Malacka11

5 minutes ago, Chambana said:

I know it’s crapuweather but I’ve never seen this wording before a week out. 

There was a time that in their three-month outlook Accuweather forecasted like forty inches of snow for the Chicago area iirc but I've never seen this before

11 minutes ago, zinski1990 said:

It could lol. Don't really remember seeing or tracking a storm like this since maybe GHD 2011

Could you please explain to me what makes this system so much different from others we've had in recent years? I get that it might be a more potent storm in terms of wind and all that, but the snowfall doesn't seem much more impressive than this weekend's event. What am I missing? 

FWIW (which, like always, is beyond me lol), the GEFS mean snowfall is actually slightly farther north this run. 

12z GEFS: 

18z GEFS: 

2 minutes ago, Hoosier said:

There's at least 24 hours of pure lake effect (not including lake enhancement) targeting the IL/WI shoreline area on this run.  Nothing is guaranteed in weather but I'd almost lock in the idea of several inches in the Chicago-Milwaukee corridor even this far out.  There would have to be a massive breakdown in the synoptic setup to not only take the system out of reach, but the LES too.

The models could erase the system in its entirety and it'd still be hard to be pessimistic with such kinds words

2 minutes ago, Stebo said:

That gyre is there no matter what even if it was faster. The key is the initial piece. It needs to be as weak as possible otherwise this is another suppression job because the heights won't be able to rise quickly enough behind it.

Initial piece as in the preliminary Thursday event right?

Just now, HillsdaleMIWeather said:

Track fluctuations this far out are super expected, liking the massive amped look though 

Agreed. This could be one meaty storm...

18z is much farther south

Even the ICON stopped suppressing the storm. Good.

Snow cover on top of snow cover. I thought the day would never come. 

00z GFS is basically the same idea

5 minutes ago, Thundersnow12 said:

Euro is mega hot/north. 4-6” entire Chicago metro. 7-9” south of I-88 

Press "x" to doubt

Not saying I won't take it but

The GFS and GFS are very similar to each other regarding next weekend. I know this doesn't mean anything really at this range, but I find it interesting.

18 minutes ago, Hoosier said:

When I saw that avatar I thought to myself "I bet that's Malacka."  Sure enough.

I'll take that to mean that you approve

Next weekend continues to be of interest.

2 minutes ago, buckeye said:

18z gfs for the sub...

(3) big threats,  240, 300, 370.   They aren't dried up clippers either, they are juiced up systems coming out of the southern plains.     It's these kind of runs that started showing up in the LR leading up to Feb'10.   Details sucked but the overall idea of a snow bonanza in a relatively short time ended up being spot on.   

 

At a minimum, it'll be a pleasant change to have plenty to forecast. 

I think something is brewing in about ten says

5 minutes ago, snowlover2 said:

Don’t think 12z is out yet.

That's what I've been thinking too, but iirc someone already referenced the 12z FV3 as being the opposite of the normal GFS. Oh well

Anyone have access to para-GFS snowfall maps?

5 minutes ago, buckeye said:

....maybe something to watch in the longer range.    The eps has moved the LR trough axis further west....enough so that I think it puts more of our sub in the game for a potential biggie, if it's right.   Up until now it's looked like any big dog was a lock to be a coastal in the LR.   

My weenie mode has been activated. Thanks, it's been a while

3 minutes ago, snowlover2 said:

So saw this 18z FV3 QPF map posted. It seems to be in the NAM camp with a large 1.00" QPF area meaning likely a large 10"+ snow area.

Now we need that blue spot to hike a few hundred north so it sits over Chicagoland

Just kidding. We already had our fun. It's time for others to get their turn too. 

Just now, (((Will))) said:

DT acted like an angry drunk 100% of the time yet still had relevancy because he was a meteorologist. He also didn't hesitate to cuss out kids under 12 that were just excited about snow.

 

His relevancy made it worse because they couldn't just ban him.

Dang. That sucks even more because a person in his position has so much ability to be a positive influence on a weather forum lol

12 minutes ago, pondo1000 said:

You’re naive dumbass!!! 

JK!!! I couldn’t resist. You laid it up for me. Figured I’d play DT for a second. LOL

Wow lol would he actually say things like that?

1 minute ago, (((Will))) said:

The way I took it was that he just didn't have the courage to be himself in person.

That's what I like about our subforum. Since I joined it ten months ago, I haven't seen a single person treat another with downright disrespect here. Sure there are disagreements here and there, but nothing noteworthy, like, ever. Or maybe I'm just naive/inexperienced lol

37 minutes ago, iluvsnow said:

FWIW.....For what its worth!

Thanks mate 

36 minutes ago, Calderon said:

For What It's Worth

Ah. Thank you