Roger Smith

Thanks, RJay, as a friend of the contest in many ways, and in view of extenuating circumstances which you explained to me privately, I am going to post your forecast with just a small time penalty that would protect the field given that you had a bit of extra information by posting time. But I won't apply the entire penalty. As I mentioned, anyone else who (in coming months) has more pressing concerns at forecast time should feel free to seek a partial waiver on late penalties. I am just going to say -x% for now and see what I think is fair after assessing a few things that aren't in my head right now, such as trends in modelling since 1st, and differential from consensus in the forecast submitted. Anyone who would like to offer an opinion on this, would prefer in private message.

Forecasts for April, 2020 FORECASTER _________ DCA _NYC _BOS __ ORD _ATL _IAH ___ DEN _PHX _SEA Maxim ________________ +4.5 _+4.2 _+4.0 ___+5.9 _+3.6 _+4.0 __ +2.2 _--1.0 _--1.3 Brian5671 _____________+4.0 _+3.5 _+2.5 ___+3.0 _+5.0 _+4.0 __ +1.0 _+1.0 _+1.5 BKViking ______________+3.4 _+3.3 _+2.8 ___+2.2 _+4.0 _+2.5 __ +0.5 _+1.2 _+1.0 wxdude64 _____________+3.1 _+2.9 _+2.6 ___+1.6 _+3.1 _+3.3 __ --1.1 _--1.6 _--2.6 JakkelWx _____________ +2.9 _+3.0 _+1.3 ___+1.9 _+3.5 _+2.7 __ --0.1 _+0.8 _--0.5 RodneyS ______________ +1.8 _+1.5 _+1.2 ___+0.7 _+2.8 _+4.5 __ --0.2 _--0.2 _--1.9 ___ Consensus ________ +1.7 _+1.5 _+1.3 ___+1.0 _+2.2 _+2.5 ___ 0.0 __ 0.0 _--0.8 wxallannj _____________ +1.7 _+1.6 _+1.9 ___+2.0 _+2.2 _+1.7 __ +1.2 _--1.0 _--2.3 RJay ___ (-5%) ________ +1.5 _+1.5 _+1.5 ____ 0.0 _+1.5 _+1.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 Tom __________________ +1.1 _+0.9 _+1.0 ___+0.5 _+1.8 _+2.5 __ --0.3 _+0.3 _--1.5 Scotty Lightning ______ +1.0 _+1.0 _+1.0 ___+1.0 _+1.5 _+1.5 __ +1.0 _+1.5 _+0.5 hudsonvalley21 (-1%) _ +0.9 _+0.8 _+0.7 ___+0.3 _+0.9 _+0.7 __ +0.3 _--0.1 _--0.4 DonSutherland.1 ______ +0.5 _+0.5 _+0.2 ___--1.0 _+0.7 _+0.5 __ --0.5 _+0.2 _--1.5 ___ Normal _____________0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 ___ 0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 ___ 0.0 __0.0 __0.0 Roger Smith __________ --0.5 _--0.8 _--1.0 ___ --2.2 _--1.0 _--1.5 __--3.0 _--1.5 _--0.8 ______________________________________________________________________ Color codes reveal the warmest and coldest forecasts for each location.

-0.5 __ -0.8 __ -1.0 __ -2.2 __ -1.0 __ -1.5 __ -3.0 __ -1.5 __ -0.8 (late penalties will start soon but will waive for any legit cause)

Predict the temperature anomalies for nine locations relative to the 1981-2010 averages ... DCA _ NYC _ BOS __ ORD _ ATL _IAH ___ DEN _ PHX _ SEA Deadline for entries is 06z April 1st, with late penalties applying from then to 18z April 2nd, larger penalties kick in at that point. Good luck !!

Will say 1492 and first high risk a major outbreak in the south-central states around Feb 8th-9th.

Oops, no tie-breaker. But I don;t foresee being tied so there you go. Not looking too bad on the long-range charts for an early end to frost-free season, question might be, would all four go at the same time? Takes a fairly potent cold shot to do that, I would assume, with DCA in such a warmed up location and RIC further south.

Given that voters in most countries are divided on their level of concern about climate change, I think the best political solution is to reshape the paradigm and take climate change out of the equation to some extent, focusing instead on benefits in general from alternative (non-fossil-fuel) energy sources. If there are demonstrable benefits from such a transition, then the climate change issue fades into the background. Another change in political emphasis should be towards mitigation of problems. Whether the alleged problems are caused by AGW, other forms of natural variability, or non-climate factors, these problems need to be addressed. For example, forest fires (or wildfires) are said to be increasing. Maybe they are, maybe not. But more to the point, an advanced society should be able to manage this problem. It is probably more cpmplex than just AGW forcing more fires. There are questions like changing lifestyles (the exurban population increasing rapidly), interface questions, and philosophies about fighting or containing fires. So that sort of climate-related issue can be approached as a self-contained problem that the climate is not a key factor in controlling, in fact it would make a lot of sense to have large changes in our management of the wildfire issue, regardless of what the climate is doing or not doing. To some extent, I think the climate "emergency" is overblown hype, those who peddle it for political gain seem to have no knowledge whatsoever of the range of past weather and climate events. There may be subtle changes as part of AGW, or what we see may be just inevitable natural variability. Either way, it's a safe bet that nothing we do will actually change the future weather observed on our planet by more than a very slight amount. So knowing that, we should have mitigation strategies in place, rather than dealing in these fantasies about paying a tax on carbon to change the weather. That simply isn't going to happen, no matter how many people say so with whatever level of urgency and passion.If the oceans begin to rise in a more dramatic fashion, what can be done about it? Plans must be drawn up for protection or even removal of critical infrastructure, and populations at risk, but only when it becomes apparent that there is no alternative. I don't say this to make denial a policy, I say it because it is the only rational approach. The political parties who deal in a tax-to-solve approach are just deluding themselves and their voters. Their plans cannot possibly work. Mitigation might include diversion of some ocean water into massive desalination/irrigation projects which are needed anyway for other reasons. This is what we should be doing, rather than taxing carbon.

All four very early 10/17 in massive wintry outbreak from Midwest.

April 8, 2024 ... long totality from west TX northeast to upstate NY and Quebec. Bound to be some cloud along that line but should be within reach of most people on the forum with a bit of planning (my target would be west TX, unless a week in advance it looks like a big high over Quebec then I can go there instead).

If highs are in the 38-43 F range I would expect you would lose about 2" a day mostly to sublimation (loss into the air as water vapor). As I mentioned before the storm, we had a similar snowfall here last Wednesday that was unrelated to your storm except it happened at a similar temperature and we've had those sorts of temperatures since, and I still have full snow cover of about 2-3" here today. If it gets much above 43 F though, it's going to disappear in two or three days or so except in deeper shade. Since there's some chance of a top-up on Friday, I would expect you will get to that event with half your snow pack intact, and of course all large snow piles will start melting down a bit, but those will last until there's three or four very mild days and/or some heavy rain.

also IAD 10.6 storm total, BWI 6.6

As of mid-day climo reports, storm totals appear to be 5.4" DCA, 5.6" BWI and 7.1" IAD. Will likely add to all those with final reports.

Euro 192h ... this x5

Nice, I went from dividing by 3 to multiplying by 2. (final calls 7.0 for all three major airports, DCA should say 9.0, CHO 12.5)

Feb 3rd 2019.

So 18z would be about 1-2 hours before sunrise there? Damage will be enormous from the looks of those images.

Looks like the eye is headed for either eastern Shikoku or the strait between that island and Honshu but in any case a second landfall will occur near Kobe just west of Osaka. Given the populations and port infrastructure of the two landfall areas, the second one will be more problematic. Hoping the first one weakens the storm enough that the second landfall will be less intense, perhaps a strong cat-1 as opposed to 2. Well it won't be long now looking at radar and satellite animations, the thing is accelerating NNE-ward. Roughly 15-20 million people live in the Osaka region then there's Nagoya one bay east, five million more there.

Since it's 945 mb out in the open Pacific now, more likely to be around 950-955 at landfall perhaps? Seems to be only a strong cat-2 or weak cat-3 at present.

Will have some on-scene reports from my travelling friends who are going to ride this out in Kyoto, supposed to be within 50 miles of the eye around 06z to 08z (Tuesday afternoon JST). This is a radar I will be watching to check the exact track of Jebi. http://www.jma.go.jp/en/radnowc/ Good satellite imagery here: http://www.jma.go.jp/en/gms150jp/ It is midnight in the region now so about 12-15 hours to landfalls and impacts (first Shikoku Island, eastern half, then near Kobe west of Osaka, storm accelerates and moves across Honshu in a few hours and then at TS intensity up the north coast as far as western Hokkaido). My friends are in a modern style hotel that is a smaller building than some nearby, and the whole area is flat but 45 metres above sea level so I'm thinking no real flooding or tsunami potential, they are also on the west side of the building so much of the storm will be producing east to south winds and they are relatively sheltered from those. If the track stays a bit west, should be close to remnants of eyewall during height of storm, hoping for some interesting accounts if not pictures. Told them to expect a bit of a cleanup day outside on Wednesday then back to normal.

12z GFS shows Jebi striking the central Honshu coast on Tuesday around 10-12z (late evening Japanese time) with central pressures remaining sub-920 mb. Looks very similar to Katrina on these maps. The current landfall zone is south of Osaka placing Nagoya and Chita in the forward sector but Osaka and Kyoto very close to the fast-moving eye as it swerves northeast. I've been advising travelling friends who at this point are booked into hotel in Kyoto 1st to 4th but main point being this could shift either way so at this point just as safe to be there as Tokyo or far western Honshu. The models have been fairly consistent for days although speeding up the landfall, with respect to central Honshu as the target. Could be a high impact storm for any of these large cities or even Tokyo especially if track shifts east at all. On this track looks like Tokyo would see cat-1 conditions while Nagoya and Chita could see as high as cat-4. You also have to wonder if a significant earthquake would be imminent given these approaching tidal stresses.

You people throw some mighty fine snow parties. I had two weeks like you're having now, back around end of December and into New Years. That snow is still in my back yard today despite the past five days being sunny and around 40-45 F.

Seems like a movie in the making ... SNOW WARS Long long ago in a snowstorm far away different measurement techniques came into conflict "Luke, where is your snowboard?"

He tried to jump but missed the window wide right.

With this appearance, storm should have been Feb 14th perhaps ..

Strong pressure falls at 44008 (54 se ACK) to 975.7 mb at 1250z ... estimate center 965 mb at 39.5 N 68.8 W, appears to be phasing with upper low. This will soon overcome the slight warmth left in boundary layer near sea level and become a raging blizzard (where it is not already) in e MA and some parts of RI, e CT. Air temp only 34 F out in Mass Bay over 39 F water, likely to stabilize at about 31/31 at KBOS, S to S+ depending on banding location. Enjoy.