preceding that.

In addition to the site where the measurements were taken, I’m going to take an educated guess that there are differences in how they were taken (technology, methods, etc.). Just as an example, I can’t be the only one who thinks that the 77.2 average for September 1881, five degrees higher than any other September, is more than a little suspect. As such, I can’t compare records set in 1881 to observations taken today. Not sure if folks are generally in agreement with this or not.

 

By the same metric we could question January 1977 at around an 11 degree average, as the coldest month of all time by around 6 degrees.  Now there are people who can corroborate that as many were alive then, and it is an actual temperature.  How do we know September 1881 wasn't that warm?  We've seen very warm Septembers, maybe that was on steriods.  It can happen.  Plus that September recorded a few 100 degree days, which has never happened since, oh except in 1884.

I also find it interesting that it seems we don't see highs that are as extreme as they used to be.  Looking through the records it seems years ago we had yearly maxes that were vhigher than today.  Taking each decade since 1940 Most are relatively close, with the 40s having the highest decadal mean high at 95, the 2000s are the lowest at 91.  The last decade (2010s) was 93.  40s were 95, 50s were 94, 60s were 94, 70s were 92, 80s were 94, 90s were 94, 00s were 91 and 10s were 93.  While they're all close, as averages it seems significant that our highs don't seem to be getting quite as high as they used to.

[TimB]

13 minutes ago, Ahoff said:

By the same metric we could question January 1977 at around an 11 degree average, as the coldest month of all time by around 6 degrees.  Now there are people who can corroborate that as many were alive then, and it is an actual temperature.  How do we know September 1881 wasn't that warm?  We've seen very warm Septembers, maybe that was on steriods.  It can happen.  Plus that September recorded a few 100 degree days, which has never happened since, oh except in 1884.

I also find it interesting that it seems we don't see highs that are as extreme as they used to be.  Looking through the records it seems years ago we had yearly maxes that were vhigher than today.  Taking each decade since 1940 Most are relatively close, with the 40s having the highest decadal mean high at 95, the 2000s are the lowest at 91.  The last decade (2010s) was 93.  40s were 95, 50s were 94, 60s were 94, 70s were 92, 80s were 94, 90s were 94, 00s were 91 and 10s were 93.  While they're all close, as averages it seems significant that our highs don't seem to be getting quite as high as they used to.

Those summertime highs are an interesting trend for sure. It’s a lot more intricate than the fact that we’re getting warmer overall. I wasn’t alive in 1977 but I don’t question it because it was taken at the same site and probably with similar methods to observations taken today.

I’m not sure of the official position of the NWS or others who study meteorology for a living on the older data or its accuracy, but I do know this. People on both sides of the aisle have politicized the non-political, scientific issue of climate change. As a result, even if the NWS did a quality control study and determined that the old data to be inaccurate, and put an asterisk next to it in the records, there would be an uproar about “artificially manufacturing or overstating climate change” or even “trying to rewrite history,” even if their reasons for doing so were legitimate. Therefore, the older data is here to stay. With that being said, we’re all free to use whatever data we want to come to whatever conclusion we like. I just choose to only use data from 1948 on because they’re the only numbers that I feel can give me an accurate comparison.

[Ahoff]

That storm early next week looks great on the GFS.  Some really heavy rates and a temperature of 17!  Though the 850 level was close to freezing here, above in the ridges, wonder what that would do to the snow?  Would it be wet at 17 degrees and immediately freeze, or would it still be fluffy and dry?

At hr 162 on the GFS our 6 hr snow accumulation is 7.2"!

[Ecanem]

1 hour ago, Ahoff said:

This already came down from 3-4" yesterday, so they look to be adjusting down.

Yesterday they were posting totals through Friday.  This is just tonight. I don't think they are adjusting down.

[RitualOfTheTrout]

50 minutes ago, Ahoff said:

That storm early next week looks great on the GFS.  Some really heavy rates and a temperature of 17!  Though the 850 level was close to freezing here, above in the ridges, wonder what that would do to the snow?  Would it be wet at 17 degrees and immediately freeze, or would it still be fluffy and dry?

At hr 162 on the GFS our 6 hr snow accumulation is 7.2"!

It will depend on which layers of the atmosphere go above freezing. Models won't have a good handle on this until short range.  This graphic helps visualize it:

So even if the 2M temperature is 17 you could still see sleet or freezing rain if there is a warm nose somewhere in the column. A lot goes into this though, say you have a high to the north funneling in low dew point air, during heavy precipitation maybe you can wet bulb the column to 0 and get all snow, then during lulls you get drizzle / sleet. There are a lot of variables that go into figuring out p-type and snow ratios. You can't just say it's 20 degrees so ratios will be 15:1 (Not saying this is what you were implying just pointing it out.)

[TimB]

21 minutes ago, RitualOfTheTrout said:

It will depend on what layer(s) of the atmosphere go above freezing. This graphic helps visualize it:

So even if the 2M temperature is 17 you could still see sleet or freezing rain if there is a warm nose somewhere in the column. A lot goes into this though, say you have a high to the north funneling in low dew point air, during heavy precipitation maybe you can wet bulb the column to 0 and get all snow, then during lulls you get drizzle / sleet. There are a lot of variables that go into figuring out p-type and snow ratios. You can't just say it's 20 degrees so ratios will be 15:1 (Not saying this is what you were implying just pointing it out.)

This may be anecdotal and obscure, but does anyone remember the January 1999 snow/ice storm? My memory tells me we had sleet/FZRA with temperatures not too far from 17. 

[Rd9108]

A lot can change but the 12z gfs takes the low next week and rams it right into western PA.