psuhoffman

12z 2/2/23 ensembles BWI snow probability through day 15 1”: 11% 3” you don’t wanna know 6”: my microscope broke

30-40 years

Curious what the red tags think on this. My preliminary theory is “perhaps” the mjo impacts of the expanded indo-pac warm pool along with the expanding pac Hadley cell AND the logical impact of the almost permanently above normal gulf and western Atlantic are all combining to enhance the SER even more so than the pdo alone did during the last -pdo, and that is why we’ve seen patterns that historically were able to mute the SER fail to overcome the SER recently. 2 part question. There is not nearly enough data yet but do you think this COULD have any validity. And if so what other factors could help overcome that?

Good. Either way the more test cases the quicker we can come to a conclusion

Raises hand: Oh OH OH I know this one

The signal is hidden within the ensembles. The near neutral heights up top on the ensembles are because there are competing camps. There is some support for the -NAO the op runs are hinting at. The problem is, within that camp, there is a split between what the mid latitude impacts are, with most members showing continued ridging in the east regardless of the NAO state. We've seen that show now in a couple op runs also, the 6z aside. This is something we should be watching, and there should be more discussion and analysis on imo, is why havent, and what needs to happen for the NAO to have the canonical mid latitude response. IMO this is the most important factor because I do think we have entered a long term -PDO cycle. If we look back at the last -PDO cycle the way we got snow was not typically to get a positive PDO/PNA. The pacific was stuck in a hostile state about 80% of the time from 1945 to 1980. The way we got snow during that period was mostly during periods of high latitude blocking that forced the trough in the western US to cut east under the blocking instead of lifting, resulting in a basically a west to east full continent trough. We didn't ever really get a favorable pacific, we just overcame it. Look at the h5 for all our above normal snowfall -PDO years since 1960. The blue there is exaggerated because most of those years are from a colder base state and its using todays norms but you can clearly see the longwave pattern. The pacific is flat out god awful. Aleutian ridge, western N American trough. The reason most of the years are from so long ago was that was the last -PDO cycle. We have had a +PDO 75% of the time from 1980 on so there weren't that many years that had a -PDO for there to be opportunities. But within that there is a troubling trend where the percentage of -PDO winter months with above normal snowfall is dropping significantly. That is a big problem if we are going to spend 80% of the next 30 years in a -PDO! But if we dig even deeper the problem is related to the NAO. During the last -PDO 35 year cycle positive NAO periods were really really bad by that time periods norms. But -NAO periods were very very good. The reason -NAO's worked though was not because they somehow timed up with a favorable pac. This is why I get annoyed when people blame a NAO fail on the pacific. In our last hostile pac cycle the NAO was how we overcame the hostile pac. The hostile pac isn't going away, and I got bad news...thats likely true even in most nino's, many of our ninos during the last -PDO the pac was still a hot mess just like 2019 was, but the -NAO was able to compensate. But our fail rate in -NAO-PDO months is increasing dramatically. SO far though the data set is too small to say anything with statistical significance. But we really really really need NAO's to start forcing the western trough to broaden into a full west to east coast to coast mid latitude trough and NOT see the SER simply go ape during the -NAO and even link up...because that is the only way we ever got a really snowy winter during the previous hostile PDO period on record. Yea those years posted above may not seem like that many... but if you remove them from out last PDO cycle it would have made that period god awful. What I am most interested in frankly is waiting to see that the NAO still has the same impact it did during the last -PDO, which is to say it can OVERCOME the hostile pacific, because if we truly are in the next -PDO that hostile pacific is going to last most of the rest of our lives. That wasn't a death sentence for snow during previous PDO cycles only because blocking could overcome it.

I don't have an issue with your posts...your keeping hope alive posts are great. You are always clear that these are long shots at small events. You aren't hyping anything. Its good stuff. And you don't get emotional. I was just replying to your post because it was articulating this theme that we need to change the tone. No we need to change the pattern. The tone sucks because the pattern sucks. We can start 500 threads and name them whatever but so long as we are stuck in this pattern the results will be the same. I was agreeing with you on that. ETA: I have only posted a couple times about tangible threats because honestly there has rarely been anything that imo elevated itself to a legit high probability threat at significant snow. But everyone has a different threshold. You're more willing to break down something that, for example, has a 20% chance at giving someone 1-3". That doesn't really rise to the level I am willing to dig deep into and write up analysis. Frankly in a normal year we wouldn't even bother wasting time on that. But I get it...we're starving so take the crumbs. I have no problem with anyone that want's to focus on any little spec of hope we have. Maybe one of these actually works out. That's often how we get snow in a crap year...getting lucky with some longshot mediocre at best setup. I just don't have it in me to get excited by them. I am more interested in analyzing why we're stuck in this god awful long term cycle and looking for signs we are breaking out of it, not just hunting the crumbs within the drought. I am hunting when we finally break out of it in a big way.

It was a joke, he was posting April snow pattern maps, and his reply was clever and funny because I replied "k" to several people yesterday. Can't we at least have fun since its not snowing. Why does everyone have to be miserable.

The coldest I ever skiid in was -20 at Steamboat but honestly it was sunny with no wind and it felt a lot warmer. The coldest I skied in New England was about -10 at Sugarbush a couple times and that felt pretty awful on the lift in the wind.

The negative vibe won't change until we can look at a long range pattern and not see a 570hpa ridge centered right over us. The problem isn't the analysis its the pattern. If what the majority of people here want is snow...so long as the pattern is really bad for snow...the analysis of that SHOULD BE BAD... unless its bad analysis. The fact that it has barely snowed at all all winter justifies the analysis. If we had long range threads all winter saying "this looks awesome its gonna snow soon" that would mean we suck at this and should find a new hobby. When the pattern is actually good for snow...then the analysis should be positive. When the pattern is bad for snow it should be negative. I don't actually get upset at all by whatever direction the discussion takes because the discussion and the actual snow are two different things. Yea the fact it is not snowing bothers me some. Not much anymore because I've pretty much given up and moved on. But no matter it never bothers me if the discussion is about a bad pattern or how its not going to snow...because its just words. Its not actually snow. Even if we were discussing how awesome the pattern looks and page after page of digital snow...its just words and pictures its not actually snow. Analysis of a good pattern doesn't excite me anymore than analysis of how awful it is. Its just a discussion, words, pictures...all the same. Just analysis. Why are people getting upset by people saying its not gonna snow? The words aren't the reason its not actually snowing. If we say its gonna snow and then it doesn't does that really make it better?

The chart doesn't look that impressive because it's not showing temperatures, its showing "change in temperatures". The temperatures warmed very gradually for 1000 years leading to that warm period. That chart is showing that temps are warming faster now than at any time in the last 1000 years, but its not showing what the temperatures actually were during any given time period.

Great movie though

@mattie g my frustration is this side discussion and AGW in general is totally irrelevant my actual point and analysis that currently our snow climo is degrading. The fact it was warmer at points in the distant past is irrelevant to whether it’s getting warmer right now. Whether it’s a natural cycle or human caused is irrelevant to whether it’s snowing less now than 50 or 100 years ago. AGW worriers on both sides who can’t just let it go keep hijacking the discussion

I know one way they estimate historical temperatures are ice core samples. It’s misleading because it makes it seem like it’s warmer now than the mid eval period if you just glance at the chart. What it’s actually showing is that we are warming way faster in the last 100 years than anytime during the last 2000 years. That’s relevant to an AGW discussion but I’m not (and we aren’t supposed to be) talking about that. But the mid eval period was still warmer than now (although at the rate we’re warming that may not be true for long) because from like 1000BC until 1100AD temps were warming. They were warming at a relatively slow pace, especially compared to now, but look at the chart and you can see from 0-1100AD temp change was slightly above 0 just about the whole time. So the accumulation of all that warming eventually lead to a very warm period in the Middle Ages. That’s well documented. Based on what we know about the climate in Europe and Asia during this period it’s likely the DC area had a climate closer to Rome or Atlanta during that period and snow was virtually non existent. I don’t think that fact is really relevant since no one is comparing now to then and when people say our snow climo is degrading we mean compared to 50 or 100 or 150 years ago not 800 years ago lol. But I’m also not trying to hide things or manipulate facts. It is what it is.

Positive NAO SER negative NAO SER

Seems to go like this… step A someone (often me) makes an observation involving the current pattern that mentions the anomalous warmth and the obvious issue that creates for our snow hopes step B someone on either side of AGW immediately jumps in. Either to use it to further an AGW case or because they feel the un mutable itch to let us all know it’s not really getting warmer because 300 million years ago it was 2000 degrees. Imo the problem isn’t A it’s B. A is just observing the reality we’re in right now. B is people who can’t keep their political agenda out of the discussion. We shouldn’t have to ignore temperature which is half the snow equation just because they can’t control themselves.

It's been discussed some. Warmer mid latitudes would tend to consolidate the TPV which would naturally make places like Siberia even colder. Add in the fact they are much less influenced by maritime air like we are. Kind of a see saw effect going on there to some extent.

Often we are coldest when the PV is displaced to our side of the pole and vice versa. However there is also the fact Asia is much more insulated from the effects of the warmer oceans. So not sure how much correlation to our current problems we can attribute what happens over there.

human norms and expectations are not set on that timescale. We base them on our experiences and the more recent relevant past. Even if we had records boing back millions of years we wouldn't be basing our current expectations on previous climate periods from hundreds of years before anyone today was live.

There ain't a single one of us here that aren't crazy

Ladies and gentlemen, may I present to you…a February rainstorm

Maybe if we’re really lucky and everything goes absolutely perfectly in every synoptic variable and we get perfect timing and wave spacing we can get a trailing system to take a 100% perfect track along with a perfect track vigorous mid and upper level SW during our snowiest month and FUCK

floating near surface underwater volcanoes that don't show up on any measure of seismic activity

I am not denying CC but two things can be true. That chart is misleading, its showing temp change not temps. The mideval period was significantly warmer than now because it came at the end of hundreds of years of "warming" temps. We will get back and surpass that quickly though at the rate we are warming now. There were times millions of years ago when the Earth's average global temperature was above 90 degrees. We wouldn't survive in that climate but just saying. We wouldn't even be able to breath at points billions of years in the past when the atmosphere wasn't composed the same as now. The real threat of CC is if we change the environment faster than our biology can adapt. But no I do not want to have that conversation and debate with anyone. There are other places for that. My point is I don't even have to engage in that nonsense because the fact it was warmer at random points in the distant past has absolutely no bearing on a conversation about our snow climo now and whether it is currently getting worse or not.

I like Steamboat, will probably get at least one day in there in a couple weeks when I am out there. I like Winter Park a lot too. The tree skiing on Mary Jane and Eagle Wind is awesome. For anyone thinking of moving to Colorado for snow...the area around Steamboat is actually probably where you want to be. A lot of the other towns people live in Colorado have a pretty nasty snowshadow affect. And even when they do get snow due to downsloping often it melts pretty fast. But the area west of Steamboat Ski resort actually gets a ton of snow and stays pretty cold. It's a high elevation plateau and far enough from any other ridges to their west and north that they don't suffer from downsloping like most Colorado towns with systems tracking west to east across the state. 20" plus storms aren't unusual in town there unlike most of the other lower elevations and whenever I am there in winter there is always deep snowcover even down in the town not just at the ski resort.