14 replies to this topic

[Chicago WX]

10 year running snowfall averages for select sites in the Lakes/Midwest region.

The snowfall numbers for 1881-82 to 1890-91 that are in italics means it was not a full 10 year average (data might have began in the middle of that period or there may be only 3 seasons in that average). Note GRR's average is not a full 10 years for the 1891-92 to 1900-01 period.

Of course ORD and DTW were not the exact locations for the official totals throughout history, but I figured they're familiar so I used them as the identifiers for Chicago and Detroit.

 DECADE SNOWFALL AVERAGES.png   188.52K   6 downloads

[Geos]

That's a cool stat table! Looks like every location gained in average snowfall between the 90's and 00's, except LSE, MSP, and TOR. Big jump with DTW ~ +30%!

[michsnowfreak]

What else can I say, thank you Tim....awesome work!

Amazing to see the jump the last 10 years at DTW! Amazing to think in that 20-year span from 1931-1951 Detroit only averaged around 30" (actually Jan 1, 1940 thru Dec 31, 1949 actually averaged 27.6" if you go strictly by the exact decade). Also interesting to see how the 1880s plummets some 9 inches when you take out the snowmaggedon winter of 1880-81.

[hm8]

Nice to see almost everyone's been killing it or at least average this past decade

[Geos]

It would be interested to see a series of maps that showed the average storm tracks from decade to decade! I don't know of any such work that has been done of this nature though.

[Jonger1150]

This will really quiet those pesky elderly.

[Trent]

I've always wondered if snow fall really matters in terms of actual depth for historical comparisons. For example if a storm a storm has 0.1" liquid equivalent but produces 3 inches of snow or a half inch of snow, it's the same mass of snowfall that fell. Unfortunately, most of the liquid equivalent data is more faulty than the snowfall data itself, particularly in windy events, so it's almost a moot point.

But it would be great if there was some site that had reliable data where one could compare the actual snow (not the amount of air that the snow has in it) by season or decade. Right now, climate and statistics make no distinction between a 3" fluff event that has 0.07" water equivalent or a 3" sand snow event that has 0.34" water equivalent, when they have clearly different impacts visually, hydrologically, economically, and on transportation just to name a few.

I just think it's funny how much emphasis is placed on dendrite shape and the air pockets within it versus the actual mass of the snow that falls. I think we could look back on seasons and find some interesting information looking with another set of lenses.

[michsnowfreak]

Jonger1150, on 19 February 2012 - 11:39 AM, said:

This will really quiet those pesky elderly.

[michsnowfreak]

Trent, on 19 February 2012 - 12:37 PM, said:

I've always wondered if snow fall really matters in terms of actual depth for historical comparisons. For example if a storm a storm has 0.1" liquid equivalent but produces 3 inches of snow or a half inch of snow, it's the same mass of snowfall that fell. Unfortunately, most of the liquid equivalent data is more faulty than the snowfall data itself, particularly in windy events, so it's almost a moot point.

But it would be great if there was some site that had reliable data where one could compare the actual snow (not the amount of air that the snow has in it) by season or decade. Right now, climate and statistics make no distinction between a 3" fluff event that has 0.07" water equivalent or a 3" sand snow event that has 0.34" water equivalent, when they have clearly different impacts visually, hydrologically, economically, and on transportation just to name a few.

I just think it's funny how much emphasis is placed on dendrite shape and the air pockets within it versus the actual mass of the snow that falls. I think we could look back on seasons and find some interesting information looking with another set of lenses.

Thats some very interesting food for thought. I think pre 1930s they just assumed a 10-1 ratio for most snowfalls. And of course, snow depth records (how fast/slow snow settles) does help matters too....but yeah, all snow is not equal but it is in terms of season total snowfall. The liquid equiv and snowfall columns are usually a pretty good indicator of what kind of snow it was, at least since the 1940s per my observation (tho a big shaky in the 2000s in ASOS's youth). But you never REALLY know, as you said, if everythings totally accurate.

Both of our biggest synoptic snowfalls this year (2.5" with 0.25" liquid, temps in teens on Jan 20/21....and 4.9" with 0.33", temps fell from low 30s to mid teens Feb 10/11) had a pretty high impact on traffic because they were so cold. We still have plow piles everywhere dotting our otherwise bare landscape. Not that they didnt melt fast either, but it was cold when the storm happened. In contrast many of our other snowfalls didnt even stick on the roads, making them pretty low impact though it adds up in the snow column. And of course the snow-melt-snow-melt cycle that this winter has been makes the total snowfall (20-30" in SE MI to date) seem like so much less than it really was, whereas had we had a cold, white winter with 20-30" to date it would seem like so much more. There is so much more to snow than how much falls...another reason I think it is the most intriguing aspect of the weather, bar none.

[Ajdos]

OT; does anyone know what the deepest snowfall in Detroit was? Snow depth?

[michsnowfreak]

Ajdos, on 19 February 2012 - 07:27 PM, said:

OT; does anyone know what the deepest snowfall in Detroit was? Snow depth?

Biggest snowstorm was 24.5" on April 6, 1886.

Deepest snow depth at obs time was 26" on March 5, 1900. It was noted that snow depth was probably closer to 30" between obs times. And of course, the deeper and more layered a snowcover gets, the more snow depth is subjective due to drifting and stuff. But what I wouldnt give to go back to late Feb 1900 for a few weeks!

Looking at the peak snow depth each winter for Detroit since 1882 (wish I knew what peak depth was in 1880-81, probably 2 feet plus). FWIW peak depth this winter was 5".

Top 10 winters with highest peak depth (actually 12 due to a tie at 10th)
26" - 1899-00
25" - 1885-86
24" - 1998-99
19" - 1974-75
18" - 1892-93
18" - 1981-82
16" - 1904-05
16" - 1951-52
16" - 2010-11
15" - 1903-04
15" - 1907-08
15" - 1977-78

Top 10 winters with lowest peak depth
2" - 1952-53
3" - 1881-82
3" - 1888-89
3" - 1936-37
3" - 1937-38
3" - 1941-42
3" - 1957-58
3" - 1960-61
3" - 1971-72
3" - 1988-89

[Ajdos]

michsnowfreak, on 19 February 2012 - 07:39 PM, said:

Biggest snowstorm was 24.5" on April 6, 1886.

Deepest snow depth at obs time was 26" on March 5, 1900. It was noted that snow depth was probably closer to 30" between obs times. And of course, the deeper and more layered a snowcover gets, the more snow depth is subjective due to drifting and stuff. But what I wouldnt give to go back to late Feb 1900 for a few weeks!

Looking at the peak snow depth each winter for Detroit since 1882 (wish I knew what peak depth was in 1880-81, probably 2 feet plus). FWIW peak depth this winter was 5".

Top 10 winters with highest peak depth (actually 12 due to a tie at 10th)
26" - 1899-00
25" - 1885-86
24" - 1998-99
19" - 1974-75
18" - 1892-93
18" - 1981-82
16" - 1904-05
16" - 1951-52
16" - 2010-11
15" - 1903-04
15" - 1907-08
15" - 1977-78

Top 10 winters with lowest peak depth
2" - 1952-53
3" - 1881-82
3" - 1888-89
3" - 1936-37
3" - 1937-38
3" - 1941-42
3" - 1957-58
3" - 1960-61
3" - 1971-72
3" - 1988-89

Thank you! I appreciate this information.. ........26" is not a lot, honestly..

[michsnowfreak]

Ajdos, on 19 February 2012 - 07:52 PM, said:

Thank you! I appreciate this information.. ........26" is not a lot, honestly..

We had a 14" storm on Feb 28/Mar 1, 1900 and a 16.1" storm on Mar 4/5, 1900 with some snow in between. Think of how deep the snow looked last winter as it was a product of several snowstorms and the snowbanks get bigger and bigger, imagine a buildup like that. Of course its not as impressive as getting it in one major storm, but it makes the snowpack more solid/dense.

[Ajdos]

michsnowfreak, on 19 February 2012 - 08:04 PM, said:

We had a 14" storm on Feb 28/Mar 1, 1900 and a 16.1" storm on Mar 4/5, 1900 with some snow in between. Think of how deep the snow looked last winter as it was a product of several snowstorms and the snowbanks get bigger and bigger, imagine a buildup like that. Of course its not as impressive as getting it in one major storm, but it makes the snowpack more solid/dense.

Yes, I remember the storms.....What a great winter!

[michsnowfreak]

Ajdos, on 19 February 2012 - 10:32 PM, said:

Yes, I remember the storms.....What a great winter!

Season total of 69.1" was an exact match to last winter at Detroit, but lots of people would have been stressed out before the good were delivered. Season total sat at 9" on Feb 3, 1900...we managed to get 60.1" of snow from feb 4th onward...imagine the stress and complaining in Dec/Jan lol.