cbmclean

Actually what I think I have learned is that THE critical factor is always whichever one sucks for us at a given time.

29 minutes ago, Ralph Wiggum said:

Thing I've learned over the past several seasons....a good PAC can overcome a meh Atlantic. And more often than not a good Atl with a crud PAC does us no good. There are exceptions but I almost always look to the PAC side first before seeing what the Atl is doing. 

Yeah but based on PSU's findings it appears that the NAO may be more important in the average west-based Nino because it helps modulate the alwaye Nino tendency to inject Pacific air into NA.

I agree that in Nina the PAC is an absolute.  If it is flooding us with Pac Puke then forget the NAO.  If we have a nice EPO or PNA ridge, then perhaps the NAO is of less consequence.

7 hours ago, Paleocene said:

Nerds

Geological epoch.

1 hour ago, Maestrobjwa said:

Anybody care to weigh in on why we've been seeing this more often lately?

The @psuhoffman lending library has many volumes you could check out on this topic, but in your heart of hearts, you know the answer to this question already

1 hour ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

We're in a bad decadal cycle in the Pacific (last 25 years):

https://ibb.co/nkdRM0v

And a higher frequency of La Nina 

https://ibb.co/GnzTZ0y

La Nina is up on El Nino 15-9 since we went +AMO in 1995. 

I thought El Nino vs La Nina was modulated by the PDO as opposed to the AMO.

17 minutes ago, aldie 22 said:

I think if we try hard enough we can get 5 or 6 more people in the mid/long range thread to tell us how next week won't work.

I saw what you did.

5 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

I’ll be sure to post Webb’s 9 tweet thread about it and the never ending torch when he gets it posted 

Be sure to include lots of flame emojis.

1 hour ago, Weather Will said:

I have had a horrible month at work so a Christmas miracle would be great

Tell your boss that the NAO has degraded on the long range guidance and as a result you need to take a few extra weeks off to watch the models.

4 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Welcome to 3 pages ago. Let me know when you hear about Elvis. 

He still lives and no one can tell me any different!!

In other news, a link for the curious to the CPS MJO weekly write-up

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/mjoupdate.pdf

Summary: there is a disagreement between the dynamical models which predict the wave dies (potentially due to destructive interference from a CCKW in the Indian Ocean), and the "RMM forecast" which favor continuation of the wave into 7 and beyond.  

Not sure what entity/model is the "RMM forecast" other than the models, but I sure hope they are right.  I've heard many people that the models tend to kill waves too quickly so maybe...

1 hour ago, olafminesaw said:

FWIW after delaying the transition to phase 8 of the MJO the past couple days, the most recent GEFS run sped up and gets us to phase 8 around Christmas. It would be hard to imagine that if this plays out we wouldn't see a marked improvement to the pattern.

Honest question, does it "count" if it tunnels through the COD to get to phase 8?  Not used to seeing that.

2 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

These are all very good points. But going from a super majority consensus to a split camp scenario which seems to be what you’re implying, is still a move in the wrong direction. And no they aren’t super reliable. Frankly they suck at those ranges. But we were noting when they looked great. I’m simply noting when they don’t.  Is it some super awful sign no, but it’s also not a good thing to see guidance move the wrong direction.  
 

I’m frankly a little surprised by the pushback the last two times I simply made an objective observation/analysis of what the guidance showed.  I didn’t make any predictions at all. Actually I’m in record with above normal snow and said I’m sticking to that for now. No one pushed back a couple weeks ago when I observed how the same exact guidance I’m pointing to now looked great. No one had arguments why it didn’t look great or why it wasn’t with looking at. It was just a bunch of likes. Now I do the exact same thing, the only difference is the guidance isn’t so awesome and it’s a bunch of “but this that ie the other” arguments. 

If the opinion of a random SE weenie (who has latched on to this forum like a tick), makes any difference to you, I appreciate your unbiased and intellectually impartial analysis.  Please keep it coming.

I just ignored my first ever person on here.  I feel dirty.

59 minutes ago, brooklynwx99 said:

extratropical forcing is leading to a huge momentum pulse from the Pacific jet… a +EAMT, to be exact. models under did the influence of this forcing, but luckily, it’s temporary

I think I may have read something about how stout +EAMT events can help destabilize the PV.  Anyone else ever hear of that?

42 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

I mean...yeah I kinda wish they would, but at the same time ya don't wanna have too many strict rules either. Yes it can be annoying (unless it's being used as an example to demonstrate how a particular setup could work), but all we can do is try to ignore it!

The problem is that individual isn't doing it just out of lack of knowledge.  He is a known troll who has haunted the tropical forum for several years now.

7 minutes ago, mattie g said:

I'm irrationally annoyed by what the Canadian is showing for early next week. ~3" of precip over 48 hours from storm in which a northern stream vort drops down into the backside of a juicy southern stream vort and that stays pretty far off the coast.

Stupid Pacific air...

Is it just me or do perfect track storms become more common lately when the CONUS is flooded with Pac Puke?  I know I know; the MA used to be able overcome less than ideal Pacifics, but not any more.  

A link to Dr. Simon Lee's page documenting his weather "regimes".

https://simonleewx.com/north-american-weather-regimes/

Obviously we are about to embark on a very robust "Pacific Trough" regime.  There is some hint of a potential transition to a "Greenland High" regime starting between Christmas and New Years, but it is by no means a certainty.

47 minutes ago, NorthHillsWx said:

This is drought-busting rain. Training over us since 4:00. Over 2”

Must be nice.  The I-95 corridor has been absolutely shafted.  Virtually nothing here.

That spin move Wallace pulled out was impressive.  He definitely hit the circle button on his controller.

@CAPE

@WxUSAF

@psuhoffman

Do you guys share in today's general despair?  Looking at the big three ensembles, not sure that I see anything worse so much as just a failure to see anything better.  Perhaps I am just impatient.

The mood has turned ugly today.

20 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Almost all my “predictions” are just me pointing out probabilities based on data analysis of history. “What happened  when we were previously in this same situation” type stuff.  Sometimes it helps identity when we’re likely to get snow. Lately it’s mostly identified when we’re fooked. But it’s just math.  Anyone could do it. 

 Not necessarily.  It takes mental discipline and an analytical mind.    Neither is in over abundance.

20 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

For whatever reason whenever I make a nuanced post it feels like the positives get ignored and the negatives are all anyone sees.  I’m not alarmed by this at all yet. I was just acknowledging (since someone asked earlier) that the pattern progression has slowed on guidance. 

Couple a' things:

1. Everyone on here has been burned by can-kickage, especially over the last 7 years,  Many of us vividly remember the 2019 El Nada vividly.  So at the first hint of CK, we get the sweats.  It's like the smell of smoke to a herd of spooked horses.

2. You have a history of accuracy in predictions.  Lately many(most?) of the predictions have been of doom, simply because we have been a prolonged stretch of total suck.  When you note even a potential for concern, the wise among us take note.  Case in point: the famous December 30th 2020 post where you described that, based on ALL historical evidence: we were in for fail.  And fail we did.  

So, take it as a compliment.

9 minutes ago, jayyy said:

And let’s face it… it IS the best model these days post upgrade.


.

I haven't seen any of the 500 HP verification scores lately.  There was a time not too long ago when the GFS had dropped to third behind the CMC.  Is that no longer true?

11 minutes ago, CAPE said:

Also the EPS is suggestive of h5 heights increasing into the NAO domain. This is really what I am keeping an eye on. We pretty much know what the Pacific is going to be based on location of Nino forcing, but we really could benefit from a more favorable NA.

@psuhoffman mentioned that as "Phase 2" of the master plan. 

Meanwhile GEPS has some hints of ridging in the EPO PNA domain but very subtle.  I hate waiting on pattern changes.

ETA: Correction, I should have said PNA domain, not EPO.  Alaska still troughy.

I'm honestly scared to even look at the ensembles today.  Someone braver than me: has the can-kicking started, or has it held steady?