Trent Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Damn. 00z nam has 0.63" or 9.3" of snow for CLE through 76 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick7032 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Wait, now I'm confused...we're all looking at the NAM on the NCEP web site http://www.twisterda...e&archive=false Also: http://www.nco.ncep....am_p60_072l.gif Ahhhh thought so....hope the text data Chicago WX posted on that link is correct....I was loading the actual soundings for 12z and 18z and looking at the totals on Bufkit itself....did not mean to make it confusing....if 0.40 verifies that would work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 SSC Can I ask a favour of you to post the ooz NAM bufkit data for YYZ. Thanks 0.20" QPF yielding 2.1-3.2" of snowfall. Most of what little uvvs there are, along with the deepest saturation, is below the DGZ which accounts for the ratios generally below 15:1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 You probably won't make up much ground on LAF though. Odds are you'll end up winning, but maybe we can hold you off into February... Hey, I dont mind us all getting snow LAF is about 10" ahead so far... LAF: 23.0" MBY: 13.3" DTW: 12.9" Today was the 25th day with 1"+ snowcover already this season, which is halfway to normal for the entire season, and the season is still weeks away from the halfway point. So im thinking its very likely we are on track for an above normal snowcover season. In the massive snow years of 2007-08 and 2008-09 we were above normal for snowcover days too, but not nearly as great a departure as the snowfall in inches was (ie, in 2007-08 we had more inches of snow than days with 1"+ snowcover). Im thinking this is a different type of winter. And the last thing I expected in La Nina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toronto blizzard Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 0.20" QPF yielding 2.1-3.2" of snowfall. Most of what little uvvs there are, along with the deepest saturation, is below the DGZ which accounts for the ratios generally below 15:1. Heres to the ooz GFS to follow suit BTW the ooz RGEM m odel looks similar to the NAM FWIW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 0.40" http://68.226.77.253...km/NAM_KDTW.txt 0.33" through 60 hours. http://68.226.77.253...NAM212_KDTW.txt I use this usually. It says 0.36", but Im RIGHT on the edge of eastern MI on the Detroit River, so mby is in the 0.40" area verbatum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick7032 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I use this usually. It says 0.36", but Im RIGHT on the edge of eastern MI on the Detroit River, so mby is in the 0.40" area verbatum. Yeah I just looked at the actual soundings for the DTX JXN DET area and it shows around 4.2 at DTX to about 5.1 along the 94 corridor so a general 4 to 6 inches looks good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukrocks Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 GFS track of the low is through Southern Kentucky! Which is great news for me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 One way of keeping it further south. weaker.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hthe620110 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 has anyone noticed that the western trough seems slower, which inturn is causing the southern upper low to move, more northeast further west than progged Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kab2791 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Better than the 18Z GFS QPF wise One way of keeping it further south. weaker.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Heres to the ooz GFS to follow suit BTW the ooz RGEM m odel looks similar to the NAM FWIW Bah... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Pretty simple on the GFS, it weakens the SE low initially and then decides to re-strengthen it again rather quickly...leaving the OV low weaker all the way through. Normally it seems the transfer goes too quickly on the models, but that is usually with an initial dominant primary in the OV. Not the case this time obviously. Globals vs meso models...who wins this fight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 Better than the 18Z GFS QPF wise True.. But not by much. I just much prefer and hope for a trend NORTH of the river ( especially as it crosses Indiana ) as far as track goes. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kab2791 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 00Z GFS Specifics DET: 0.20 DTW: 0.20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 00Z GFS Specifics DET: 0.20 DTW: 0.20 So we have 0.40" from the NAM and 0.20" from the GFS. lol, lets say a 2-6" snowfall? If there is one positive to take from the crappy GFS it is that the 0.1-0.25" line went much further north from its 18z blip, so at the very least accumulating snow looks extremely likely, almost imminent. Two days ago we were told to expect no snow this far north. Now...how much is the question. Still should be our 2nd largest snowfall of the winter so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kab2791 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 So we have 0.40" from the NAM and 0.20" from the GFS. lol, lets say a 2-6" snowfall? If there is one positive to take from the crappy GFS it is that the 0.1-0.25" line went much further north from its 18z blip, so at the very least accumulating snow looks extremely likely, almost imminent. Two days ago we were told to expect no snow this far north. Now...how much is the question. Still should be our 2nd largest snowfall of the winter so far. Going from 30%pops yesterday evening to Categorical is a Win anytime...this scenario (not storm set-up) remins me of a storm in early '09 in which a couple days before we were foretasted to get 1" or less, which turned into WWA for 4-7". That Was the 12" IND storm I think. Not comparing the storm, but how being on the northern fringe is very tentative to drastic changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OhioValleyWx Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Pretty simple on the GFS, it weakens the SE low initially and then decides to re-strengthen it again rather quickly...leaving the OV low weaker all the way through. Normally it seems the transfer goes too quickly on the models, but that is usually with an initial dominant primary in the OV. Not the case this time obviously. Globals vs meso models...who wins this fight? I have to believe meso is at least closer. I think the GFS is too flat still. It seems to have found more energy hanging back but it still pushes mainly east. I have to believe some cutting and a more amplified look happens in E Ohio before the Eastern low takes over. Tough to discern but this is usual GFS error so I have to go towards NAM more than GFS. Josh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone77 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 My 2-3" call for the QC from earlier may be stretching it a bit. May end up more like 1-2". Models have trended a touch drier for this area the last 2 runs. A long and drawn out 1-3" is basically a non-event, but it's better than nothing I guess. Congrats to all who can benefit a real snow from this thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmaxweather Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I am going with 3-5 for Cincinnati proper that includes the counties along the Ohio River and counties in Northern KY I am going with 4-6 across the northern Burbs that includes: Butler, Warren, Clinton,Montgomery, Preble and Greene Counties Lastly I am going with 5-7 across the I 70 corridor Subject to minor tweaks but I am pretty confident on this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukrocks Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I am going with 3-5 for Cincinnati proper that includes the counties along the Ohio River and counties in Northern KY I am going with 4-6 across the northern Burbs that includes: Butler, Warren, Clinton,Montgomery, Preble and Greene Counties Lastly I am going with 5-7 across the I 70 corridor Subject to minor tweaks but I am pretty confident on this one! This is just just for the areas in Southern Indiana and Kentucky. I am going with 5-9 inches of snow for Seymour Indiana and the surrounding counties. 4-7 inches for those north of Metro Louisville and south of Seymour, Indiana. 3-5 inches for Louisville to Elizabethtown. 1-3 inches for those south of E-town. I think this will be a nice little event before an exciting next weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowlover2 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I am going with 3-5 for Cincinnati proper that includes the counties along the Ohio River and counties in Northern KY I am going with 4-6 across the northern Burbs that includes: Butler, Warren, Clinton,Montgomery, Preble and Greene Counties Lastly I am going with 5-7 across the I 70 corridor Subject to minor tweaks but I am pretty confident on this one! Completely agree Max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Pretty simple on the GFS, it weakens the SE low initially and then decides to re-strengthen it again rather quickly...leaving the OV low weaker all the way through. Normally it seems the transfer goes too quickly on the models, but that is usually with an initial dominant primary in the OV. Not the case this time obviously. Globals vs meso models...who wins this fight? I'm always skeptical of the GFS in these situations. It seems to have a chronic problem of underrepresenting the inland low in these double low scenarios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWeatherPimp Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 This is just just for the areas in Southern Indiana and Kentucky. I am going with 5-9 inches of snow for Seymour Indiana and the surrounding counties. 4-7 inches for those north of Metro Louisville and south of Seymour, Indiana. 3-5 inches for Louisville to Elizabethtown. 1-3 inches for those south of E-town. I think this will be a nice little event before an exciting next weekend. Way to high for most areas. No way southern Indiana (Seymour area) sees 5-9, no way the area between Louisville and Seymour gets 4-7. More like 4-5 in the Seymor area with 2-4 in between Seymour and Louisville with 1-3 South of the Louisville metro area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmc76 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 This close in I tend to lean toward the NAM more then the GOV(gfs). So Im calling for a nice 3-5 inch snowfall with 15 to 1 ratios for all of the Detroit area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I'm always skeptical of the GFS in these situations. It seems to have a chronic problem of underrepresenting the inland low in these double low scenarios. Agree the GFS always is too quick at transferring to the coastal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosier Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Agree the GFS always is too quick at transferring to the coastal. I mean, it's a little embarrassing to even call this a surface low but you know what I mean. It's all relative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I mean, it's a little embarrassing to even call this a surface low but you know what I mean. It's all relative. Yeah thankfully this one bias of the GFS is still in so we know that we can toss the model out as being incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowlover2 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 0z GGEM looks more in line with the NAM imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilly84 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 First things first, would like to apologize if I made anyone mad last night, it was an honest mistake. And yes I am still on the 5 post thing, so Im not gonna reply to anyone.. Enough of that. As per the storm. Mostly everything has been covered where the models are concerned so I wanted to post my map for Ohio.. Basing it more on the NAM, as I dont buy the underdone qpf on the gfs. But anyways here ya go. Enjoy.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.