|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Jan 9, 2019 23:17:17 GMT -6
Ya it’s still snowing in the metro at the time of that map. I’m having a hard time finding any FV3 snowfall maps after hr 66
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowman99 on Jan 9, 2019 23:17:46 GMT -6
yeah UKmet is still in the 1" club.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sparkman - Wildwood, Mo on Jan 9, 2019 23:18:11 GMT -6
The fv3 verbatim drops like 1.5" of qpf just South of 44/64 and it's all snow Also about the qpf being overdone. Pwats are 200 percent of normal with a powerhouse phasing system. The GFS is drier because the GFS has a bias towards flatter less phased systems with weaker lljs. This is the best model continuity I have ever seen. It feels like people are just afraid to go out on a limb. Well Glenn freaking Zimmerman did. The most notorious snow grouch in St. Louis broadcast television history. Because Glenn is a straight shooter looking at this thinking: Everything I just wrote. Hahahahaha “Glenn - freaking - Zimmerman” hahhaha |
|
|
|
Post by bellevillewxguy on Jan 9, 2019 23:20:09 GMT -6
The UKMET has widespread 1" amounts and a narrow strip of 1.2" right into the metro.  Actually that's a very narrow 'finger' of 1.4 into the MO side of the Metro. |
|
|
|
Post by Frivolousz21 on Jan 9, 2019 23:24:26 GMT -6
UKMET is rolling out. Doesn't appear to be any major changes, a bit further north it appears. Still waiting on some temperature data from the UQAM site.  |
|
|
|
Post by bdgwx on Jan 9, 2019 23:24:41 GMT -6
The UKMET has widespread 1" amounts and a narrow strip of 1.2" right into the metro. Actually that's a very narrow 'finger' of 1.4 into the MO side of the Metro. Oh...OH...O-H...you're right. I totally missed that. So that's actually a widespread 1.2" chart there. |
|
|
|
Post by cozpregon on Jan 9, 2019 23:24:53 GMT -6
Ya it’s still snowing in the metro at the time of that map. I’m having a hard time finding any FV3 snowfall maps after hr 66 Ends up with 16 (10:1) |
|
|
|
Post by guyatacomputer - NE St. Peters on Jan 9, 2019 23:26:00 GMT -6
If we get anywhere close to some of these accumulations it would put this into the top 15 or 20 snows of all time.
|
|
|
|
Post by bellevillewxguy on Jan 9, 2019 23:28:38 GMT -6
Impressive to see a system that could deliver an entire season's worth of snow in one go. Average snow for us is between 14 - 17" depending where you look and what averages you look at. If the pipe dream comes true someone might get pretty close. But definitely a solid 6-10" with locally higher amounts for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by bdgwx on Jan 9, 2019 23:36:41 GMT -6
I'm thinking the FV3's snow depth product could be too low with the SLR and then it also seems too aggressive with the melting/compaction.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Higgins on Jan 9, 2019 23:37:06 GMT -6
There is a rule of thumb that I've used personally at times that has helped me some when dealing with bigger snows. Take the max value in the models...and slash 20% of the top...for no other reason than because the number of times model over-forecast snow vs. under-forecast snow is pretty high. The 20% deduction is just a good sanity check. In this case...lets say the top QPF is on average 1.0" then 8.0" of snow is pretty reasonable. So that's where I sit with the high end of my forecast...I'm very happy with where I sit with my forecast right now...widespread 4-8" ... some sleet/mixing concerns south..but not enough to drop them out of the 4-8 range. There is definitely potential for upwards of 10"... maybe a little more...but at this stage of the game...I see little benefit to pushing the numbers up any...and then risk having to drop them back down again. I'd rather hold with 4-8...and continue "steady as she goes" and wait until the storm is onshore and we get inside 24 hours. 4-8 is a beefy storm for us...and gets the public ready for the potential impact. There is nothing worse in my opinion than to watch a forecast yo-yo. 2-3, then 3-6, then 4-8, the 3-6, then 2-4...and we get 5. We have all seen that happen many times in the past. If it ain't broken...don't fix it. 4-8 is not broken. Also, this is not a wind event...and it is a weekend...so the impact is not going to be what you would see if this happened during the week.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sparkman - Wildwood, Mo on Jan 9, 2019 23:44:51 GMT -6
There is a rule of thumb that I've used personally at times that has helped me some when dealing with bigger snows. Take the max value in the models...and slash 20% of the top...for no other reason than because the number of times model over-forecast snow vs. under-forecast snow is pretty high. The 20% deduction is just a good sanity check. In this case...lets say the top QPF is on average 1.0" then 8.0" of snow is pretty reasonable. So that's where I sit with the high end of my forecast...I'm very happy with where I sit with my forecast right now...widespread 4-8" ... some sleet/mixing concerns south..but not enough to drop them out of the 4-8 range. There is definitely potential for upwards of 10"... maybe a little more...but at this stage of the game...I see little benefit to pushing the numbers up any...and then risk having to drop them back down again. I'd rather hold with 4-8...and continue "steady as she goes" and wait until the storm is onshore and we get inside 24 hours. 4-8 is a beefy storm for us...and gets the public ready for the potential impact. There is nothing worse in my opinion than to watch a forecast yo-yo. 2-3, then 3-6, then 4-8, the 3-6, then 2-4...and we get 5. We have all seen that happen many times in the past. If it ain't broken...don't fix it. 4-8 is not broken. Also, this is not a wind event...and it is a weekend...so the impact is not going to be what you would see if this happened during the week. This is waaaaaaaay to reasonable. |
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Jan 9, 2019 23:45:47 GMT -6
Ive also noticed that people seem to care much less if they get more snow than forecasted. If the forecast is calling for 4-6" and they receive 7" most people don't bat an eye. But if the forecast is 4-6" and they receive 3" then its a failure of a forecast.
|
|
|
|
Post by bdgwx on Jan 9, 2019 23:47:23 GMT -6
Yep. I much prefer starting low and ramping up as needed. I don't even mind busting low. But, man, do I get annoyed when a forecast has to unwind.
|
|
|
|
Post by birdsonthebat (MO'Fallon) on Jan 9, 2019 23:56:34 GMT -6
Boo....Chris Higgins! Boo! 🥴
Regardless.....my new plow will get some use!
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowman99 on Jan 10, 2019 0:10:20 GMT -6
Euro is going to YUUUUGEEE
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Jan 10, 2019 0:11:02 GMT -6
Euro is going to crush the metro
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Jan 10, 2019 0:14:27 GMT -6
1.5" of QPF just west of STL lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowman99 on Jan 10, 2019 0:17:10 GMT -6
Yeah, crazy, lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Higgins on Jan 10, 2019 0:17:50 GMT -6
The Euro may require a bigger ruler.
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowman99 on Jan 10, 2019 0:19:02 GMT -6
The area of 1"+ is MUCH larger than at 12z
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Jan 10, 2019 0:19:03 GMT -6
Euro buries the western counties under 15-18"
Metro get 10-13"
Eastern counties get 7-9"
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Jan 10, 2019 0:21:45 GMT -6
The area of 1"+ is MUCH larger than at 12z The QPF on this run is just insane |
|
|
|
Post by Snowman99 on Jan 10, 2019 0:32:11 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Jan 10, 2019 0:32:12 GMT -6
Euro has PW values approaching an inch Friday evening
250% above normal for this time of year
|
|
|
|
Post by jason0101 on Jan 10, 2019 0:32:58 GMT -6
We are going to need bigger boxes...qpf continues to rise by the run.
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowman99 on Jan 10, 2019 0:35:54 GMT -6
Now the 6z GFS needs to get it's sh*t together, lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Snowstorm920 on Jan 10, 2019 0:38:04 GMT -6
Euro has 1.1" to 1.4" of QPF in the metro
There's a jackpot of 1.7" just west of STL near 99
Southern counties receive 1.2 to 1.3 but have mixing issues holding down their numbers a bit. Farmington still gets a foot
Eastern and Northern counties are right around an inch of QPF
|
|
|
|
Post by RyanD on Jan 10, 2019 0:39:07 GMT -6
EURO qpf map please
|
|
|
|
Post by jmg378s on Jan 10, 2019 0:44:27 GMT -6
I bet that'll raise some eyebrows at the NWS office...
|
|
