MJOatleast7

2 minutes ago, OSUmetstud said:

Oh. Its on hm's twitter feed. Weve seen hadley cell expansion the past few year (subtropical highs and subsidence expanding northward and southward into the mid latitudes from tropical convection). It likely contributed to stj having a +5F anomaly last winter even with a stout +NAO. Ive seen some evidence is agw related but i dont know a ton about it. 

the extreme case of which is Venus with its 300 km/h jets or 60x the planet's rotation speed (compared w/10-20% the rotation speed on Earth). Look for that number to go up under GW.

CFP here in Winchester. Pretty clearly shows up on radar.

Tremendous poleward surge of tropical air...is this the Archambault event or is that next week? NAO doesn't tank until then.

4 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

December futility at ORH ?

At BOS?

Just now, LongBeachSurfFreak said:

I just love how Woodford is shown for Vermont instead of Bennington Or Brattleboro!

this one looks like a pocono special 

And Gardner is shown instead of Fitchburg

10 minutes ago, LurkerBoy said:

It’s a madhouse! 

I think it was a few years ago, we had a thaw clear to the Arctic Circle...was that the same year as >0c 850 at the North Pole...?

57 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

eventually ... as enough GW has happened, you start seeing odd behaviors ... like, spring tapestry in the synoptics of deep winter month. 

 

and wouldn't such weirdness show up first in the lower troposphere...I mean, CO2 is a heavy gas, so its effects should in theory be concentrated there. Meanwhile you have more normal synoptics above it with less CO2 concentration, where the gradients still exist.

Could also speak to the strength of the PV despite a radically warming Arctic surface... the added heat simply isn't getting to the mid-and upper troposphere (not to mention the stratosphere) so you can actually have it colder there. Just speculating.

3 hours ago, Typhoon Tip said:

James ... there are glaring differences between these two ... just to help you out.

I sense that you may be identifying just the locations of (+) and (-) nodes in your comparison, and then leaping to passionate conclusions (heh, so to speak..). If so, that approach is not seeing crucial aspects with the interstitial relationships/limitations in between those nodes.  It's alright. Folks don't come along with that knowledge necessarily built into their filters, so don't take this as chiding.  

First and for most, ...the flow is too fast in the lower panel.  Look over Old Mexico to Bermuda: when you see that entire axis is in a 'laminar' construct ....with lots of isotachs smashed together and smooth, that means the flow is highly compressed. Compression = high velocity.  You don't want that ... A January 2005 redux would intrinsically require a slower field, which if you look at the geopotential height gradient tapestry of that top panel, the flow is much slower  ... key: outside of individual wave/spaces/impulses identifiable in the flow, the winds are lighter.  That aspect is important for both slowing systems down .. giving them time and space to maximize.   Another way to think of it: the total torque budget of the system is conserved at the S/W scale...and not borrowed by torque already used up in L/Ws ... screaming along like Jovian wind bands - mind you...I'm speaking in hyperbolic terms there, but just to help visualize the point.

Secondly, the individual wave spacing/morphology is not even in the same ilk really, even if the flow of the lower panel were slackened off...  Wrt to the targeted impulse in your comparison, I'm assuming to be the fast open-wave structure over the lower Ohio Valley area, vs the compact(er) mechanics diving through Wisconsin of the top.   It "might" be that the structure of the S/W is different partially due to the compression differences ... but, open wave mechanics in a progressive field isn't really in the same ball-park of cyclogenesis type --> evolution.  Point being ... you can have open waves in weaker overall gradients and vice versa.  There is a bit of mastery in knowing/learning to recognize which wave structures are 'heading' toward a negative/closure, but.. the baseline requirement is not having over say... 80 kts of wind outside of S/W spaces. 

Having pointed that out... yes, you can have powerful flat waves in high velocity saturation that create fast moving robust storm ... They snow prodigiously along < 500 mile wide corridors... Essentially, Dec 2005, or November 1987 are variants of that...But those are not analogs for Jan 2005.    

Another aspect/difference, which is more systemic in nature:  Notice that 'hook' low you see just west of California? Commonly referred in met parlance as an "outside" slider (yes there are 'inside' sliders, but both function similarly), that feature is a positively feed-back to the compression E of the 100th latitude(s). It's existence in space and time ... by exhausting latent heat down stream of it circulation, that is helping to rise heights from Texas throughout the Gulf/Florida and adjacent SW Atlantic Basin.  The flow down there can have elevated heights anyway, but the hook look is only adding to that circumstance. 

There may be other limiting factors, but these in total make analog ratio between those two charts, very far from 1

This seems like two seasons ago ('16-17) when we had weeks of fast laminar flow south of 40N owing to high heights in the tropics that just wouldn't budge for most of the winter, over a wide swath longitude. I remember many posts from you about how we couldn't get any digging or slowing of the flow. You think we're setting up for a similar thing this go-round?

1 minute ago, PowderBeard said:

I've heard of a rusty one but not a frozen one.

sad trombone, wa wa waah

18 minutes ago, LurkerBoy said:

I am not seeing the thaw, can somebody please illuminate which models are showing it, or is it being shown in more esoteric models than the usual?

Well, a slight thaw, rebound to normal or a little above, but Black Friday isn't exactly Hot Friday.

1 hour ago, tamarack said:

Might've been me, as I parsed the local long-tern co-op and found that BN temps on Oct were followed, on average, by BN snow.  BN temps in Nov led to AN snowfall.  However, neither trend was huge - the snowfall variation was mainly between 90-110% of average.  This Oct was 3°+ below average and Nov looks to finish BN as well, which would be just the 3rd time in 21 years for that double play.  O-N 2002 were each solidly BN and we had a long, cold, but not very snowy winter.  O-N 2008 were both BN, but Nov by less than 1°, and that winter had the rare (for my sheltered locale) true blizzard in Dec plus the 24.5" dump in late Feb.  I'll have to check Farmington for years with BN temps for both months. 

I wonder if it's different here in SNE. BOS also has better correlation between BN temps in November than BN in October with a good winter. But ideally, it's best to have both BN around here.

This year, however, the warm water off the south SNE coast might put pressure on that, bringing the baroclinicity farther north than would otherwise be the case. Certainly enough to get us in the game and hopefully you too.

2 hours ago, BrianW said:

Footage of them clearing it . The snowblower is not very impressive...

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20180329/p2a/00m/0na/011000c

but the company song is awesome!!!

9 minutes ago, tamarack said:

IIRC, Rainier/Paradise's tallest pack was something like 376".  Assuming that bus is 11-12' high, the wall in the pic must be in the 500" range.  (Of course, some of that may be stuff thrown up as the road was cleared, but still...)  And I'm surprised that it opens as early as April.  When my brother and family, then stationed in Germany, tried to access one of Norway's fjord towns (Flam or Geiranger) from inland one June about 30 years ago, they were unsuccessful because the roads at 3000-4000' elevation had not yet been cleared.

I don't know with what equipment you could even clear a 13-meter high snowpack. I think they used to use rotary plows in the Sierras (before tunnels and other road coverings that is) or Going-to-the-Sun road in Glacier NP. Are there machines that tall?

From the Aomori Snow Corridor (when it opens in April):

10 minutes ago, tamarack said:

Anyone in New England expecting wire-to-wire should get a job at Paradise on Rainier, where the average year sees over 50 feet of snow and only one season (14-15) came in with less than 400".

or the spa at Sukayu Onsen in Japan

21 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

Do we need a panic room? lol 

We need one of those calming rooms with lights:

5 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

Judah?

yup

4 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Yes classically we seem to get our snowy periods early to mid December while late December is our "thaw" period.  I could see that happening.  An early snow appetizer or two Dec 1-20, then the thaw could be like Dec 20-Jan 20, with the main course of winter snows to come Jan 20 to Mar 20.

Corresponds well with the period of max occurrence of noreasters.

Says it all about New England's diehard fans. Summit cam from MWN

The last two weeks have really taken a bite out of our SSTs...still warm south though to fuel our coastals. Images from 10/11, 10/18 and 10/25

58 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

  People around here are so shook about October snow. A fluke event in October has zero say about a 3-4 month seasonal pattern.

Good to see Quebec puts down a healthy snowpack in this deal. Probably not the same correlation with Siberian snowpack/SAI but will help those early-season Quebec highs to lock in cold air (like that really happens in Dec. :))

Now where you WANT the snow right about now is south of Hudson Bay, like it's doing. I read somewhere, don't remember where, that a rapidly expanding cover south of Hudson Bay in late October is very important, and what you want to see for a good winter in NE.

14 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

Ideal winter track. Practice makes perfect.

Yes, it seems the atmosphere (or the current state of it) must "learn" how to storm and then "practice" it.

9 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

It's not what the predominant NAO signal for the season is per se, but how many times it changes, thats why closer to neutral NAO seem to be the best seasons for snowfall- PD2 for example occurred when the NAO was positive.  There are many examples of this.

Also the warmer than normal temps offshore do allow for quicker bombogenesis and drag in colder air from the north into these storms.  That's actually a more favorable signal for northeast snowstorms than colder than normal waters just offshore.  The continent supplies the cold air and the water supplies the moisture, and the warmer the water the better, because that means the air above that water is more moist and the water is a powder keg for big storms (like what we had last winter.)  This is exactly why the past decade has been so great for big snows.

Yup the first one went to like 949 mb or something crazy like that off HAT...actually performed as modeled

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_2018_North_American_blizzard