Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,604
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

March 3-4 Potential Winter Storm


Hoosier
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

I try to avoid looking at the HRRR at this lead time because it's a hot start model and frequently all over the map for winter systems. I really don't think it was meant to be used for winter forecasting outside 18-24 hours. It's more useful inside 12-18 hours.

While it doesn't mean a particular solution in its extended runs can't have the right idea, it's much more often wrong than right this far out and therefore hard to put any stock in it. It was very bad for the ice storm (too warm) and also the event before that (too cold over northern IL). It may have performed decently for the pre Christmas storm at this lead time, but that's the only one that sticks out to me.


 

 

I keep forgetting that about the Christmas event and in my case Les which it went overboard with. The clue in that ( Les speaking ) was the strong winds and bitter cold temps which resulted in pixie dust flakes and banding that got ripped apart initially. Fooled a few because of the November Les event around here. Temps were not bitter and wind wasn't as strong but enough to bring the better banding further inland vs normal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lightning said:

Looking at the dynamics with this storm I believe heavier rates will be there!  Plus heavy wet snows seems to be the norm this winter here. :lol:

 

 

Outside of Christmas I won't argue that. Strange winter for sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stebo said:

There is one short range model that I watch because its been very good, the RDPS(RGEM).

 

Yep. I always forget about that. It has also served well for Les events around here. One of the few to nail the November Les event here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

I deleted my post since you beat me to it haha. I think this sort of variability closer in underscores the complex nature of this forecast.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
 

The problem too is the band isn't exactly wide so noise level changes are making a huge issue. Like what do you do with DTX's CWA.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GFS seems to go more west to east till just east of here? Snowfall maps ( 10.1 they claim ) actually ticked up a bit between here and SB? Solidly in the 15+ range with the 18+ now just to my sw? Lost a little on the east side of the state by the river? Crazy.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem too is the band isn't exactly wide so noise level changes are making a huge issue. Like what do you do with DTX's CWA.
100% agree, we're not talking huge differences in features anymore, but the difference in sensible weather impacts is dramatic. Gonna be a fun day at the office tomorrow lol.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will definitely be a nightmare snow forecast since there is no antecedent cold air mass we're essentially relying on dynamic cooling in a likely narrow band of intense deformation. Probably can't really call it a cold conveyor belt, maybe more of a TROWAL. Someone is going to get a good thumping with intense rates but very thread the needle and probably better will be picked up by hi res later tomorrow. We hope. Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOT, IWX, GRR and DTX will probably have to issue watches with hilariously high gaps in the totals, we could see another “Total Snowfall of 2 to 12 inches”  type watch like an office in Wisconsin had to do earlier this winter 
We're actually technically not supposed to put the totals in the watch text products, according to NWS directives. However, the simplified formatter we went to 4-5 years ago spits out the deterministic ranges and most offices leave them. I think we (at LOT) usually change it to snow totals of 6 inches or more are possible.

The unusual watch and warning issuance on the same calendar day is looking likely for this event.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

We're actually technically not supposed to put the totals in the watch text products, according to NWS directives. However, the simplified formatter we went to 4-5 years ago spits out the deterministic ranges and most offices leave them. I think we (at LOT) usually change it to snow totals of 6 inches or more are possible.

The unusual watch and warning issuance on the same calendar day is looking likely for this event.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
 

 

Talk about a lower then normal confidence level with snowfall amounts etc. I admit I am questioning the 1.50+ amounts some of these models keep pumping out such as this latest gfs. With relying on dynamic cooling precip rates will play a larger then romal role on snowfall amounts. 

I tip my hat to you guys having to put your necks out there for the general public who doesn't understand all the intangibles with a event like this. 

Yeah the snowfall/qpf maps look good here with room to spare but it wouldn't take very much to change the outcome. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

Last 3 runs of the GEFS 24-hour 10:1 snowfall mean. 7eb97ecd33f6c29bc6bcbabbb273da80.gif

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
 

 

You know I see a storm like this and can't help to wonder about that Jan 67 event which basically featured borderline temps here with straight 10-1 ratios ( 28.6 snowfall and 2.86 qpf ) yet a incredible ice storm not more then 30 miles to the south? How do you get as much ice as I hear fell just south of here while temps was near 32 with incredible snowfall amounts here? Was zero snow on the ground for many miles in both directions as we just had record breaking warmth just before the storm. I wish more studies was done on this. 

  • Like 1
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...