• Member Statistics

    16,550
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    yuyuer0221
    Newest Member
    yuyuer0221
    Joined
Chicago Storm

Jan 24-26th Potential Something Part 2

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, nwohweather said:

It’s so obvious how snow starved weather fans are up there. I feel for ya lol, but far too many bullish comments on this on a storm likely to underperform.

there is nothing to suggest this will underperform.

that max area in IA/N MO is primed.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hawkeye_wx said:

If the snow is going to be a bit wet, and with some good wind and drifting, I know the ratio in my yard will be crap.  6-9" seems like a good guess here at this point.

Think I'm gonna make a first call of 8-10" for IC. Though the QPF outputs are tantalizing and open the door for some really impressive totals if only ratios and banding cooperate. Still think someone somewhere in S IA exceeds 15".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mimillman said:

To be fair to LOT at least, onset of precipitation is later than previously modeled, looking more like Monday late afternoon/early evening. So a watch hoisted in 12 hours makes sense, it’ll probably end up happening in the wee hours of the AM as Ricky alluded to. As for eastern DVN, they’re probably coordinating with LOT

Yes, exactly. There is a large amount of collaboration that takes place and consistency from office to office is pretty much essential. This is true in both the private and public sector. Ultimately all of that will usually end up producing a superior forecast rather than letting one person or idea drive the bus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, purduewx80 said:

Primary differences though are that we have no terrain to enhance convergence, and y’all also have salty ocean air which can produce efficient snowflakes at warmer temps. 
 

I kinda feel like the warmer temps and stronger winds near the lake here Monday will negate any modest lake enhancement. Tuesday is a different story if the colder/slower solutions verify. 

I think warmer temps aloft and less lake enhancement on Monday will be compensated by the fact its mostly an overnight event. And just in time as Tuesday rolls around, low passes to our south, temps are colder and lake enhancement can begin

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, zinski1990 said:

You guys are all so lucky. Tired of storms missing us down here or looking good then suddenly sailing east 3 days out

I hear you, guy. I'm down here west of Cincy and this year has been terrible. I sometimes think the OV should have its own regional page. Our weather is so different from the Lakes region..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So have been taking a closer look at BUFKIT soundings and Cobb output from PSU and starting to think the initial burst late afternoon into evening will have higher ratios than you'd think given the surface temps.

 

Attached below is the 18z NAM BUFKIT sounding for ORD valid 03z Tuesday. GFS is similar but faster, implying heavy snow as early as 22z Monday.

 

The white line to the left of the T/Td trace is omega and yellow line on the temp trace is the DGZ. We look for good alignment of strongest lift with the DGZ to feel confident about higher snowfall rates. In the case of this sounding, the omega is strong at greater than -20 ubar/sec and very well aligned with the DGZ. Another factor is the very steep mid upper lapse rates above 550 mb at near or over 8C/km, which is another favorable element for heavy convective snow rates.

 

As mentioned above, the GFS is faster with this signature seen on NAM sounding and even a hair stronger omega between -25 and -30 ubar/sec.

 

Given all these favorable factors, I think the Cobb ratio should be given consideration, because the Cobb takes into account favorable lift through DGZ. Output for 18z NAM and GFS is 13-15:1 for several hours after onset of initial burst of snow.

 

I'm not sure I'd yet go 15:1 ratios, but I think these soundings and Cobb output make a good case to go with around climo (~12:1) and certainly no lower than 10:1 SLR late Monday afternoon through Monday evening.

 

Edit: And forgot to add, the DGZ itself is pretty deep at about 3kft, which certainly doesn't hurt.

ac308768b870d5d172eb2b6fb32aaf47.jpg&key=2cd7aea997824351680324847b38f78c55d8e5ae3addd2448a18dc4d6fbcae1b

 

 

 

 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
there is nothing to suggest this will underperform.
that max area in IA/N MO is primed.

The slower this exits, the more the defo band weakens. Combine that with a mid level dry slot & a weakening storm as it moves East, you have an underperformer. You’re a pro, you should know this man
  • Like 1
  • Weenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chuckster2012 said:

I hear you, guy. I'm down here west of Cincy and this year has been terrible. I sometimes think the OV should have its own regional page. Our weather is so different from the Lakes region..

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. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nwohweather said:


The slower this exits, the more the defo band weakens. Combine that with a mid level dry slot & a weakening storm as it moves East, you have an underperformer. You’re a pro, you should know this man

Yea, for areas east such as portions of IN/MI/OH that will be affected. However, for areas to the west (IA/N MO) it's locked in.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

So have been taking a closer look at BUFKIT soundings and Cobb output from PSU and starting to think the initial burst late afternoon into evening will have higher ratios than you'd think given the surface temps.

 

Attached below is the 18z NAM BUFKIT sounding for ORD valid 03z Tuesday. GFS is similar but faster, implying heavy snow as early as 22z Monday.

 

The white line to the left of the T/Td trace is omega and yellow line on the temp trace is the DGZ. We look for good alignment of strongest lift with the DGZ to feel confident about higher snowfall rates. In the case of this sounding, the omega is strong at greater than -20 ubar/sec and very well aligned with the DGZ. Another factor is the very steep mid upper lapse rates above 550 mb at near or over 8C/km, which is another favorable element for heavy convective snow rates.

 

As mentioned above, the GFS is faster with this signature seen on NAM sounding and even a hair stronger omega between -25 and -30 ubar/sec.

 

Given all these favorable factors, I think the Cobb ratio should be given consideration, because the Cobb takes into account favorable lift through DGZ. Output for 18z NAM and GFS is 13-15:1 for several hours after onset of initial burst of snow.

 

I'm not sure I'd yet go 15:1 ratios, but I think these soundings and Cobb output make a good case to go with around climo (~12:1) and certainly no lower than 10:1 SLR late Monday afternoon through Monday evening.

 

Edit: And forgot to add, the DGZ itself is pretty deep at about 3kft, which certainly doesn't hurt.

ac308768b870d5d172eb2b6fb32aaf47.jpg&key=2cd7aea997824351680324847b38f78c55d8e5ae3addd2448a18dc4d6fbcae1b

 

 

 

 

Great analysis, thanks for this.

FWIW, looks like Kuchera maps have been hovering around 11-12:1 for most of the CWA, so seems reasonable and perhaps per your work above, upside from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

So have been taking a closer look at BUFKIT soundings and Cobb output from PSU and starting to think the initial burst late afternoon into evening will have higher ratios than you'd think given the surface temps.

 

Attached below is the 18z NAM BUFKIT sounding for ORD valid 03z Tuesday. GFS is similar but faster, implying heavy snow as early as 22z Monday.

 

The white line to the left of the T/Td trace is omega and yellow line on the temp trace is the DGZ. We look for good alignment of strongest lift with the DGZ to feel confident about higher snowfall rates. In the case of this sounding, the omega is strong at greater than -20 ubar/sec and very well aligned with the DGZ. Another factor is the very steep mid upper lapse rates above 550 mb at near or over 8C/km, which is another favorable element for heavy convective snow rates.

 

As mentioned above, the GFS is faster with this signature seen on NAM sounding and even a hair stronger omega between -25 and -30 ubar/sec.

 

Given all these favorable factors, I think the Cobb ratio should be given consideration, because the Cobb takes into account favorable lift through DGZ. Output for 18z NAM and GFS is 13-15:1 for several hours after onset of initial burst of snow.

 

I'm not sure I'd yet go 15:1 ratios, but I think these soundings and Cobb output make a good case to go with around climo (~12:1) and certainly no lower than 10:1 SLR late Monday afternoon through Monday evening.

 

Edit: And forgot to add, the DGZ itself is pretty deep at about 3kft, which certainly doesn't hurt.

ac308768b870d5d172eb2b6fb32aaf47.jpg&key=2cd7aea997824351680324847b38f78c55d8e5ae3addd2448a18dc4d6fbcae1b

 

 

 

 

Love seeing bufkit being used. Warms my heart.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, purduewx80 said:

Primary differences though are that we have no terrain to enhance convergence, and y’all also have salty ocean air which can produce efficient snowflakes at warmer temps. 
 

I kinda feel like the warmer temps and stronger winds near the lake here Monday will negate any modest lake enhancement. Tuesday is a different story if the colder/slower solutions verify. 

The orographic effects are big.  That’s one way the Tug gets working in their favor.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, for areas east such as portions of IN/MI/OH that will be affected. However, for areas to the west (IA/N MO) it's locked in.

I agree with that. But I’d throw Illinois in there as well with IN/MI/OH. Rooting for all though lol don’t think I’m completely pessimistic. Stronger this storm is, the more warmth I get. Looks like I’ll make a run at 80 on Tuesday
  • Weenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

So have been taking a closer look at BUFKIT soundings and Cobb output from PSU and starting to think the initial burst late afternoon into evening will have higher ratios than you'd think given the surface temps.

 

Attached below is the 18z NAM BUFKIT sounding for ORD valid 03z Tuesday. GFS is similar but faster, implying heavy snow as early as 22z Monday.

 

The white line to the left of the T/Td trace is omega and yellow line on the temp trace is the DGZ. We look for good alignment of strongest lift with the DGZ to feel confident about higher snowfall rates. In the case of this sounding, the omega is strong at greater than -20 ubar/sec and very well aligned with the DGZ. Another factor is the very steep mid upper lapse rates above 550 mb at near or over 8C/km, which is another favorable element for heavy convective snow rates.

 

As mentioned above, the GFS is faster with this signature seen on NAM sounding and even a hair stronger omega between -25 and -30 ubar/sec.

 

Given all these favorable factors, I think the Cobb ratio should be given consideration, because the Cobb takes into account favorable lift through DGZ. Output for 18z NAM and GFS is 13-15:1 for several hours after onset of initial burst of snow.

 

I'm not sure I'd yet go 15:1 ratios, but I think these soundings and Cobb output make a good case to go with around climo (~12:1) and certainly no lower than 10:1 SLR late Monday afternoon through Monday evening.

 

Edit: And forgot to add, the DGZ itself is pretty deep at about 3kft, which certainly doesn't hurt.

ac308768b870d5d172eb2b6fb32aaf47.jpg&key=2cd7aea997824351680324847b38f78c55d8e5ae3addd2448a18dc4d6fbcae1b

 

 

 

 

So what you’re saying is, neither the 10:1 or Kuchera maps are 100% accurate? ;)
 

Definitely agree on the locally higher ratios wherever the better meso forcing sets up. Probably lose some of that to riming and fracturing I’d think. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, chuckster2012 said:

I hear you, guy. I'm down here west of Cincy and this year has been terrible. I sometimes think the OV should have its own regional page. Our weather is so different from the Lakes region..

Same. I swear I feel sometimes we just get left out lol. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, RCNYILWX said:

So have been taking a closer look at BUFKIT soundings and Cobb output from PSU and starting to think the initial burst late afternoon into evening will have higher ratios than you'd think given the surface temps.

 

Attached below is the 18z NAM BUFKIT sounding for ORD valid 03z Tuesday. GFS is similar but faster, implying heavy snow as early as 22z Monday.

 

The white line to the left of the T/Td trace is omega and yellow line on the temp trace is the DGZ. We look for good alignment of strongest lift with the DGZ to feel confident about higher snowfall rates. In the case of this sounding, the omega is strong at greater than -20 ubar/sec and very well aligned with the DGZ. Another factor is the very steep mid upper lapse rates above 550 mb at near or over 8C/km, which is another favorable element for heavy convective snow rates.

 

As mentioned above, the GFS is faster with this signature seen on NAM sounding and even a hair stronger omega between -25 and -30 ubar/sec.

 

Given all these favorable factors, I think the Cobb ratio should be given consideration, because the Cobb takes into account favorable lift through DGZ. Output for 18z NAM and GFS is 13-15:1 for several hours after onset of initial burst of snow.

 

I'm not sure I'd yet go 15:1 ratios, but I think these soundings and Cobb output make a good case to go with around climo (~12:1) and certainly no lower than 10:1 SLR late Monday afternoon through Monday evening.

 

Edit: And forgot to add, the DGZ itself is pretty deep at about 3kft, which certainly doesn't hurt.

ac308768b870d5d172eb2b6fb32aaf47.jpg&key=2cd7aea997824351680324847b38f78c55d8e5ae3addd2448a18dc4d6fbcae1b

 

 

 

 

Thanks Rick for this. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, chuckster2012 said:

I hear you, guy. I'm down here west of Cincy and this year has been terrible. I sometimes think the OV should have its own regional page. Our weather is so different from the Lakes region..

Snow wise yes. Doesn’t make sense for severe weather though, both Lakes & Ohio Valley often face the same outbreaks. Don’t get me wrong, I like tracking snowstorms, but for some of us it’s tornadoes & derechos that are the real thrill

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Y'all south of here that are not in the game for this one... I get it.  I am going  on 3 years since having a 6" storm, which is really bad for my climo, but there's a banter thread to talk about how bad things have been going.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what you’re saying is, neither the 10:1 or Kuchera maps are 100% accurate?
 
Definitely agree on the locally higher ratios wherever the better meso forcing sets up. Probably lose some of that to riming and fracturing I’d think. 
Yeah agree, that's why thinking closer to climo would work for the various negating factors including those you mentioned. I'm briefing the mid shift that I think our ratios are a bit low for Monday PM for the all snow areas.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Hoosier said:

Y'all south of here that are not in the game for this one... I get it.  I am going  on 3 years since having a 6" storm, which is really bad for my climo, but there's a banter thread to talk about how bad things have been going.

kicked to the curb.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, A-L-E-K said:

Speeding up?

Not this run as of yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More ridging ahead of the ejecting wave, and a bit less confluence in the Lakes this run.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.