40/70 Benchmark

@512high...May have to coordinate with you early on the subsciption launches....will have to watch this weekend.

Are there a few others?

I don't really give a rat's ass if the warm night time lows are more anomalous than the cold shots...sorry to those who lose sleep over that. Just give me a cold enough airmass to snow and a low over the islands.

Big underpferomer here Wednesday night, but made up for it last night. 18.1 for the low.

Still not an average snowfall season here since 2017-2018....closest was within like 10-12" when I got 51" in 2020-2021.

"More days in first place"....

Looked great at H5.

Hometown of Derek Lowe!!

Yep...save ofr maybe March.

Only part of that I don't expect is a -NAO/+PNA in the mean, but nor do I think either will be extremely positive and negative, either....there will be variance. WPO should drive this winter in conjunction with PDO.

Yea, he's gonna be making Webb voo doo dolls by turkeyday.

I'm being facetious. But honestly...I don't care how much time is put in, you have to be mindful of trends with respect to bias and make changes to methodology when its not working out. This is why I have tried to incorporate climate change a lot more and address West Pacific aspects this season.

I am also pretty confident we will see some blocking this year....the EPO is the big question for me.

The next 2-3 weeks will be key because if the late November into December favorable stretch doesn't get muted or attenuated, then we are probably in business for the season. If you recall last season the favorable December flip got totally stripped down to just a bried NAO flex, which got laregely negated by the monster trough out west.

I am pretty confident the N Pacific is going to be decent....what needs to be ironed out is whether or not its just a -WPO with no blocking and a +EPO, like 1999, or we also get the -EPO a la 2013 and/or some blocking mixed in. I hedged mainly -WPO with some blocking early and late, but if the -EPO is also consistently negative, then that is a the game-changer.

Same. Last thing I wanted though is another 65" forecast that ends up 33" and Kev lighting up my threads with AIT. Honestly, though...can't always chase upside.

TBH I am nervous my forecast was too conservative. I'd rather that, though....two awful busts in a row that were to aggressive. I don't want to get the JB rep because its difficult to shake lol

Wow..only 27.7 here...at 9:10pm, nonetheless....mixed out the rest of the night.

Same..my only above average snowfall season since 2014-2015. It was still warm here, but March made it worth it.

Subsurface: https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/drupal/disdel/ Coralreef: https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/drupal/disdel/

Everyone is wrong sometimes....its how you learn to be right more often, and develop some genuine humility along the way, which makes it easier to not dismiss anyone.

EVERYBODY has something to contribute and offer...don't care who they are.

See....this is the awful mindset that I had originally assumed as it pertains to you and Bluewave, but a funny thing happens when you stop succuming to bias and automatically dismissing certain people...you learn a few things.

Another key part for the 95% who don't have the time or patience to reach through in its entirety. The Paradoxical Relationship Between ENSO & MC Forcing in the Modern Climate Perhaps the ultimate paradox with respect to La Nina is its potential relationship with pattern deviations, or "mismatches" from the very Maritime Continent forcing that embodies it. La Nina is normally associated with a central Pacific ridge. This is due to the manner in which the ocean-atmosphere interface establishes the Hadley Cell. Conventional logic dictates that stronger La Niña events would be associated with stronger, more prevalent North Pacific ridges, however, clearly the ridge preceding the much stronger La Niña of 1973 pales in comparison to what has been the strongest one on record in 2024. This is the result of the current -PDO phase being enhanced by climate change due to an accentuation of the West Pacific warm pool. The byproduct is both a record negative PDO and associated North Pacific ridge, despite the pedestrian nature of the burgeoning cool ENSO event. Note the baseline cool ENSO nature of the Pacific Hadley cell over the past 25 years, independent of ENSO, as compared to the previous 25 years. The latter is a virtual sea of negative departures relative to modern day, ambient heights, and is completely devoid of a discernible North Pacific ridge. This is in contrast to the former, in which the north Pacific Ridge is conspicuously prevalent amid very high global heights. This is what has led to the baseline MC forcing tendency that has evolved over roughly the past decade. It has been stressed that La Nina is not going to play a very influential role this season, which may sound silly and contradictory since there is currently a record north Pacific ridge in place, along with a negative PDO of unprecedented strength to constructively interfere with it. And it absolutely is doing so, to an extent, as evidenced by the MEI and RONI values outpacing the ONI. However, unlike other recent La Nina events, ENSO is not the primary catalyst of this pattern. Rather, it is the immense, cool ENSO like baseline that is the driving force at play, and the reason that it is difficult to distinguish this is because the MC regime mimics that of La Nina. Be that as it may, the ENSO neutral state of the ONI in conjunction with the MEI and RONI currently only being reflective of a weak atmospheric coupling (ASO -.76) on the heels of a strong El Nino are incontrovertible evidence that the baseline MC forcing is the most instrumental catalyst around the hemisphere at this juncture. The reason that this "chicken or the egg" distinction is so vital to the seasonal forecast moving forward is that while it is true that La Nina is generally associated with Maritime continent forcing, there are disparate variations of La Nina according to intensity and structure that can trigger deviations from the baseline MC forcing assuming that it is of sufficient intensity. One of the most egregious of errors among a litany of fatal flaws with respect to the Eastern Mass Weather winter outlook last season was assuming that a weaker reflection of El Nino automatically favored a colder outcome. This is, of course, false, although it is true that historically speaking, weaker ENSO events tend to have colder results, which is illustrated quite well in the composites below. Note in the juxtaposition of schematics above that the weakest events, on the left, have greater incidence of poleward Aleutian ridging and high latitude blocking in the mean, which understandably yields the colder result on average. This is due to the fact that weaker ENSO seasons are more prone to extra tropical influence, which can sometimes yield colder results, but not always. When the baseline regime is one that teleconnects to warmth in a specific region, as does the current baseline MC configuration for the east, weaker ENSO does not necessarily mean "colder" because it is more likely to "lose" that "competition" with said extra tropical influence. This was the case last season, when the more meager expression of El Niño in the atmosphere relative to the ONI was the result of the warm ENSO competing with, and losing to, the baseline MC regime. Conversely, while a stronger ENSO event is less prone to extra tropical influences that can favor cold, it also increases the likelihood of ENSO being the vehicle for deviation from a persistent baseline tendency. This is likely the reason that the intensity of La Niña was also linked to the increase in the duration and frequency of deviations from the baseline MC forcing in the earlier referenced research conducted by Bluewave of Americanwx forums. The variation in the respective composites is considerable, as east-based events (left), and to a lesser extent, central-hyrbird events, have significantly more poleward Aleutian ridging and high latitude blocking than their Modoki, or west-based counterparts (right). The is because the Modoki convective forcing regime is very similar to that of the baseline MC forcing that is currently in place, and Modoki events are on average the strongest events of the three composites, which means that there is little opportunity for deviation from said pattern. This MC forcing regime has remained very consistent throughout the Autumn. Which is reflected in the precipitation anomalies given that the convergence and subsequent lift near the surface, below the divergence aloft, fosters positive precipitation departures from average. This supports the Bluewave findings that the variation data set featured more intense episodes of La Nina, which matured and coupled with the atmosphere earlier, as evidenced by the greater October MJO amplification. This allowed for greater deviation from, and/or lower amplitude of the MC forcing during boreal winter, hence the pattern "mismatch" period that was more conducive for east coast snow and cold interludes. The prevalence of the MC forcing over the past decade has fundamentally altered the manner in which ENSO interacts with the extra tropical atmosphere and has in fact reduced its influence. Whereas weaker La Nina was previously linked to colder outcomes due to other extra tropical influences allowing for deviations from the cool ENSO baseline MC paradigm, said MC regime is now the general baseline, and thus La Niña needs to be even stronger to act as that crucial vehicle for deviations driven by its own structural nuances. It is with this in mind that is is important to also consider the intensity of the recent periods of mismatch from the MC forcing in order to determine the nature, duration and frequency of any potential deviation during winter 2024-2024. Characterization of potential Mismatch Periods for Winter '24-'25 The 2017 east-based La Nina represented one of the more prominent examples of deviation, as it featured two significant mismatches from the predominate MC forcing. The first was triggered in December, as the MJO was allowed to traverse phases 6-8 and contributed to the development of -EPO and +PNA blocking, which is the antithesis of the predominate MC pattern. Then a lull in the MJO activity later in the season coincided with the downward propagation of a potent February SSW to contribute to historic NAO blocking in tandem with a significant -WPO ridging in the Bering sea. Although the peak RONI of -1.26 and MEI (-0.7) are comparable to the expectation for 2024, the peak October MJO phase 6 amplitude of +3.353 is significantly higher than the phase 5 peak of +2.762 this past October. The peak ONI of -1.0 is also greater than the -0.6 to -0.8 expectation this season. Due to the higher ONI and significantly greater MJO amplitude during the month of October, the coming winter is unlikely to feature multiple deviations of this magnitude, nor it as likely to have as extensive NAO blocking given the central-based nature of the current La Nina is fairly similar to the prevalent MC forcing that is so inimical to -NAO. However, diminished likelihood of major NAO blocking is not prohibitive to colder, more wintry periods on the east coast. January 2022 is perhaps one of the better analogs for any potential mismatch this season. Although the peak ONI of -1.0 and MEI of -1.5 are slightly stronger than expectation for this season (-1.0 to -1.2 peak MEI forecast), the peak RONI of -1.24 is at the lower end of the forecast -1 to -1.2 range this season and the max October MJO phase 5 amplitude of 2.087 is significantly less than that of this past October. Furthermore, this -WPO/+PNA tandem seem a more plausible deviation this season considering the previously discussed state of the North Pacific, whereas an NAO driven, December-January mismatch seems relatively unlikely for reasons already disclosed. December 2020 into February represented a very protracted period of disconnect from the baseline MC forcing, which was largely muted by a weakened MJO response. While the October MJO peak of 2.117 in phase 6 is comparable to October 2024, the comparisons largely end there. Peak ONI of -1.3 was much stronger, and while the peak MEI of -1.2 is not a particularly poor match, the RONI was slightly stronger at -1.54. The safe interpretation would appear that any deviation this season will be both shorter in duration and of a different ilk, given that the WPO was severely positive. The final mismatch analog to be considered seems relatively sound from a frequency and duration standpoint, as the 2022-2023 Modoki La Nina registered a peak ONI of -1.0, RONI of -1.13 and MEI of -1.7. While La Nina seems somewhat stronger than the current event, this is likely negated by the fact that it was west-based and this would only seem to reenforce the MC regime. Additionally, the peak October phase 6 amplitude of 2.177 was significantly less than this year. This is not only a superior duration and length of amplitude analog, but it represents a wonderful illustration of why west-based events are not immune to bouts of blocking within the polar domain, as will be discussed shortly. This season featured a modestly disturbed polar vortex early on, not unlike December 2020, however, the Pacific was much more hostile, which is a theme that was repeated with an even stronger, SSW induced round of blocking in March. Should this degree of blocking evolve again during the coming season, it would likely yield a somewhat snowier and colder outcome for the east coast due to the anticipated differences in the north Pacific. The caveat being that a late season round of blocking is neither as likely to take place, or to be as intense as March 2022 due to solar considerations that will be touched upon shortly. Now that a clearer portrayal of the anticipated impact of the interaction of ENSO with the predominate MC baseline and the type of deviation that may result has been provided, it more appropriate to consider the final piece of the puzzle remaining for winter 2024-2025.