Tim Stoecklein
EF5
We'll let you know, as we'll see it here tomorrow into Wednesday. They've been giddy about this one for several days now, as apparently we all have. I just want to see some snow......
Tim
Tim
1/6/2005: SIGNIFICANT PLAINS/MIDWEST WINTER STORM
- Thread starter Robert Dewey
- Start date
Robert Dewey
EF5
Things still look interesting... The 18Z FSL RUC is beginning to pick up the event, and is quite moist with this system. The FSL RUC verified pretty darn well in regards to the last strong winter storm (Ohio Valley) in terms of QPF and SFC low positioning.
I am also trying to decide whether or not to run the Workstation ETA using the GFS as initialization, on a 12KM grid scale and KF convective scheme, just to see how the QPF sets up (since the GFS appears to be more stable with the track, and is currently doing a better job at verification). But, I have found that doing this will actually kill a winter storm :wink:
NWS DTX has a watch out for greater than 8 inches of snow, and that is pretty rare considering the event is still quite a ways out, and DTX only reserves the "greater than 8 inch" wording for the strongest of storms (or so I have noticed, most of the time it's "greater than 6 inches").
I am also trying to decide whether or not to run the Workstation ETA using the GFS as initialization, on a 12KM grid scale and KF convective scheme, just to see how the QPF sets up (since the GFS appears to be more stable with the track, and is currently doing a better job at verification). But, I have found that doing this will actually kill a winter storm :wink:
NWS DTX has a watch out for greater than 8 inches of snow, and that is pretty rare considering the event is still quite a ways out, and DTX only reserves the "greater than 8 inch" wording for the strongest of storms (or so I have noticed, most of the time it's "greater than 6 inches").
Dan Cook
EF5
LOT's waiting for the 00 models to upgrade their watch any further.
Jeff Lawson
EF3
Winter Storm Watches are up here in eastern Nebraska, and OAX seems confident enough in the models and their forecast to go ahead and set start times for the Winter Storm Warnings (Noon tomorrow for my location). Forecast calls for as much as 12 inches of snow.
EDIT: Actually, looks like NO Winter Storm Watch. They just went ahead and issued a Winter Storm Warning for the entire CWA, starting at various times of day tomorrow for certain zones. So, technically, the Winter Storm Warning has been issued, but it's not yet in effect. Weird. Or perhaps it's normal, and I've just lived in Texas too long.
EDIT: Actually, looks like NO Winter Storm Watch. They just went ahead and issued a Winter Storm Warning for the entire CWA, starting at various times of day tomorrow for certain zones. So, technically, the Winter Storm Warning has been issued, but it's not yet in effect. Weird. Or perhaps it's normal, and I've just lived in Texas too long.
rdale
EF5
"So, technically, the Winter Storm Warning has been issued, but it's not yet in effect."
That's normal... Same thing for a watch - my area is under a winter storm watch tomorrow issued today (wouldn't make sense to wait til an event starts to send the warning!)
I'm calling for 4-8" in the Lansing area with 8-12" south and east towards the state line.
- rd
PS No need to post "we're waiting for the next model run" because we're all waiting for the next model run, and no need to post just stating that your area is under a watch or warning because we all see the national graphics with watches & warnings...
That's normal... Same thing for a watch - my area is under a winter storm watch tomorrow issued today (wouldn't make sense to wait til an event starts to send the warning!)
I'm calling for 4-8" in the Lansing area with 8-12" south and east towards the state line.
- rd
PS No need to post "we're waiting for the next model run" because we're all waiting for the next model run, and no need to post just stating that your area is under a watch or warning because we all see the national graphics with watches & warnings...
Jeff Lawson
EF3
I've seen it done with Winter Storm Watches, but never a Warning. Not to say it doesn't happen...it just surprised me, especially given that, for some locations, the warning wouldn't kick in for another 24 hours after issuance. Seems like it would make more sense to issue a Watch today and then upgrade to a Warning tomorrow at the necessary time.
When I was a student intern at FTW years ago, I don't remember ever being around when a Winter Storm Watch or Warning was issued, so I didn't remember the exact protocol off the top of my head.
Robert Dewey
EF5
Hey, ya gotta keep the thread on top somehow!
Anyway Rob, it's interesting to see your forecast -- Our local ABC station (WXYZ) didn't mention any accumulations, and didn't even mention the watch until well into the 6:00PM edition, which I was quite surprised at.
Your forecast looks about right, no need to go bonkers with totals when the storm is just barely making the CA coast as of now. Things can always be tuned up or down as the situation evolves...
David Schuttler
EF5
Me think RD is looking for a mod job ......
Robert Dewey
EF5
I think the reason for the early warning, is that many NWS are expecting this to be a pretty significant event, or at least that's how it looks right now. Still time for things to change, but better to get the warning out early than to have no warning at all. My personal guess, based on observations over the years, is that our local NWS (DTX/GRR) won't issue a warning until tomorrow afternoons package or perhaps even as late as the Wednesday A.M. discussion... They usually give a 12 hour lead time...
rdale
EF5
"Seems like it would make more sense to issue a Watch today and then upgrade to a Warning tomorrow at the necessary time. "
It's a confidence thing... For some areas this is a high confidence event, so no sense putting off something.
As for Detroit's TV weathercasters - they aren't well known for the meteorological abilities.
- Rob
It's a confidence thing... For some areas this is a high confidence event, so no sense putting off something.
As for Detroit's TV weathercasters - they aren't well known for the meteorological abilities.
- Rob
Joel Wright
EF5
This storm appears to be sort of a two parter. Looks like a quick shot of precip will shoot out tomorrow and tomorrow night, while the main energy takes it's sweet time in coming through. I wouldn't be surprised if the main part of the storm slows down even further in future runs allowing for a much larger break between "waves", possibly over 12hrs. So it would almost be like two different storm systems all together. A lot of times when this happens snow amounts are overforecasted a bit. This is just my little observation. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
Robert Dewey
EF5
Actually, I think you may be looking at the "overrunning" event before the actual storm swings through... In cases like this, forecasted snowfall amounts are usually UNDER forecast (i.e. very similar situation with the deformation zone in the Ohio Valley on the 12/23 monster snowstorm). I can already say this about the ETA -- It appears too weak with the 500mb trough just off the CA coast... OBS indicated the 540 height contour making it into western CA, where as the ETA don't even have a 540 contour.
Mike Umscheid
EF4
In Dodge City, KS, we are bracing for a major ice event...especially for high plains standards... as climatology/geography does NOT favor southwest Kansas for major freezing rain events... they occur, but the .50 to 1.00"+ ice storms are about a 15 to 20 year event (that's a guess, I'd have to look at the actual LCDs)... December 1984 was a big event... in a typical major winter storm, the cold layer in western kansas is deep enough for most of the event to be in the form of snow... it is very rare to see the high plains of southwest kansas getting all freezing rain event... or the majority of the event being freezing rain. just northwest of here, it appears the cold air will be deep enough in the lowest layers for sleet... prolonged sleet is also very unusual, and it appears this will happen in a narrow strip across western Kansas.
Then wednesday morning, as the 10-15F arctic air plunges south, driving north winds on the high plains will sway the ice-laden trees/powerlines, creating a hell of a time. Needless to say, winter storm warnings are in effect for much of kansas already for largely a prolonged ice storm (somewhat similar to January 29-31, 2002, but probably not as much precipitation). We've used verbage such as "power outages can be expected" in our warning for southwest kansas.
Mike U
Then wednesday morning, as the 10-15F arctic air plunges south, driving north winds on the high plains will sway the ice-laden trees/powerlines, creating a hell of a time. Needless to say, winter storm warnings are in effect for much of kansas already for largely a prolonged ice storm (somewhat similar to January 29-31, 2002, but probably not as much precipitation). We've used verbage such as "power outages can be expected" in our warning for southwest kansas.
Mike U
Robert Dewey
EF5
NOTE: I changed the title of the thread to incorporate the ice event and expand the potentially affected areas.
Robert Dewey
EF5
After looking at the ETA, and using the GEM and NGM as a "first guess" model (to see if they are in similar agreement), things are looking good for a very significant snowstorm across the Great Lakes region (of course, other regions are affected, I am somewhat biased to the Great Lakes -- IL/IN/MI/OH/WI).
IF, and this is a big IF, the 00Z JAN 03 2004 run of the ETA is correct with the amount of moisture, vertical velocity, frontogenesis, vorticity, and ultimately the location of the bariclinic/deformation zone, I would venture to say that a pretty broad band of 16-20 inches would be a pretty good bet from eastern IA to southeastern lower MI. QPF in this region is on the order of 1.15 inches, and I decided to use a snow ratio of 1 to 18 as opposed to the previous 1 to 20, since the air will be slightly warmer than previously thought. Within that heavy band, it is quite possible that CSI may allow for a very intense band of snow given the direction of the flow, orientation of the baroclinic zone, and system movement along the boundary. I would not be at all surprised to see someone end up with 24 inches, again, if the ETA verifies.
Obviously no true forecaster is going to stick their neck out and paint such a snowy picture, but for the sake of this forum, for kicks, and the fact that I called it on the Ohio Valley storm by some lucky pick of the straw (I actually underforecast that one), here we go. :wink:
EDIT: The latest GFS is in, and it certainly put a kink in things. It has trended pretty far south with the QPF axis (over the Midwest/Great Lakes) compared to the ETA, NGM, FSL RUC, and Canadian GEM models. The 00Z FSL RUC seems to have some problems at 500mb at the 48 hour time frame by being overly aggressive. So, the ETA is the farthest north and would produce the most snow, while the GFS appears to be the furthest south, with the least snow...
IF, and this is a big IF, the 00Z JAN 03 2004 run of the ETA is correct with the amount of moisture, vertical velocity, frontogenesis, vorticity, and ultimately the location of the bariclinic/deformation zone, I would venture to say that a pretty broad band of 16-20 inches would be a pretty good bet from eastern IA to southeastern lower MI. QPF in this region is on the order of 1.15 inches, and I decided to use a snow ratio of 1 to 18 as opposed to the previous 1 to 20, since the air will be slightly warmer than previously thought. Within that heavy band, it is quite possible that CSI may allow for a very intense band of snow given the direction of the flow, orientation of the baroclinic zone, and system movement along the boundary. I would not be at all surprised to see someone end up with 24 inches, again, if the ETA verifies.
Obviously no true forecaster is going to stick their neck out and paint such a snowy picture, but for the sake of this forum, for kicks, and the fact that I called it on the Ohio Valley storm by some lucky pick of the straw (I actually underforecast that one), here we go. :wink:
EDIT: The latest GFS is in, and it certainly put a kink in things. It has trended pretty far south with the QPF axis (over the Midwest/Great Lakes) compared to the ETA, NGM, FSL RUC, and Canadian GEM models. The 00Z FSL RUC seems to have some problems at 500mb at the 48 hour time frame by being overly aggressive. So, the ETA is the farthest north and would produce the most snow, while the GFS appears to be the furthest south, with the least snow...
Similar threads
