weatherwiz

I was debating starting a severe thread. Not a fan of how dry alot of soundings looked though...but there may be enhanced convergence right along the front. Good sign to see models with decent QPF signal.

Great sign to see...getting pretty CAPE colors into the OV now. Bodes well going into May/June as long as we don't have to do with any funny ULL parked to our north

weird...you would think it would mix out based on wind profile

It's not going to fall apart. It may weaken slightly but it may actually rejuvenate some by the coast. Should be a decent amount of lightning with this thing

There were certainly stretches this winter where the regime was more "Nino like" then La Nina. With the weakening Nina the atmospheric/oceanic coupling began to weaken. This is another major part of ENSO and it's influence on the pattern too. There is an atmospheric component of ENSO and oceanic. The pattern will be more reflective of what you would expect in a given ENSO state when the atmosphere and ocean are strongly coupled.

I don't have snowfall statistics but we've had Strong Nino's (especially early in the 1900's) which the pattern certainly looked like it could favor decent snow chances and those winters weren't blow torches either. It is interesting though that the warmest strong Ninos have occurred since the 80's. My list of Strong EL Nino's (super strong is ****)

eh not sure this is really flash freeze type stuff. It obviously will be a little slick where precipitation falls, but I wouldn't characterize this as flash freeze type stuff.

I like to close my eyes and pretend it's june

I wonder if the SST configuration has had something to do with this...or maybe its just the constant barrage of deep WC troughs has influenced the SSTs off the coast.

Strength breakdowns

Ahhh this is one of the sites I had but lost within my bookmarks somehow. I like how it doesn't break the data. It's great to know when the sites change location but that can be just noted. I still think it's stupid they have nothing for BDL 2005-2006 through 2009-2010. That's absurd. I know a few were terrible but come on. Absolutely unbelievable.

This is looking really fun tomorrow evening

Yes. I even went through the different types under station. The record begins 1948-1949 (which I think is when maybe the station moved from Hartford) but I know there was data going back farther then that. This stuff pisses me off so much.

ahh right, thanks. I don't know why I keep confusing the two. I just have to write it down in a notebook

This is the crap that pisses me of. Here is BDL. Now I get the crap that happened mid 90's into the early 2000's but WHAT THE **** IS THIS? This is absolutely unacceptable and embarrassing beyond belief. How in the hell can the database with snowfall keeping be this terrible? 5 year old's do a better job organizing their Legos. I would love to do a bit more with understanding snowfall during ENSO BUT HOW THE HELL IS THAT POSSIBLE WHEN THE RECORD KEEPING AND DATABASE IS UTTERLY PATHETIC. This is bullshit. What a fooking embarrassment.

Annual snowfall period is October 1 - September 30, right?

I don't disagree with anything you said here. This is exactly why IMO getting too detailed with seasonal outlooks and long-range forecasting can ultimately bite you. There is absolutely no way to diagnose or predict the noise. Ultimately, it's going to be the noise which influences the details of a season. For anyone who partakes in seasonal forecasting, the best course of action is to probably do an initial outlook which focuses on pattern and evolution and incorporating all the variables...and then over the course of the season follow up forecasts are done which can focus more on the noise and details.

This season further emphasized that when it comes to the NAO (and this can be used for PNA, EPO, etc). it has way more to do whether the index is positive or negative, it's all about evolution, structure, and where the core of the anomalies are within the domain.

1000% agreed. This is the mindset everyone needs to have and consider. We will also encounter evolutions we've never seen before just b/c there is in infinite number of potential outcomes. One big example of this was the notion that we couldn't get KU's during La Nina's b/c it had "never happened" Well early 2010's had something to say about that.

This is so helpful. I am going to go back and look at my printouts of SSTA's for all LA Nina/EL Nino events and just study them harder and more closely. I would agree, you can't be too restrictive with definitions because you're not going to get "perfect" matches. This is especially true with those modoki events (which I think I understand so much better now)...it's difficult to ever get the core anomalies well into the far western edge of the defined ENSO region.

I'll take some time to go back and review your previous works. I know you do a phenomenal job laying everything out and breaking it down.

so essentially, modoki is when the core anomalies are located within the western side of the ENSO region (applying to both EL Nino and La Nina)

I found doing structure for EL Nino to be much more challenging then it was for La Nina's. When you construct yours I'll throw my graphs into the ENSO discussion thread. I was actually going to explore whether assessing tropical forcing would be a better proxy then SSTA's alone. This is also something I think the trans-nino index is meant to provide, but I find it understanding the TNI a bit confusing.

That is going to be some convective line that moves through tomorrow night. Higher terrain could easily pick up a quick inch or two of snow and could be a graupel fest for many. Probably going to see a decent amount of thunder/lightning too. EDIT: should add this is ore favorable for western sections and northwest specifically

Thank you! This makes tremendous sense then. When I was doing EL Nino structure I found very few events which could be considered west-based.