Burghblizz

1 minute ago, dj3 said:

The euro may be king for other locations but it absolutely sh*t the bed for us on this one. The gfs gets a bad wrap but didn’t flinch.

Another thing I find curious is why Mets care about being reactionary. On Twitter they are getting blasted from basically everyone. Even their own semi-colleagues like hosts on the fan are just killing them. What is the big deal about changing your forecast. Why do you have to put out a consistent forecast that doesn’t change. The atmosphere isn’t static so why would a forecast have to be. One thing that definitely frustrates me as this well be referenced the neft time we are in the crosshairs for a storm. Sorry for the rant, move to banter if need be.

I think part of this is on the General Public...

First, model runs that used to be our little secret on weather boards 10 years ago are now blasted everywhere. So they become points of discussion when they show big storms. 

People seem to understand the nature of thunderstorms and that they can be in the forecast, but hit the next town over. They don’t seem to understand that short distances make a difference with snow. They want a firm forecast. 

So given that fact, they want a forecast that lacks the nuance that some situations need. This one needed it. We all knew that.  It Should have been communicated that there was high potential for far different sensible weather with a small shift. I think the NWS discussions did that. But not many read those.

Ideally that is communicated and people understand that there are sometimes differences in confidence.

So that comes to your point....it those small shifts that make dramatic differences happen, then by all means change the forecast. Don’t step it down gradually. But it really starts with a consumer that understands the situation, and that just isn’t the case.

Maybe that becomes less of a factor of models get better. On one hand, it’s incredible that we know there was a big storm coming in the eastern US a week ago. On the other hand, it’s a damn shame they were this bad in the short term.

2 hours ago, jwilson said:

NWS updated map isn't all that different strangely.  Feels like they didn't push snow totals north enough, unless they expect more on the back end of things.

I think they are expecting a decent back end thump. That said....at some point it becomes a PR play, and stepping down totals plays better than wiping them completely out.

Euro owes us a lot of snow.

Dr. No my ass.

In the past it would be the model that would sniff out borderline temps that would go wrong. Usually not a bad sign when it’s on your side 

18 minutes ago, KPITSnow said:

Huh? The NE corridor has had multiple historic storms in the last 5 years.

Yeah, great, we get 40 days of snow a year, but 35 of those are less than an inch.

 

I’ll gladly continue to complain as we live in probably one of the worst areas east of the Mississippi for big storms, and we are constantly 50 miles away from a huge hit in every direction. 

 

Block me if it bothers you, and I think most of the forum will agree with me.

 A lot of your perception is off because parts of I95 have had an historic run (not sustainable), and nobody pays attention to areas to the Southwest.

NE is NE...they have no right to complain ever

The long term is a little different. I wouldn’t pack your bags to Cincinnati, Indianapolis, or DC to find more snow or big storm frequency over long term.

But there IS a complaint thread that is awesome to debate that.

Agree that this storm is frustrating and sucks since it was on the radar so long 

44 minutes ago, KPITSnow said:

If you want a laugh, read the NE and NYC threads....

 

I think anyone that lives there and complains should be forced to live and track storms here.

Yeah, but we average ~40 days of accumulating snow per year, which is the 3rd most behind only Cleveland and Buffalo among major US cities. (And I think this is a little better place to live for a lot of reasons)

So some others would laugh at your relentless complaining — esp those that average half as much snow and still get big storm droughts. All relative.

3 minutes ago, bubbler86 said:

I believe it was Dec. 30th 2000 that we were under a WSW for a foot and not only did it not snow there were hardly any clouds.  Not rain though.  That storm equaled out the Jan 5th 2000 Miracle Blizzard where we got over a foot and had little to no snow forecast.  That one is an Eastern US WX Legend as weenies nowcasted their way into a blizzard. 

Wright Weather....That was even Before Easterns time. 

9 minutes ago, Caveman said:

It's a slight difference based on synoptics...but the deep low over eastern O Canada certainly is driving cold directly to these parts!  Clear, calm, crisp; was eerily cold that morning!

 

My recollection of those mornings here was a little different. We had -22 air temps but -60 chill factors. So not super calm in Pgh

My anti-tongue hope hinges on two things:

As modeled, this not a primary through Ohio with redevelopment. The WTOD dipiction is usually because places to the east experience CADDing and places to the north are far enough out of harms way before a secondary storm takes over. If this is seriously going to pass to the SE by way of southern WV, then I think even areas that get more warm push will flip back. The track is the “big IF” to me.

Second is the time of year. It’s climatology the coldest. That gives a little more hope.

I always find this a fun and informative page. Probably not a lot that we don’t already know this time:

Navigate to the probabilistic  tab

https://www.weather.gov/pbz/winter

6 minutes ago, CoraopolisWx said:

00z 3k NAM tucks that 850 vort just south of us, keeping us mostly frozen.

More so than other storms, the 850's are really running the show.

And I believe it given the track

NAM is showing similar amounts to what it has been (at least non Kuchera) but the path there looks MUCH more believable with this run

2 minutes ago, KPITSnow said:

Btw, I wouldn’t mind a sleet storm. Haven’t had one of those in ages. Just not freezing rain or plain rain.

Feb ‘07 had a storm that was like 7” and a pile of sleet. It was a pain, but not horrible in terms of witnessing a decent “event”.

Obviously though, there were thoughts of what could have been. If I recall correctly, it was well forecasted so not like forecasted totals got ripped in half. 

The 0Z NAM is the worst looking way to get to 12-14” ever. Somehow does, but likely a lot of sleet and slop in reality. Definitely don’t like it’s look 

17 minutes ago, Rd9108 said:

Slopfest but alot of time and the UK improved so we are still in the game. 

GFS looks to be generally snow, just more modest totals. Might be a scenario where just west of the city does better

Only about 24 more GFS runs to go!

(it’s way far out to be doing this, but I’m intrigued that it’s on multiple models)

Looking like 1994 type cold after the next storm. Likely will moderate, but damn it looks cold at the end of the month. 

Most places in Allegheny County surpasses that already. Spotter reports averaging around 1.5”.

if some of those heavier returns in Ohio can hold together, still a chance for a decent little event. 

Out in the Greensburg area tonight and about an 1” since about 4:00.

There is a ton of precip to the SW, so I’m interested to see how things hold together. 

4 hours ago, north pgh said:

Happy New Year everyone!

Feels weird starting to check models again and it is already January 7th. Not much of a winter thus far but maybe this will be good for a big storm. Most of us are due for one and I'll take the foot plus storm in the next 2 months if that is all we get. However excited for the coming week but it will be nice to get the shovel out maybe?
BTW I was out all weekend and took down the Christmas lights and did a lot of yard work so it paid off not having snow on the ground now. Bring it on now that the yard is ready 

Happy 25th anniversary!

GFS looking interesting by around Thursday....the ever elusive Piedmont runner.

17 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

In the wake of the most recent rainfall (0.33"), year-to-date precipitation in Pittsburgh stands at 57.08". That ranks as the second highest annual figure on record. The record is 57.41", which was established in 2004.

One more system is likely to impact Pittsburgh before 2018 concludes. At present, a moderate rainfall appears likely.

Based on sensitivity analysis applied to the recent guidance, the implied probabilities are as follows:

No precipitation: 3%
Measurable precipitation: 97%
0.25" or more: 88%
0.50" or more: 69%
0.75" or more: 42%
1.00" or more: 18%

New annual record (0.34" or more): 82%

Therefore, at least at this point in time, it appears very likely that Pittsburgh will set a new annual precipitation record.

Great info....wish some of that would have translated into a big snowfall year.

Wow - Jeff V let go from KDKA.

Obviously, he was not kind to weenies and hobbyists, but the general public seemed to like him

Interesting that they feel there is some upside to early tommorow as well. I was thinking it’s the period slightly beyond that (thurs night) that looked a little better.

12Z GFS looks a touch snowier in western Pa for overnight Thurs

3 hours ago, jwilson said:

My only concern is the inevitable warm-up, especially with the cold this early.  I haven't looked at any long-range predictions, so maybe it never becomes an extended warm period, but if there's one thing I loathe, it's a warm December.  If it's transient between cold shots, that certainly bodes better for snow chances.  Any snow in November is a bonus.

Looking back, though, it appears Pittsburgh got 32.3" of snow in November of 1950.  That must have been an interesting month.

(30-year mean being 2.1")

Mostly from one storm. A retrograding BOMB up the spine of the apps and through Ohio....but so potent that there were single digit temps with southerly winds.