Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,508
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

Feb 1-3rd GHD III Part 3


Chicago Storm
 Share

Recommended Posts

Curious as to why some have said not to use Kuchera maps for totals? I'm not looking for a reason to inflate totals IMBY by any means, but when the snow starts here it will be 5, 6 or 7:1,  for several hours and may even jump back down to those until temps really drop. Isn't there inflation in that using 10:1? 

 

I always thought Kuchera used lesser and better ratios  for a more realistic number. I watched the beginnings of the 0Z HRRR rum comparing between the two and 10:1 was better than using Kuchera.

 

I understand both maps are grain of salt and manual reviews needed(I'm not that smart :lol: ), but when I went through a GFS run using Bufkit output there were weird fluctuations in ratios throughout it as well.

Been using the 10:1 maps when looking at totals, but they seem somewhat inflated at the beginning and somewhat low towards the end. Is that average start and finish enough to use that over Kuchera?

 

Sorry for the long post during a model run :lol:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, frostfern said:

I don't know how many people who post are old enough to remember 1978.  I always see these pictures of what looks like three feet of snow and drifts up to the roofs of cars but it seems misleading.  My folks don't remember the details, but they seem to imply that there was a already a decent amount of snow on the ground before the storm.  It would be like if you combined the constant clipper trains of Jan/Feb 2014 with GHD 1.  GHD 1 happened after a cold and dry January with otherwise below normal snowfall.  I imagine if there was already quite a bit of snow on the ground that was still powdery enough to blow and added whatever 12-18" fell in that particular storm you'd get those kind of drifts you see in pictures that give the illusion it snowed 6 feet.  People you talk to still seem to think it snowed 2 feet in that storm when in reality it didn't.  It never has snowed 2 feet in 24 hours.

GR daily data:

image.png.6c3c7647633ff29887cdd7a32a9696ca.png

Looks like there indeed was a solid 8" base on the morning of the 25th as the storm was setting in. Then you add your fresh storm snowfall of about 19" and suddenly you have a 27" depth giving the general public the same feel that a 27" storm from scratch would have given. With all the massive drifting, it's not hard to see why Joe Public equated it with a 2 foot storm. 

While GR had temps remain below freezing, there were a lot of places S and E of there that actually had melting conditions leading up to the bliz, so their snow was just a crust to get flash frozen, it wasn't contributing to blowing and drifting. Such was the case in Genesee county where I was at the time. OH ofc had rain and 40's so all those huge drifts you see in photos came via the storm itself. Oh, and the 24 hr snowfall record for Michigan is 32" btw. Much more than 24".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RogueWaves said:

GR daily data:

image.png.6c3c7647633ff29887cdd7a32a9696ca.png

Looks like there indeed was a solid 8" base on the morning of the 25th as the storm was setting in. Then you add your fresh storm snowfall of about 19" and suddenly you have a 27" depth giving the general public the same feel that a 27" storm from scratch would have given. With all the massive drifting, it's not hard to see why Joe Public equated it with a 2 foot storm. 

While GR had temps remain below freezing, there were a lot of places S and E of there that actually had melting conditions leading up to the bliz, so their snow was just a crust to get flash frozen, it wasn't contributing to blowing and drifting. Such was the case in Genesee county where I was at the time. OH ofc had rain and 40's so all those huge drifts you see in photos came via the storm itself. Oh, and the 24 hr snowfall record for Michigan is 32" btw. Much more than 24".

I think the 8" on the ground was still fairly fresh.  There was no intermediate thaw.  It makes sense the drifts were huge with 27 inches of powder being blown around by blizzard force winds.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Harry said:

 

Total for Jan 67 was 28.6. storm total not daily total which I posted. 

21.1 on Jan 26 and 7.5 on Jan 27. Qpf total was amazing with 2.86! Rare beast for this part of the world. Straight 10-1 ratios.. 

Keep in mind probably have had many of storms that say started at noon and finished noon the next day. 

And I believe there was a report of 30" a bit to the NW of BC. Out towards Richland? If true, isn't that crazy that depth was hit with 10:1 ratio and not some fluffed-up high ratio storm? Like you said, it's East Coast stuff, not MW stuff what happened in '67. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hoosier said:

Been raining good.  I'd have to think on it but can't recall this amount of rain right before as big of a snowstorm as this looks to be.  Usually it's more drizzly/light if it occurs.

Blizzard of Nov '89 (The Mitt Special) it rained all day on the 15th, well into the night before switching over maybe 10-11 pm. Only 12" fell after change-over where I was in NEMI, but some areas saw 2 feet with the aid of lake enhancement. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...