Jump to content

McHenrySnow

Meteorologist
  • Posts

    606
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by McHenrySnow

  1. Overall looks good to me. I'm beginning to doubt doubt digits, though localized 10" especially further west is certainly possible.
  2. Was in Bridgeport during the November 2018 "blizzard" - that and the snowstorm in November 2015 were heartbreakers for people who actually lived in the city (let's face it, O'Hare isn't the city).
  3. You can also see the lake's influence very well. Maybe too well for parts of McHenry, Kane, and DuPage.
  4. You have the lake to at least pad totals by a couple inches, which is always nice. I can't imagine living in the loop and loving snow the past few years. It was bad enough in Bridgeport, but we often had better accums than the loop.
  5. This shows the actual storm total best as the "total" accums add an inch to inch and a half across much of northern LOT from tonights snow.
  6. They'll issue one in the morning, little doubt about that.
  7. Oh, certainly not. Well, I hope the 6-8" across N IL verifies and, even though it's been an Iowa winter, there's no chance 30" falls.
  8. GEM drops 30" in S Central Iowa and then peters out to 6-8" across N IL.
  9. Well, I certainly can't argue that the new GFS is better.
  10. Has the Para ever been correct? I mean, I think it has gotten better, but it's still been pretty awful.
  11. The one we need, certainly, but not the one we'll get.
  12. We've only had 50% of the snow we should have had to date. I understand your agony and I know you'd be thrilled to have what little I've seen, but considering the climate differences, not a big difference. We've both had a bad winter. This may change things our way here and there is still time for you guys further south. Biggest snowstorm I've been in was March 4-5, 2015 in Kentucky.
  13. I never expected a watch before tomorrow morning. LOT is usually more conservative than both DVN and MKX and I think tomorrow morning is plenty of time.
  14. Yep, seems models are being a little more generous tonight/early tomorrow in N IL.
  15. As I said, I like the trend. Said it so many times.
  16. Their harassment started long before my tag, but thanks for the input.
  17. Be prepared to be piled on, but you’re used to it, I know.
  18. He said no models substantiated what I had said and that was not true. ive acknowledged a good trend, I’m just being cautious. I’m sorry I can’t lend myself to weenie forecasting that suits you.
  19. There is a concern with shear and unlike lake and cook, inland counties won’t benefit much if at all from the lake. There is absolutely nothing wrong about this statement.
  20. Am I writing in a foreign language? Or do you guys not bother to read. Where did I say I’m choosing one model over the other. I’ve repeatedly said my expectations have increased and I’m not worried about getting completely shafted like I once was.
  21. You must be unaware of the NAM or RGEM. You must also have poor reading comprehension as I have repeated acknowledged trends are looking better. I’m not responding to you from here on out, you’re a troll.
  22. Rockford almost always manages to do well no matter. Several models show a lower area of totals over Boone and McHenry due to the low shearing out and then the lake compensating for Lake and Cook. I’d be very happy with 6”, and, as I said, I’m becoming cautiously optimistic.
×
×
  • Create New...