vortex95

Pffttt! Lame X post. He does not specify how *strong* El Nino was those years. That makes a big difference. And there have been 10 El Nino events since 1994, so where are the other 7 for comparison? 2002-03 was strong El Nino. How did that winter do? /S 2009-10 was strong El Nino, what happened that winter? /S We should be looking at very strong El Ninos only. We've have 4 since the 1950s, 1982-83, 1991-92, 1997-98, 2015-16. It is a mixed bag, leaning toward below avg snowfall, but there was the Feb 1983 blockbuster and also Jan 2016. So it does not mean it is a complete loss. Also, sample size, 4 very strong El Ninos in 70 years does not tell us the full gamut of what can happen, so don't let the @CoastalWxDebbie Downer attitude rule here! There are no less than a dozen other global and regional oscillations going on and how they interact w/ El Nino can and does lead to the unexpected. Case in point, normally in very strong El Nino, Cali is soaked and the Pac NW is dry. Well, that did not occur in 2015-16, it was the exact opposite! Also, the wx/atmosphere does not work linearly. In other words, just b/c this may be the strongest El Nino in modern times, does not mean you simply extrapolate in one direction based off other very strong events, esp. when it comes to regional sensible wx and the specifics.

Likely a rain-wrapped tor. If it was a MB that strong to flip cars, the other ones nearby would have at least been pushed sideways. Nothing I find more frightening in wx is not having good VIS when a tor may be present. I've been in that situation before in OK (the day of the El Reno monster in May 2013), and it was a harrowing experience to say the least.

The wind shear "barrier" along 20N is quite impressive. So 92L and what is behind it don't stand a chance once they gain more latitude. 93L well to the N in the basin is likely a TD/weak TS now. Sheared, but LLCC has become more defined and convection is persisting E of the center, plus its fast forward motion is likely augmenting the winds on the S quad. NHC gives it 40/40 but it could be declared at any time. It's small and will not last long if it becomes a TC.

Thanks. The 1871 event from the reports was likely similar to Iniki in intensity. The thing that made the 1871 event stand out was its angle of approach. Iwa and Iniki both were picked up by a strong trough to the W and accelerated N to the islands. The 1871 event was just moving within the tropical easterlies. In the cntrl Pacific, the way the mean pattern/flow is in the summer and fall makes conditions rather hostile (wind shear) within about 500 mi E of the islands. So any EPAC system that is intense and tracks W right towards HI weakens significantly to below HU strength by the time it gets to the area. So whatever pattern was in place over the cntrl Pacific in Aug 1871 must have been highly anomalous for such a strong HU to make landfall from the E.

I'm glad you got great LTG. Location, location, location for LTG! And talk about localized. One person gets several very close CGs and ear-splitting thunder, and they are like. "WOW, what storm!" And another a few miles away just gets some mdt booms. Such can change a perception of a storm so easily! The #1 thing I look for always is lots of LTG at my location, esp, close strikes and the really odd acoustics you can get sometimes. Several years ago here, for the first time I had ever witnessed, I actually heard the ZZZTTT!!! when a strike hit about 200 ft away, It was not the typical electric click/pops, more a "frying" noise, probably from arcing from streamers.

Hawaii looks to be impacted by a TS or min HU in about 5 days. The angle of approach is a bit atypical coming in towards the Big Island from the ESE, but it is a strong El Nino, and this results in higher potential for a strong TS/min HU direct hit in Hawaii (Iwa in 1982 is a good example) and the cntrl Pacific is more active overall in El Nino. But the system (93C currently) looks monsoonal and broad, so that should preclude any big intensification. Also, 700-500 RH drops below 60% by 60 hr and below 50% by 72 hr well before it gets to the islands, so despite above avg SSTs, low environmental RH tends to override and will limit things. Of course the MSM will act like it is end of days, as if such an event is unprecedented. I will point out this TC on 8/9/1871. A estimated cat 3 made landfall on the Big Island coming in from the ESE. To get a TC of this strength coming in from the E at that latitude for a landfall is exceptional. No other record of anything like this exitss. Iwa in 1982 and Iniki in 1992 came in from the S https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/99/1/bams-d-16-0333.1.xml

We have a combo continental/marine climate, so we get just about everything, just less extremes in terms of frequency. Is that so bad? Prevailing westerly flow for continental influence, and the ocean right next to us for marine. 4 very distinct seasons and true variety for all types of wx. @CoastalWxneeds the marine influence for his Weymouth OES! And really, continental climate outside of mountain areas?, 8-14" is considered a monster snowstorm. So be grateful we exceed that for our definition!

And MET is going away in Oct.

Yes, nice center point, and MPV airport is 1166 ft. I think one reason why it was farther W to have coverage in Upstate NY, which is part of the BTV CWA. Fortunately, the Canadian radars that were upgraded to Doppler last decade help a *lot* for NNE! On another note, today EC starts targeted (polygon-based) svr/tor warnings. https://dd.meteo.gc.ca/doc/genots/2026/08/03/NOCN04_CWAO_031225___62572

Yesterdays wind reports?...wow. You'd think it was a bona fide derecho! It wasn't, but the MCS areal coverage was very impressive NE to SW PA to VA. Also, the classic DC split occurred, at least for CGs. Take a look at the plot from later ydy. There was an uptick on CGs in downtown Silver Spring after the line moved through N side of the city. Saw some good CGs and heard some solid booming thunders to my S.

Yes, I did know about Mt Mansfield, but I was thinking some towers were grandfathered in when new laws were passed? Also, when the WSR-88Ds were being installed, you had push back in some areas thinking these radars were a radiation hazard. I am not kidding! When the WSR-88D were installed, the NWS planned things right. That's why OKX is in over cntrl LI, b/c the former WSR-57 was right in NYC, and the ground clutter was horrendous! Out West, the put a number of radars on top of mountains b/c otherwise they would have been worse than even KCXX for coverage! So I do not think it was the NWS being lazy at all here. They took care to try to place all radars within 50 mi of the largest city in the CWAs for low-level mesocyclone detection. Again, this was the biggest selling point and upgrade from the former radars, so not having 0.5 BREF and VEL is a big deal.

And just like that canceled. However, the KCXX is practically useless for low-level scans in its E quadrant, so you have to wonder. The VT laws not allowing certain towers on hills/mountains, that is what I think prevented the KCXX radar from being placed properly when built 30 years ago. If it is, it is stupid law b/c these radars were installed to protect lives and property, and the biggest selling point when we upgraded to the WSR-88D was tornado detection!

Not too impressive in my part of Silver Spring. Not much LTG/T at all. G45KT leading edge. Rainfall not torrential. The leading edge of the line was just forming a shelf cloud as it passed so it had not quite matured yet, so I would have thought better or more widespread for such an impressive line. CG plot attached. Looks like it weakened as it move into the N and NW of the immediate metro!

Maybe this time we can get it to really go nuts before it gets to the bay high dew point area just E of i-95? I can't tell you how many times Silver Spring misses out b/c of this!

The only difference from an MCS and MCS is the extent, duration, and eccentricity of the very cold cloud top canopy. As for sensible wx, the both can produce high-end svr wx and unreal LTG displays!