11/30/2006 FCST: IL / MI / IL / MO / KS / OK (WINTER PRECIP)

[Robert Dewey]

Latest NCEP statements saying the ECMWF should be used with this storm as the other models (mainly the NAM and GFS) are too far to the northwest. ECMWF has been the most stable with the track (lines up with the GGEM and RGEM to some extent), and is more "appropriate" for such a storm system (I'm guessing they mean climatologicaly speaking).

After looking at the 21Z SREF members and the 00Z ensembles, the NAM and GFS do appear to be the odd men out. The NAM yet again picks one of the farthest west tracks out of the other SREF members:

http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/gmb/tp...rack.srperts.2006112921.east_coast.single.gif

I'll stick with my original heavy snow target of MO/IA/IL, but I'm prepared to make drastic changes if some of the other (majority?) SREF members become reality.

 

[beaudodson]

Sitting here in Peoria - Downtown. Drove 5 hours for this one. Looks like this is going to be a good spot. 700 VV are very impressive. I am looking for thundersnow and ice later tonight/tomorrow morning. Will be curious to see if we can get blizzard conditions through here. Winds might not make it though. They are expecting gusts to 40 mph. Should be a lot of blowing and drifting.

I am concerned that BUFKIT shows a ton of ice before the snow falls. Something to consider. Model tracks all seem to be merging on a solution now with the track of the low and the upper support.

Hoping for the best.

 

[Robert Dewey]

I've been watching the past few runs of the NAM... There's a slight weakning trend, and the column is getting progressively cooler across lower MI. The 18Z NAM barely brings the 850MB 3C isotherm into MI, with LAN riding the 0C through the entire event. It will be interesting to see what happens, a 25-50 miles jog in the 850MB 0C line will make all the difference to those along the rain/snow line.

 

[Mike Kovalchick]

Speaking of riding on the 850mb 0C line..here in Lansing I noticed on the SPC Mesoanalysis page that the RUC shows the OC line about 100 miles further SE than the GFS/NAM forecast position. If it represents reality, perhaps a slightly cooler solution is going to verify.

 

[Ed Boik]

From what I can tell, it seems as if ILX is trying to be conservative on the total snowfall amounts. Is there that much dry air that the total amounts in the heavy snow band would be knocked down 2-6 inches lower than adjacent WFAs?

 

[Jesse Risley]

From what I can tell, it seems as if ILX is trying to be conservative on the total snowfall amounts. Is there that much dry air that the total amounts in the heavy snow band would be knocked down 2-6 inches lower than adjacent WFAs?

From looking at the latest model runs, it appears as if the "bulls eye" for heavy snow will be in the SE IA/NE ME/W IL corridor, which bascially excludes all but the far western FA for ILX. Indications seem to suggest NW of the IL River will bear the brunt....I'm guessing that explains their more conservative tone?

 

[Jeff Snyder]

I just moved a slew of posts out of this thread and into the NOW thread... Remember that posts in FCST threads must pertain to FUTURE weather (i.e. it must be a forecast). If your material contains to ongoing weather, please use the pertinent NOW thread.