Monday, February 18, 2013

Late Week Snow Possibilites... And More to Follow?

There's been a lot of talk about possible accumulating snow for later this week. It remains to be seen what will happen, of course, but Minnesota snow lovers are feeling the love between that possibility and others that appear to be following.

From Fox 9 Feb. 20. Graphic says 5.5 for metro; fine print says 2-4.

NWS forecast as of Monday mid-afternoon.


92 comments:

  1. The NWS currently prognosticates around 6 inches for the Twin Cities by Friday.

    http://www.crh.noaa.gov/wxstory.php?site=mpx

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was really looking forward to a 3-day work week. With those amounts, I'll need the help of some wind if I am to sleep in on Friday!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Accuweather says 4-8" Thursday/Friday.
    For Sunday/Monday they have just over a 12".
    I know they are unreliable,but they have to be right sometimes,right?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Winter Storm Watch is up for the metro area and points south. Still too early for predictions since a few of the models still vary a bit in strength. It certainly won't be the worst storm the metro has seen, but it should make winter enthusiasts happy. That second system that is showing up is still all over the map so we will worry about that one after we get through this first batch of powder.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It seems like forever since we got a named storm affecting us,Hurray Q is coming!How childish!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Direct quote from this morning's NWS area discussion: AN ACTIVE FORECAST PERIOD IS AHEAD...WITH MULTIPLE SIGNIFICANT /6+
    INCH/ SNOWFALL EVENTS APPEARING MORE LIKELY WITH TIME. I sure hope they are right!! Let it snow!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. With all this hype so far out from the storm, does anybody see a huge bust potential here, or is this as certain as certain can get regarding a snowstorm?

    ReplyDelete
  8. We're 2+ days out from storm #1, and I don't think it will be "certain" until I can see the snow flying with my own eyes!

    I sure am hoping for the best/most! The NWS discussion this morning sure is encouraging for snow enthusiasts.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anyone look at the weather story. NWS is going all out! (at least with storm #1)

    http://www.crh.noaa.gov/wxstory.php?site=mpx

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'd love to hear from those on the board that are less optimistic about the snowfall amounts that are being (almost) promised now. A lot of quiet forecasters on the board right now! Anybody still not buying it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dave Dahl is buying it.........he said 6-10 inches on his 8:30am radio spot on KS95 this morning.Was also funny reading DD's blog on Sunday evening in regards to our 2 potential snowstorms,his last line read: "Bring it on"..............a man after your own heart there PWL!

      Delete
  11. 12z ECMWF nailing us with that second system. And still strong with the first.

    Keeping fingers crossed.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Its going to be a very active few weeks. 20+ inches between now and March 10 looks like a good chance.

    ReplyDelete
  13. FANTASTIC!!!! Hoping for a fun snow day soon for the kiddos.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Keep in mind everyone, that when MPX mentions several 6+ inch snow events possible they are referring to their whole CWA and not specifically the Twin Cities. So if the metro happens to not see at least 6 inches from one or the other or both but areas down by Albert Lea or St. Cloud or Alexandria do...then their forecast is correct. I'm sure everyone knew this, but just in case :) This should help with snowmobiling in the area, plow services, and hopefully a slow enough melt happens in the spring that we can put a big dent in that drought that is still there.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Thursday/Friday storm falling apart?,Wunderground has only 40%/30% chances respectively for snow with only "up to 3 inches possible",why are they saying that while at the same time DD says 6-10 and NWS says 5-8,interesting someone will bust!

    ReplyDelete
  16. looking at things quickly, I suspect we could see about 2-4" across the metro less north more south. Update later tonight. King Euro has not been so good for us lately, and as normal I'm throwing the NAM under the bus. One thing has become apparent since Feb 13th, the GGEM got a huge upgrade on that date, and it has been consistent on bringing the weakening low across IL/IN instead of further to the NW. Its seems to have performed well, as the 19/12z euro has caved to it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Get ready for an Winter Advisory and a lot of tap dancing from the NWS,as well as DD,cuz I can see this storm dwindle to nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  18. DD's forecast was a little confusing. On the website, he mentions 6-10 for the southern half but only shows 3-5" for the metro on TV (with more to the southeast but not the 6-10). Wish the forecasters would help us out by having consistent presentations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. which by the way was 2-4 at the minnesota level map, which became 3-5 when zooming in at the immediate metro level. If you noticed....

      Delete
    2. Did notice that. Good catch!

      Delete
  19. NWS seems to be forecasting 4-7 for my area, certainly below the wide swath of 8-12 they were talking about a couple days ago, and the numbers have been trending downward.

    ReplyDelete
  20. CPC now has heavy snow for the 24th to the 25th.

    http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/threats/hazards_d3_7_contours.png

    http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/threats/threats_ie.php

    ReplyDelete
  21. Looking at the model's QPF for MSP I see this:

    18z/2/19 GFS = .28
    12z/2/19 Gem = .33 (estimate)
    12z/2/19 Euro = .35

    I wished I had the UKMET, but the site that I use didn't load in the 12z/19 run, but it appears as if it will be slightly lower.

    So taking a average of the models it is real close to the .33 the GEM is showing. I'm expecting something like a 17:1 ratio out of this storm. That would equal about 5.5" of snow.

    Now, looking at the Bufkit sounding forecast I see a dry layer on both the NAM and GFS that has to be overcome. With the winds out of the east, which is generally a drying wind, I think the models are to fast in saturating the column. So I have cut the QPF back by about 20% which may not be enough, but that would yield about 4.5" of snow.

    Therefore I think the 2-4" is reasonable and confidence factor is about 7.5 out of 10. That means there is a 25% chance that what I'm thinking is wrong, if that be the case snow total would be around the 1-3" range.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course, we could see a surprise as with the DEC 8th and 9th storm, but I don't think so.

      Delete
    2. Here is the best I got on the UKMET:

      http://grib2.com/ukmet/CONUS_UKMET_1000-500_SLPTHKPRP_72HR.gif

      Delete
  22. This system has a case of TISS--- The Incredibly Shrinking Snowfall!

    Another one bites the dust,so promising days in advance,just to succumb to mere afterthought like all the rest this season(except one that had the balls to show the metro he was a worthy storm on 12/8-12/9)

    As for Sunday/Monday talk more about that one and it too will meet the same fate of all the others "that looked good for the metro"!

    ReplyDelete
  23. TWC is not real bullish about this storm for the Metro late this week. They are saying that some accumulation of snow is possible.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Bemaki:

    This is the site I generally use for the UKMET and GEM:

    http://meteocentre.com/models/models.php?mod=gemglb&map=na&run=00&lang=en

    Its generally the fastest and it also has metograms that shows the precip amounts in mm, you have to look closely and maybe zoom in to get the accurate total and than convert that to inches.

    This is also a good back up site:

    http://www.plainsweather.com/wxmap/model/

    ReplyDelete
  25. Let the tap dancing begin...............
    especially NWS and KSTP for being soooooo premature with their snowfall totals,its not always the best move to be first.

    ReplyDelete
  26. There certainly appears to be a southern shift to the storm with the latest model runs, especially when looking at the surface low position for Friday. Most models now track the surface low through no. IL instead of central WI.

    However, gut feeling is that forcing at mid & upper levels will easily compensate for the further south track of this storm. In turn, much of MN & WI, including the MSP metro, will receive a healthy snowfall out of this. You can't dispute that we will be in a fantastic area for good dendrite growth from THUR evening into FRI morning. This should lead to well developed fluffy flakes that can accumulate quickly.

    I can't imagine that we will see 6"-10" in the MSP metro, but I wouldn't be shocked if some places reached or exceeded 6" by Friday PM. Of course, heavier amounts as you travel so. on I-35 into IA.

    I'm anxiously awaiting the 00z Euro runs to confirm or dispute the above thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  27. OOZ NAM just came in, shows most of our CWA back in 8-10". While I don't buy it (yet), kind of gives something for snow lovers to get excited about.
    http://grib2.com/gis-snow-overlays3.php3?BASEHR=00Z&STATIONID=MPX

    ReplyDelete
  28. Really?! Two snowstorms lined up to hit MN in the next few days, and its almost been 12 hours since a post?!

    Is anyone interested in "bringing it"?! Anyone peeing their pants?! Any bust-birds ready to chirp?!

    I am personally hoping for as much snow as possible. If everything went according to best-case-scenario outcomes...Friday AND Monday will be great days to work from home!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. It's been pretty quiet on here. I hope it snows its tail off from both of these storms, though I know that that likely will not be what occurs. Anyway, if the metro can pick up another 5-6 inches of snow between the two storms, then I'm all for it. I will keep my fingers crossed for a lot more though!!

      Delete
  29. I've decided to be happy with this Winter. Granted, I'm yearning for green grass and warm weather, but all told it's been a decent Winter. The last few weeks have made it more tolerable with regular snowfall, it just seems that the large storms have not been tracking favorably for us for almost two years now.

    I would prefer that we get at least 6" from each of the coming storms, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I have a feeling they will both be busts.

    ReplyDelete
  30. 12z GFS just latched on to the Mon-Tues storm and pumped it up to 1"+ of precip!

    ReplyDelete
  31. This last weekend the GFS also had us getting nailed 5 days out. I wouldn't get too exited yet.

    ReplyDelete
  32. disgruntled weather fanFebruary 20, 2013 at 2:01 PM

    i have realized that you cannot trust any model until the day before or even the day of. WWA now issued for all of south central MN. The 6-12 that we were targeted for a week ago has turned to nothing at all. Love snow and winter but this is pure craziness with the models and over hyping forecasts. Yes NWS did mention earlier today that most of the area will turn to WWA and little if any CWA would meet the criteria for warning levels. mondays storm will miss us completely or a light dusting, just because the outputs are predicting 1" doesn't mean we will see it.

    ReplyDelete
  33. "The 6-12 that we were targeted for a week ago has turned to nothing at all." Aren't we still in a 3-6" forecasted range? I think models have actually been pretty consistent with this Thurs-Fri storm, even for the past week...NE and IA in the bullseye with MSP getting around 6". If we get half that, I'd say that's pretty good.

    Now if there's a 15:1 ratio for Mon-Tues, that's 17" of snow. If we get half that, it'll be enough to make snow lovers happy around here!

    (This is me thinking "glass half full" here, instead of "if we're not getting a foot of snow, it's nothing").

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Even though for now the Metro is in the 3-6 inch range, the NWS discussion makes it pretty clear that it expects any amounts over 3 inches to occur south of I-90. Translation: the forecast is for approximately 3 inches of snow for the Metro. Don't get me wrong, I'll take it, but it is a far cry from the numbers that were being thrown around the past several days. That is exactly why I did not get excited when I was reading this blog on Sunday morning and several posters were gleaming with the news of a possible big snowstorm in the Metro this week. I have a feeling that the Metro won't get a big snowstorm unless it isn't predicted. A storm will make a last minute shift in its track (e.g. December 2012 snowstorm) and wallop us. It seems that whenever there is talk a few days out of a big snowstorm in the Metro, it never comes to fruition.

      Delete
    2. Agreed! 3-6 is ok, but from what they were predicting is a far cry from what is going to happen. see above, DD said 6-10 just yesterday and then poof! to me, models don't mean much until i see that snow fly out my window. (i never used to be so negative about storms) hoping for a miracle jog north so we can get in on the heavy stuff. good luck on that 17" we may get on Monday/tuesday, Im not MET but that is just not going to happen.

      Delete
  34. I find the complaining quite remarkable. The computer models and forecasts have been consistently showing a major snow event over parts of Nebraska, Iowa, South Dakota, and SW Minnesota for about 10 days. There have been a few times when it hinted that the Twin Cities would maybe get a bit more then it appears, but overall its been a pretty well forecasted storm. The fact, that practically nailing a snow storm 10 days in advance isn't good enough shows just how good the science of meteorology has gotten. 20 years ago, the idea of forecasting a storm two days ahead of time was considered an achievement. 35 years ago you knew a snow storm was coming when snow was reported south of us.

    This appears to be an incredibly well predicted storm that we've been talking about for a week. Any complaints about the forecasting are borderline absurd in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's exactly what I was thinking earlier today when reading comments here, I just couldn't put it into words quite like you did.

      Delete
    2. For what it's worth, I think many people complain on this blog out of frustration about not getting a big snowstorm. They aren't really mad at the models or the mets; they instead use this site as a sounding board to vent. It's human nature. That's just my guess, but I read this blog often and that is the strong impression that I get.

      Delete
  35. Dave Dahl has toned down his 6-10 inch talk from yesterday and falling in line with the NWS and calling for 3-5 inches now on his blog,but he did leave the door open for "additional accumalations" Friday morning because he is seeing a trend of the storm slowing down,first person who I have heard mention that,let's see if that pans out.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Wow,reading this evening's discussion at the NWS,leave a lot of uncertainties with tommorrow night storm and early next weeks,they didn't seem all that confident with their snowfall forecast for Friday nor did they have any confidence that next weeks storm will even happen.

    ReplyDelete
  37. There are still a few things to sort out but for the most part models are somewhat agreeing with things in regards to this first system. 18z GFS did come in a bit higher with its amounts but right now it looks as though the NWS's forecast totals are looking good. Unfortunatly the timing of snow into the metro is going to be right during the morning rush. As mentioned by others, there is some dry air that will have to be overcome before the snow can start reaching the surface and first guesses for the metro are this occuring sometime between 3 and 5am early Fri morning. Once the snow gets through it could fall at a decent clip and should last through a majority of the day. It won't be heavy all day but should at least be falling. The timing of the arrival will probably need to be tweaked through the day on Thursday, but that is just first guess at things. We wait and see now...

    ReplyDelete
  38. Plymouth Weather LoverFebruary 20, 2013 at 7:30 PM

    I love to hear the upward trend of the last run. Bring it!! This is not a bust but we will have to be patient to get it to start. Then, bring it! Let it snow. This is a white wonderland. With another potential big one coming Monday/Tuesday, I might pee my pants but that usually doesn't happen until we are talking a foot or more. Hard to control.......

    ReplyDelete
  39. Plymouth Weather LoverFebruary 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM

    Novak, Big Daddy, Randyinchamplin, Duane, Jaw, Joel, Sam and others.......your thoughts are needed. Bring it!!!! And Hammer. And DD. and Bill.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Is this going to be another of those situations in which the radar shows blue (snow) covering us but nothing falling from the sky? I hate that! LOL

    ReplyDelete
  41. There was an uptick with 18z runs and over all this is a 3 -5 incher of light fluffy dendrites. Burst of s+ then light snow rest of day.Next storm is so interesting. Euro wants to dig it south however Friday's upper low may fugiwara that shortwave back at us with an open gulf and bent back frontal occlusion. That keeps the snow going for long periods. My 2 cents

    ReplyDelete
  42. MPX latest weather story...http://origin-www.crh.noaa.gov/wxstory.php?site=mpx

    I'm still going with 2-4" for most of the metro, and maybe 5" for far south metro like Lakeville. I generally define the metro being Central Anoka county to a Lakeville line. Roughly 45 miles deep.

    BTW could someone who is on facebook ask MPX what model they are using on the latest weather story...it would help.

    I may change that one way or another after I can load both the GFS and NAM into bufkit. I want to see how how deep the dry layer is and how strong. Then I want to see how deep the dendritic growth zone is, (ie: where is the temp profile between -11° and -18°c,) along with the omega or lift if you want to call it that. The last thing I want to look at is how strong is the wind in the dendritic growth zone as that will impact the quality of the crystals.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One other thing, and this will be rather critical, what will the forecast soundings show from the 06z runs for 12z Thursday as opposed to the observed soundings. For a weather enthusiast like me, I'm glad I have tomorrow off, I enjoy forecasting it more than observing it, once it starts my attention than will shift to the next storm. Hint: with the way the new and imporved GEM has handled this system (it got a huge upgrade on Feb. 13th,) I maybe riding that model.

      Delete
  43. Looking at the first frame of the GFS valid 0z on the 21st/0z run, compared to water vapor imagery at the same time, it initialized fairly well as far as the placement, however the WV image shows it slightly stronger, not sure what that means for us, but my thinking is that the system may occlude faster than what the models are showing. Having said that, the NAM is spot on. Now having said that, I have heard rumors that the NAM doesn't have a very good vertical resolution, in other words it may be a little weak in forecasting how the upper level low will progress as it moves over the mountains.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Ok, I normally don't like to throw this many technical terms out there, but I did it because so many people are big time critical of our local mets. If they miss one minor detail it could make or break a forecast. For instance, when I looked at the Water Vapor imagery I forgot to look at the ridge over Hudson Bay as opposed to how the models depict it.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Plymouth Weather LoverFebruary 20, 2013 at 10:25 PM

    Randyinchamplin has this changed your 2-4 inch prediction?

    ReplyDelete
  46. Randyinchamplin - good input.

    Bill - in case you missed the 10:00 pm CBS and NBC forecasts. Belinda Jensen showed a model output with 6" at MSP. Meanwhile, Chris Shafer has MSP in the middle of 1-3". His 3-6" band was close to MSP though, with it reaching to just south of Dakota county. Pretty big difference in those 2 predictions. Also interesting (probably just to me) WCCO used to use the model outputs that would show a storm total at specific locations and KARE would use a more standard color coded range of snow totals. Tonight it was the opposite. Haven't kept enough track this year to tell what each broadcast met has normally used this winter. Anyone see the ABC or FOX predictions?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I see Hammer is on this thread, so ABC is counted as 3-5", which falls in between CBS and NBC.

      Delete
    2. I saw where WCCO recently detailed the model outputs in table form rather than as part of a map graphic. I thought that was slightly better. Interesting that KARE is on the model output/snow meter wagon.

      Delete
  47. PD from 11pm Tuesday night:

    "A deep layer of arctic air will insure all snow; fairly light and powdery Thursday night into Friday. I'm thinking something in the 4-7 inch range; 8-9" for southern MN."

    "All told we'll probably pick up another 10" of snow between now and next Tuesday in the metro. Uh oh. Breaking news."

    http://pauldouglasweather.blogspot.com/2013/02/2-plowable-snows-within-3-days-why.html

    ReplyDelete
  48. Ian said 3-6 he had 5 inches in the metro. ( FOX)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ian's presentation on FB/Twitter was confusing (see graphic posted at top of this blog). He used the dreaded snow meter showing 5.5 for the metro but went on to write 2-4 with pockets of 3-6. Can it get any more confusing?

      Delete
  49. ok I have the GFS and Nam on bufkit, I really don't see a good dendritic snow growth zone until late in the storm, there is dry layer that we have to overcome. Therefore I like my 2-4" for the metro, confidence factor is 7 out of 10. The fly in the ointment is the ride over the Hudson Bay

    ReplyDelete
  50. Sven on Kare 11 is predicting 2-4" in the metro as of this morning.

    ReplyDelete
  51. And the amounts for the Metro keep decreasing. Yesterday morning the NWS had the Metro in the 5-8 inch range. That decreased yesterday afternoon to 5-6, then to 4-5 last night. This morning the range is 3-4. By the time the snow starts it will be 1-3.

    ReplyDelete
  52. National Weather Service said this morning that tomorrow's system and the one early next week will both be pretty weak in the metro area, generally 3 inches each, if that. Somebody on here yesterday said that the metro won't get a big snowstorm unless it is not predicted. I agree. Those models sure look promising several days out, but they always fizzle away with snow amounts at crunch time. I don't have anything against DD, but I have learned over the years that he is very prone to overestimating snowfall predictions. This is another case in point. A day or so ago he was calling for 6-10 inches of snow in the metro from tomorrow's system. I can't even call it a storm anymore. Now, it appears that the metro will be extremely lucky to get 6 inches from tomorrow's system and the system early next week combined. Kare's conservative snow amount approach this season is really paying off for them, unfortunately.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. KARE conservative? They were predicting 6" at MSP as of their 10:00 pm forecast on 2/20.

      Delete
  53. PD says maybe a couple slushy inches with next week's system. "Not as impressive a this one," and this one's not that impressive!

    ReplyDelete
  54. Yawn! Go home, folks. There's nothing to see here. The storms either go north/west of the Metro or south/east. Ho hum. Watch, the Metro will get a big snowstorm in mid-March. That is when nobody really wants one, because it will melt within a few days. Bring on Spring!!

    ReplyDelete
  55. I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict the metro will receive a dusting to 10 inches. With pockets in the metro receiving 2 to 8 inches.

    ReplyDelete
  56. I absolutely love the over-analyzing that goes on this board during these snow systems. It is so funny how we live and die by each model run, even the less than desirable 18z & 06z runs.

    If you simply take a step back and look at the overall picture, truth is, the computer models have done a nice job and have been relatively consistent with the evolution of this storm. Of course, we still have a good 24-36 hours yet to go, but in general, the models have been cranking out approx. 3"-6" for the MSP metro since 2 days ago. If this verifies, then we have to give most of the computer models credit on this one. I can't imagine it will not verify especially when considering how nice and cold it is in the mid layers of our atmosphere. Good dendrite growth zone through much of Friday.

    On the other hand, those who were predicting a block-buster 10"+ snowfall should have learned a valuable lesson with this storm. Don't come out with alarmingly high totals early in the game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I also feel that most of the media outlets were too quick to announce that a major storm was on the horizon that would be greatly impacting the twin cities. Several times they reported possible 6" or more totals, around a week out. Granted things change but I am not sure if it is responsible to throw totals out there that early, or if it is done merely to hype up the story. There has been so much pomp and circumstance you would have thought the queen was coming.

      Delete
    2. Exactly! I think we should all learn from this. The fact of the matter is that once in a great while the models nail a storm several days out, but typically it isn't until 24-48 hours before the arrival of the storm that the models zero in on a "final" forecast. While it is fun to talk about possible big snow totals a week away from the event, it is important for us to keep in mind that that is just what it is, talk, conjecture and hope. In my opinion, any outlet that makes predictions (as opposed to merely mentioning the possibility) of big snows for a specific area more than a couple of days from the event is being irresponsible. Technology needs to be improve substantially before we can start relying on forecasts for storms several days away. Forecasting the weather is part science and part art. Notice that I did not say that it is an exact science, because it clearly is not.

      Delete
    3. I think someone said in a previous thread that there's a disconnect between forecasters and the public sometimes, and I agree. When I hear terms like "interesting" or "significant" or even "plowable" before specific numbers start to get thrown around, I honestly have NO idea what that means. Not that that's anyone's fault necessarily. It just is what it is. Some people will think at least 12+ inches when they hear "interesting" (esp from DD). Others won't. So, I think for some this is where the disillusionment sets in. Mix this with model runs a week out, and it's a perfect recipe for over-hyping and speculation that almost always doesn't pan out.

      Delete
  57. I concur with one of the Anonymous above,most outlets have trended downward the last day or two,case in point:
    NWS....5-8,4-6,4-5,now 3-4
    KSTP....6-10,3-5,now Hammer this morning 2-4
    PD....4-7,now 2-5 as of last post
    Also most are saying "dry air needs to be overcome",I seen so many times when that is said that the snow line gets so dangerously close to metro but only a few flurries sneak into the metro,watch that becomes the case this time and we receive nothing substanial.Next week system doesn't even look like it will even get here on most models,in the end these cant even be called snowstorms anymore,just nuiscances!

    ReplyDelete
  58. Tracking Q: Jim Cantore looks good in Lincoln,Neb.,one of these days,if Randyinchamplain is correct with his 'major snow 2/15 to 3/15",he may make a stop in Minneapolis!

    ReplyDelete
  59. WCCO midday went with 3-6 for metro.

    ReplyDelete
  60. For Sunday/Monday the 12Z GFS takes the low through Chicago, while the GEM and EMCWF take it through southern IL towards the Ohio Valley. Guess it's looking like no 2nd storm.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep!was just going to post that the NWS has dropped next week system %'s no higher then 30%,when just yesterday they had 40/50%.
      Alot of crow to pass around for all those who have said the last few days "1-2 punch of snow coming".........."2 plowable events in 3 days".............."5-10inches of snow for metro to add to the February totals"........."2 systems on track to impact the county warning area",the list goes on and on!
      I couldn't agree more,maybe this is what we need to get a major snowfall,put our guard down,forecast flurries and then hope for a surprise shift.

      Delete
  61. C'mon now...there's no crow for dinner here! The models were CLEARLY forecasting big snows for Mon-Tues next week, and then they shifted. If the NWS was completely silent regarding that storm, people would have been crying "WHERE'S THE NWS?!" And what if they were the ONLY ones to say "no snow on Mon-Tues" when every model out there had 1" of precip? People would have been lighting them up for that too.

    The forecasters weren't "wrong"...they were just interpreting data that was in front of them that indicated big snow.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People should know that the models 5-7 days out nearly ALWAYS change. Somehow, it seems, forecasters forget that models just aren't particularly accurate until maybe 2-3 days prior to a snow event (they do seem to be better for major arctic outbreaks). I honestly think that most big storms do not show up 7 days ahead on a model (not that I know what I'm talking about).

      Delete
    2. @Jaw,exactly my point,they are model forecasting,models always shift,even a day in advance of the storm,their trying to sell hype,they are trying to get viewers,I understand you need models to make forecasts,but stop the damn bold statements.Even ultra-conservative Paul Douglas lead headline on his blog the other day stated "Parade of Snowstorms on the way"REALLY?,he's making that statement one week before the second storm is suppose to hit!How about saying "Potential for multiple snow events".....see no hype,no bold statements! When you say "on the way",your implying its a sure thing and when you use the word "snowstorm" it sounds like a bigger deal.

      Delete
  62. Plymouth Weather LoverFebruary 21, 2013 at 4:51 PM

    I, for one, appreciate the reporting of what the models are saying. Even if one model is saying something excessive, I want to know. The "accurate reporting" comes in when/if a reporter does not give the full story. If he/she simply states the one model and not the big picture, I have concerns with that. If the model is saying something, then I want to know. How excited I get is on me, not on them. We are the ones that might hype something more than it should be. I am guilty of that--no question. But my hype comes out of hope. Hope for lots of snow. Hope for the big one. I can't imagine that a forecaster wakes up in the morning and says, "How can I exaggerate something so much that I get everyone excited and then make myself look like an idiot a few days later." Maybe I am wrong. Bring it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. PWL, This is a great summary. The models are the models. Put everything on the table, and then analyze it. I can't recall if this is the 2nd or 3rd winter I've followed this site, but a lot of the anonymous comments this year, are either from users that are new, or users that have no memory of prior year discussions. And I was probably making simliar comments about disappointng forecasts within the last couple of years.
      All things being equal, snow total predictions should both be under and over predicted over the course of a couple of years. When does the official prediction clock start? I'm sure no one would suggest 7 days out. So then when? 4 days? 2 days out?
      If you are a snow lover, you will probably think we are NEVER getting enough. If you HATE snow, besides also living in the wrong state, you will think 1" is too much. So there is a mental approach to this which is what PWL was suggesting. And I've changed mine over the years. Now, my expectations are low, and if ANY snow falls, I'll take it. Sure, I would like more accuracy within 3 days, but that is Mother Nature. The term "plowable snow" brings thoughts of double digits snows, but in reality is anything greater than 2".

      One problem is when snow predictions come out, in my opinion, the general public will latch on to the first and highest number and anything less is perceived as a missed forecast (which may be true). MSP is sitting at 31.3" so far this winter. An AVG winter = 39.5" (thru 2/21). Let's see where we stand after Fri and Tue. For everyone that wants to write this winter off, that is fine, but then you should probably be writing off about 50% of our winters as this year seems pretty AVG to me. Earlier today I predicted that tonight I would have 1-3 beers and so far I am in that range. Cheers.

      Delete
  63. Got to love the national outlets with our incoming snow:
    Weather.com yesterday had snow showers,today 2-6",that's a big spread from day to day and a big spread inches wise,2inch snows and 6 inch snows are quite different!
    Accu-weather overnight they were going with 4-8,this morning 3-6 and now 1-3!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't even bother looking at Accuweather or quoting any of their numbers.

      Delete
  64. Dry air so far winning out!heavy snow hard pressed to get past I-90 at the moment.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Did anyone capture the WCCO 10 p.m. weathercast? If so, what were the amounts forecast?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bill - I got a bit of it, and I am prety sure Shaffer said 3-6" for MSP, so a higher total than his 1-3" he predicted Wed night. He was on location and not being in the studio, he seemed as distacted as I was. Belinda at KARE had a 2-6" range.

      Delete
    2. Thanks. I'll add that to WCCO.

      Delete
  66. With this storm over, what is the next one looking like? I read PD's blog and he is basically saying that it is a miss completely for MSP. I did find todays headline and write up amusing... he and his media buds may also have something to do with that...

    ReplyDelete