EastonSN+

I have been wondering how the rising Indian ocean temperatures will offset other rising ocean temperatures as the Indian Ocean houses phases one and two which are cold phases for our area. Obviously if the waters off Japan continue unabated and are attributing to the faster jet our storm track will be in Jeopardy, however, purely from a temperature average perspective the rising Indian Ocean temps should offset the warmer phases impacted by the Indonesian water temperatures.

I have been tracking Central Parks snowfall total starting with the 2018-2019 season and comparing it to the 30-year Central Park snowfall drought average from 1970 through 1999 which was a little over 21 inches. Central Park is currently a little over 15 inches for this period, however, the 1970s had very low snowfall for Central Park outside of 2 years towards the end of the decade. This snowfall drought for Central Park can last a lot longer, however I agree by the early 2030s if we're seeing the same thing over and over again then we have to consider. In that 30-year time span Central Park had only five above average snowfall seasons, and 14 of them were below 19 inches. Central Park already had one above average snowfall season in this period so on track in that regard. If we get another 1978 type snowfall distribution then the average will be comparable.

Or the screaming warm Indian Ocean which has phases 1 and 2 of the mjo which are cold. Doesn't seem to be talked about or acknowledged for some reason.

Correct it's dry but unfortunately cold when we want to warm up right.

The EPO won't go away

Where have you been.

Just for fun the 3K nam came Northwest a lot from 6z. Gets a little snow to Long Island.

Thanks as always @The 4 Seasons If there was one enhancement to your site that I would love to see are radar loops for the past storms. Perhaps a bit too ambitious however great to relive.

From MA forum found hilarious for comic relief from this miss. Was a response to a 6z AI post for reference.

You can't assume that this is the case as it's not definitive yet. We could very well go back to a favorable pattern in the pack however a degree or two warmer than today. So instead of getting 25 in snow you'll get 26 or 27 and snow.

Yeah I am thinking the North Pole has a much greater positive temperature departure due to more land masses which would have more population centers creating heat than the southern hemisphere. That of course Plus all that ice down there where the North Pole is losing ice and has less land mass to house snow.

This may be an easy question but why the North Pole has such a high positive temperature departure compared to the South Pole which looks neutral. Easy answers would be more land mass in the northern hemisphere as well as more ice and snow and landmass in the South Pole while the North Pole eyes is melting. However the answer may not be that simple.

Great post by Benchmark.

Even with a cold air source that is inside the benchmark so Long Island coastal New Jersey and the City would likely be mostly rain. However could have been decent for inland areas although a fast mover.

Overall I would grade this winter a c-. Normally I would grade a winter with only 50% of average snowfall as a d, however, constant snow coverage which I still have as well as multiple events to track bumps up to a c-.

Yeah but at least there was a decent amount of doubt as all but two models showed Eastern New England getting the storm so It wasn't a total complete shock when it came in the last minute. Looking in retrospect we should have been going with all the other models as only two showed us in the bullseye. What made that one hard to swallow was the media and the national weather service going with the euro.

Another issue was the lack of a negative AO for the past event. This in addition to the AO being further north allowing the past storm to move west of us.

See THIS is how I view climate change. A 1.6 snowfall differential from 25 years ago.

Agreed. At least January 2015 the nam and the euro showed us getting hammered however all the other models showed Eastern New England. So when it failed in our area it was really only two models that failed. Every single model including the AI at one point should it's getting hit.

It has more to do with a negative five standard deviation AO than the pack. If we had a weaker AO and the same pack the storm would have gained latitude and we would have had a decent event. The fast pack would have hindered the epic slow moving bombs, however we would have had a good four to eight six to twelve event with the same pack and a week or AO.

It cost me $90 every time they plow my driveway when it's over 3 inches. I look at saving the $90 as compensation for missing the upcoming storm.

We are probably going to get annihilated with an epic winter next year and all this will be forgotten. Perhaps our 1978, or 94, or 96.

I mean look at the strength of this block.

What's funny is the GFS was the only model that did not fall for the big solution and has been the most consistent compared to the other models.

Yeah it goes back to the fact that 2000 through 2018 was like 55 through 69 where we had blocking in the right places and a dominant PNA ridge or EPO. This probably happened a lot 1970 through 1999 (I know I have stated this at exhaustion LOL).