January 2025 General Discussion

[Powerball]

31 minutes ago, michsnowfreak said:

Exactly. Its not as if you dont want to do it, its that your location makes it impossible. The DTW snow site is approx 2-3 MI E of the south side of the airport. Flint also has a similar thing. Im surprised all the northern MI sites do as well, as I wouldnt think it would be as difficult as those airports, but apparently it is. Ive heard TOL is like 3-4 miles SW of the airport, but cant confirm. 

But this seems to be a WFO-specific arrangement as discussed above. While the NWS apparently can no longer require that FAA contractors do this, many of them seemingly continue to do so.

And my understanding is takong over any weather observation duties was thrust upon the FAA (it wasn't their choice in the first place).

All of that said, it would just be nice if we had consistency with the standards/procedures everywhere. 

[michsnowfreak]

9 minutes ago, Powerball said:

But this seems to be a WFO-specific arrangement as discussed above. While the NWS apparently can no longer require that FAA contractors do this, many of them seemingly continue to do so.

And my understanding is taken over any weather observation duties was thrust upon the FAA (it wasn't their choice in the first place).

All of that said, it would just be nice if we had consistency with the standards/procedures everywhere. 

I would guess/assume that the arrangement is based out of necessity. Perhaps some sites are more user friendly than others to measure snow. I THINK i read somewhere it has to be 5 miles or less from the site, but im not sure. I think Philadelphias is actually measured in NJ ironically enough lol (obviously PHL is on border).

[sbnwx85]

Could always be worse…

[Frog Town]

1 minute ago, sbnwx85 said:

Could always be worse…

Assuming this takes into account the change in the wind chill scale.  

[beavis1729]

32 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

Agree, really impressive airmass. The most intense cold with no snowpack in quite some time. For Chicago, have to go back to Feb 4-5, 2007 for a comparable event. Rockford had snow otg in that stretch, so it's been even longer there. Would've been interesting to see how close this got to the end of January 2019 with a solid snowpack in place.

Edit: Rockford, at -11, at least tied 1/17/1954 for the coldest temp without snow cover since 1951.

What's even more impressive about this airmass (although I'd prefer to say "maddeningly annoying and frustrating") is that there's bare ground for an entire 200+ mile radius around MBY, and we still hit -10 this morning.  There's no snow cover upstream anywhere south of 45N, and even where there's snow cover north of that it's not very deep/widespread.

Usually when you get cold with no snow cover, the snow field is at least very close...which limits the temp moderation somewhat.  In this current situation, we didn't really have that.

This would have absolutely challenged January 2019 in many areas, imo.  A good illustration is Orr, MN where it was -18/-36 yesterday with only 9" of snow on the ground.  On Jan 30-31 2019, it was -22/-35 and -18/-42 with 14" of snow on the ground.  So, while the temps were slightly milder yesterday vs. Jan 2019, there was a bit less snow cover. 

[beavis1729]

12 minutes ago, Frog Town said:

Assuming this takes into account the change in the wind chill scale.  

Yes, it does.  The WC at ORD that morning was -57F on the new scale (-27F temp with 20 mph winds).  It was in the -70s on the old scale.

[Brian D]

Notable cold this am across the region. Top 5 - Hibbing -35 (T1st), St. Cloud -27 (T5th), Ashland, WI -24 (T4th), Rhinelander, WI -27 (3rd), Eau Claire, WI -24 (4th). Temps rising today on S/SW wind. Looking for 1-2" of snow tonight. Hit -23(5th) here in town for the coldest am of this cold blast. Just as a side note, yesterday's coldest temp up here was -42 at Seagull Lake up on the CAN border.

Yesterdays(Jan 20) Min/Low max/Low Avg

I-Falls -34(7th)/-18(1st)/-26(1st)

Hibbing -30(T5th)/-16(2nd)/-23(T3rd)

Duluth -24(T5th)/-12(T3rd)/-18(T5th)

Park Rapids -31(T6th)/-18(1st)/-24.5(2nd)

Brainerd -26(T7th)/-12(2nd)/-19(5th)

St. Cloud -23(T5th)/-9(3rd)/-16(T4th)

Minneapolis -18(T7th)/-6(6th)/-12(T6th)

Ashland, WI -19(6th)/-6(3rd)/-12.5(5th)

Rhinelander, WI -24(6th)/-5(3rd)/-14.5(2nd)

Eau Claire, WI -19(8th)/-7(2nd)/-13(T3rd)

[Brian D]

56 minutes ago, Frog Town said:

Assuming this takes into account the change in the wind chill scale.  

Here's the old & new charts. The worst wind chills I've experienced were in the -80 to -100 range on the old chart. There was a day (in the am) when we had upper -20's with winds up to 40+ back in the 80's. That was wicked!

[DocATL]

Are we dusting in Chicago tomorrow?


.

[Brian D]

21 hours ago, beavis1729 said:

Just to show what this airmass was capable of…it looks like Ely MN will post a -17/-36 today, for a daily average of -26.5. This may be a Top 10 all-time coldest day on record there.

The max of -17 is even more impressive. While the -36 min would be great to experience, I imagine Ely hits -40 every 3-5 years (?) on average.

I was in Grand Marais MN over the 4th of July this year. A beautiful area, and a nice cool breeze during the summer. 

Unfortunately there really isn't a good longer period record for interior areas of NE MN, but just looking at I-Falls(start 1948 with some earlier years), you can see how often -40's occur. As far as top 10 coldest avg, that wouldn't even be close. I-Falls top 10 are all in the -30's to -40's, so it would probably be the same around the Ely area.

I-Falls

-41.0    1907-02-04
-40.0    1907-02-05
-40.0    1909-01-05
-55.0    1909-01-06
-54.0    1909-01-07
-40.0    1909-01-09
-50.0    1909-01-11
-44.0    1909-01-12
-45.0    1909-01-15
-40.0    1909-01-30
-48.0    1909-02-08
-44.0    1909-02-14
-43.0    1909-02-15
-41.0    1912-01-07
-41.0    1912-01-11
-40.0    1912-01-12
-40.0    1914-02-12
-41.0    1916-01-13
-40.0    1917-12-28
-40.0    1950-01-18
-40.0    1950-01-30
-41.0    1951-01-29
-40.0    1954-01-17
-41.0    1954-01-21
-41.0    1955-12-19
-40.0    1962-01-17
-40.0    1963-01-19
-42.0    1965-01-14
-40.0    1966-01-11
-40.0    1966-01-24
-43.0    1966-01-28
-44.0    1966-02-18
-43.0    1966-02-19
-44.0    1966-02-20
-46.0    1968-01-06
-42.0    1972-01-14
-45.0    1972-01-15
-40.0    1972-01-26
-41.0    1973-01-07
-42.0    1973-02-16
-40.0    1977-01-09
-44.0    1979-01-16
-41.0    1982-01-16
-45.0    1982-01-17
-40.0    1982-02-03
-40.0    1983-12-19
-40.0    1983-12-20
-40.0    1985-02-01
-42.0    1996-01-20
-41.0    1996-01-26
-43.0    1996-02-01
-45.0    1996-02-02
-42.0    1997-01-26
-44.0    2005-01-17
-40.0    2008-02-11
-42.0    2009-01-13
-42.0    2009-01-14
-41.0    2009-01-16
-41.0   2011-01-20
-46.0    2011-01-21
-43.0    2014-01-02
-46.0    2019-01-27
-40.0    2019-01-30
-45.0    2019-01-31
-42.0    2021-02-13
-42.0    2022-02-03
-42.0    2022-02-13
-40.0    2022-02-24
-40.0    2022-02-25

[dmc76]

Another snowy day. Over 1” of pixie dust so far today. 

[RCNYILWX]

Are we dusting in Chicago tomorrow?


.

Yep, should be a band that breaks through the dry air earlier in the day, most likely across far northern IL into southern WI, then the rest of the area with a period of snow late in the day through the evening.

Sent from my Pixel 9 Pro using Tapatalk

[SolidIcewx]

One thing I like about arctic air is seeing the wind blow the pixie dust away from the squall and starts to cover the sky.

[michsnowfreak]

1 hour ago, SolidIcewx said:

One thing I like about arctic air is seeing the wind blow the pixie dust away from the squall and starts to cover the sky.

haha i was looking for a snowbow. it was blowing pixies and the sun was shining.

[WestMichigan]

GRR went full on winter storm warning through Thursday.  Looks like areas near the lake and to the north of Holland could get a pretty good storm out of this.  Maybe 8" or more in some spots.

[ILSNOW]

18z NAM coming in hot

[Malacka11]

10 minutes ago, ILSNOW said:

18z NAM coming in hot

Rare 24-25 W inbound ------> 

[Chicago Storm]

8 hours ago, Stebo said:

FAA should have never taken over any of this, it is a conflict of interest. If they control the weather observations they can put out whatever they want which would keep planes flying in adverse weather. It is always a concern about the positions getting eliminated but thankfully congress on both sides realizes the importance of contract weather observers and we are a small portion of the FAA budget to begin with. The value of information we produce is very high for the cost.

As for snow measuring, I would love to do it here at DTW but as you all have seen from posts in the past, my office is on top of the terminal and 70 feet in the air. It is impossible to measure snow up here with no protected grass. We had done it in the past before we moved into the Evans (North) terminal in 2010.

One day, however, the CWO (contract weather observer) program will be gone. And that day is getting closer as we move along, better back-ground technology is developed, and they is more push-back support.

Regarding the former issue, the FAA would most definitely put out whatever OBS they would want to satisfy their operational needs. You don't know how often we get calls from tower personal (both FAA and airlines) that want us to adjust OBS because "they aren't seeing that weather anymore".

[DocATL]

It’s been fun watching these bone dry clippers suddenly juice up and sneak up on us. You did tell me this is how things go down @michsnowfreak


.

[Stebo]

46 minutes ago, Chicago Storm said:

One day, however, the CWO (contract weather observer) program will be gone. And that day is getting closer as we move along, better back-ground technology is developed, and they is more push-back support.

Regarding the former issue, the FAA would most definitely put out whatever OBS they would want to satisfy their operational needs. You don't know how often we get calls from tower personal (both FAA and airlines) that want us to adjust OBS because "they aren't seeing that weather anymore".

Thankfully my office we have a pretty good relationship with the tower. If anything I am usually having to call to get vis updated etc.

As for automation they expected that to happen 20 years ago. ASOS can't even report PL correctly, doesn't do lightning even remotely right, can't see extremes like tornadoes, or significant clouds. AI is obviously coming but AI can't do a lot of things.

[michsnowfreak]

55 minutes ago, Stebo said:

Thankfully my office we have a pretty good relationship with the tower. If anything I am usually having to call to get vis updated etc.

As for automation they expected that to happen 20 years ago. ASOS can't even report PL correctly, doesn't do lightning even remotely right, can't see extremes like tornadoes, or significant clouds. AI is obviously coming but AI can't do a lot of things.

I notice that about sleet. It just says overcast usually lol.

[Stebo]

Just now, michsnowfreak said:

I notice that about sleet. It just says overcast usually lol.

Sleet it will report UP which is unknown precip, because it doesn't understand sleet.

[Powerball]

1 hour ago, Stebo said:

Thankfully my office we have a pretty good relationship with the tower. If anything I am usually having to call to get vis updated etc.

As for automation they expected that to happen 20 years ago. ASOS can't even report PL correctly, doesn't do lightning even remotely right, can't see extremes like tornadoes, or significant clouds. AI is obviously coming but AI can't do a lot of things.

And to the point you're making about nuances, ASOS for example can't tell whether a thunderstorm that's not yet showing up on radar, or producing precipitation, will have imminent impacts on the airport directly or its airspace. I'm also willing to bet the average ATC doesn't care enough (or know) about the finer details of convective development to confidently make that determination. They certainly didn't with that Southern Airways flight in 1977.

[Stebo]

14 minutes ago, Powerball said:

And to the point you're making about nuances, ASOS for example can't tell whether a thunderstorm that's not yet showing up on radar, or producing precipitation, will have imminent impacts on the airport directly or its airspace. I'm also willing to bet the average ATC doesn't care enough (or know) about the finer details of convective development to confidently make that determination. They certainly didn't with that Southern Airways flight in 1977.

It's more about things it doesn't see in development. It doesn't know what a TCU or CB is. Those are crucial to the lead time of a thunderstorm.

[Jonger]

[Lightning]

Pretty happy with the LES results over the past few days.  4" total but majority (3") was from yesterday evening to midday today.  Snow pack is currently 6".  Funny to think parts of Louisiana have more