cbmclean

27 minutes ago, Mr. Kevin said:

Does anyone know where the mjo is located currently? Dr. Roundy told me there are two areas of convection, one in the IO and in the Pacific. I would think we want the IOD to weaken some. That imo is hurting the mjo progression. 

The models all seem to think it is in the Indian Ocean right now, right on the border between zones 2 and 3.

3 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

 

Watch list or Reaper call?

Call me cautiously pessimistic.

8 minutes ago, C.A.P.E. said:

It's when we drink too much beer earlier than we should.

Also describes the 18z GFS, which coincides.  

Happy Hour is now replaced with "DD" = "Despair Days"

3 minutes ago, C.A.P.E. said:

It really wasn't all that sudden. And  all that despair will be undone if HH somehow delivers a pre-Christmas snowstorm, even if it is wholly not believable.

No, to be honest, it wasn't really sudden there were warning signs.  But to be frank it seems like there is always some sort of warning sign, something that fights us.  Sometimes they come to fruition, sometimes they disappear, sometimes they are brief, sometimes they are long.  I would say that it has just been the last three days that it has become completely apparent that you could avoid the signs only by being in denial and intellectually dishonest.

By the way, what is HH?  

Hard to not feel defeated today.  The wheels came off the bus, the bus kept sliding and slammed into an orphanage and burst into flames.  The wheels kept bouncing and slammed into a van load of nuns and kittens.

20 minutes ago, frd said:

Just looked at some composites, very interesting psu.

Hopefully, an eventual Pac transition occurs sooner versus later.  

Just reflecting, but maybe the  Pac puke was due, considering the duration that we had a decent Pac . Granted, the Atlantic muted the recent,  no as good Pac, as evident by the warmer December temps out West. 

Maybe the Pac nasty period is simply the Jan thaw two to three weeks early. My positive side says,  I hope so.  Not sure that fits though with the other indices in fantasy land. A very volatile period indeed.     

 GEFS MJO progression argues for a non-evil Pacific.  EPS predictably less positive.  I'll just convince myself that that the smaller overall spread in the GEFS means it has a better handle.

2 minutes ago, Ralph Wiggum said:

Red flags raised? 

White flags raised.  The hope that it will be transient just took another hit.  Dang it, when the PAC goes to crap it really digs in.  Has there ever been a "transient" crappy Pac?

6 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I’m sorry. I’m awful at that sometimes and saying things in a way that doesn’t offend.   I know you know what blocking is. I was kinda confused. But that post was mostly because there was starting to be comments about whether we were getting real blocking from others. I don’t know if they saw your post and went off on a tangent with it or it had its genesis somewhere else. 

I was confused about CAPEs timeframe.  I appreciate the educational post, though 

It was my fault.  I did not realize that the CAPE post was about AFTER Christmas, so I was confused.  The resulting PSU post was very informative for newbies though.

13 minutes ago, JakkelWx said:

That ULL was real close to becoming a Jan 2016 type deal. Unfortunately it's congrats South Carolina on your white Christmas.

I haven't actually looked at the runs so forgive the question if its stupid, but no matter how perfect the track and how strong it gets, won't it be too warm for anything frozen? 

6 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Originally they were to give a hint at meso scale features the globals couldn’t resolve. Now that the latest versions of the euro and gfs are run at 9k and 13k I believe the 12k NAM is pretty obsolete imo. The 3k is still useful. But while it can show what the meso scale structure of a system might look like, meso scale models aren’t going to get the exact location of a meso scale snow band right any more than it will a thunderstorm from 24 hours out let alone 48 or 60. When people expect that it’s going to fail every time. So if your using then to get a better idea of that the potential structure and meso scale features of an event might look like it’s useful. If your relying on them to give the exact placement of those meso scale features...good luck. 

Ah, I see.  Makes me ponder the potential future of NWP.  I wonder how much improvement is feasible before they start running up against the "limits of chaos".

Also, even if they can improve the equations and throw more supercomputer power at it, there is also the factor of the actual input data in terms of resolution and accuracy.  Although I have heard that improving weather satellites can help a lot there, since apparently a lot of the assimilated data comes from satellites these days.

4 minutes ago, stormtracker said:

Indeed

I am asking in all seriousness.  Do the regional models serve any observable purpose?  I would think that the only reason for their existence would be to more accurately model the area of their domain.  But based on the discussion on here I cannot see any evidence that, say, the NAM is more accurate over NA than the overall GFS etc.  So why do they exist at all?

4 minutes ago, Iceagewhereartthou said:

We're so funny. 

Friday: Pattern looks good, a lot to be excited about.

Saturday: Pattern stinks, might as well cancel winter, what does winter 2021 look like?

Sunday: Man oh man, all the players on the field, heading for fun times!

Monday: ?

Are you a day ahead of us in Easley?

An interesting post from one of the best MA forum posters.  Sigh.

28 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I agree completely with the first part. But I’m not sure I agree with the second. Since March of 2018 we haven’t had any real -NAO blocking. We had some bootleg transient ridges as a tpv lobe traversed a location to promote a short lived ridge there.  But what’s coming up seems like a classic west based -NAO episode. It also seems likely it gets muted for a while by as hostile a pac as we could have. 

The -NAO actually begins in only 24 hours as the current wave breaking near 50/50 builds a ridge over the top that links with the current epo side block.  By 48 hours it’s a classic west based -NAO with 50/50 low representation.

2 days later even a stronger west based -NAO representation.  And it is “blocking the flow”  despite a raging fast pac jet and gulf of Alaska vortex the next wave is being blocked under and is about to become the next 50/50 low.  That’s a classic evolution.  Lower heights exist in the means there because in a -NAO every wave gets forced under through that domain.  But one system doesn’t just sit there for weeks on end. If it did we would just be frigid cold and bone dry.  

A day later (now 4 days unto the -NAO) and we still have a classic ridge over low representation but the pacific problem is rearing its head.  That isn’t just a bad pac, it’s atrocious!  That gulf of Alaska vortex is pumping a ridge into central NAM.  The blocking isn’t breaking down but the central N Am ridge is going to merge and get absorbed which severely muted its effect.  

But even with that, it still manages to force the next wave under us!  With that pacific look that storm should cut to Hudson Bay!  If you want to know what our weather would look like without a -NAO with that pac just go back to December 2015.  The pattern over the east is blocked, that’s how a system gets suppressed south of us despite a vortex on the west coast.  It’s just not going to be able to completely offset a record pac jet in an awful alignment.  

At this point we’re 11 days unto the -NAO and the pac jet has cut underneath as soon as the vortex off the west coast relaxed some as is typical in a -NAO.  The pac is still bad just not the absolute dumpster fire it was.  This is still a classic west based -NAO with lower heights through the 50/50 space through the 11 days.  Who knows if it’s even right this far out but the representation is classic blocking regime imo.

Now at day 15 it’s evolved into an east based block.  Ironically the NAO index will be more negative now since its calculated at Iceland.  But again who knows if it’s right and the monster Scand ridge would imply we likely cycle back into blocking not break down.  

The look past day 5 could be BS.  But what we see on guidance is classic -NAO imo.  It’s muted by other hostile factors. We went through a similar problem towards the start of the last great blocking period in Feb into Mar 2018.  We suffered a perfect track rainstorm then a couple near misses due to an imperfect trough axis because of a less ideal Pac.  Then a storm got suppressed. It was during the second cycle or pulse of the NAO that we finally got a nice snowstorm in late March.  No idea how this will play out. But I do think this is finally a real -NAO. But that doesn’t mean we get snow.  We had a real -NAO most of the winter of 2000/2001 without much to show because of a not ideal pac.  December 2001 had a great NAO block the pac ruined.  It’s hapoened before. 

8 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I respectfully disagree (and just posted a thorough explanation in the main thread) with the claim that it’s not real blocking. But I agree 100% that it won’t likely matter wrt snow chances with the pacific looking the way it does. The NAO could offset a mediocre pac but not what’s coming. But the upside is blocking regimes can after recycle and persist and if the pac relaxes we would be in business. The blocking regime coming will save us from a dec AO number that would have been a bad omen for the rest of winter. We will likely end up with a near neutral AO and NAO number now. That’s a lot less hostile for our chances in Jan/Feb. There is very little correlation with March either way.  

Thanks PSU.  Your knowledge is appreciated as always.

Do you mind if I share this with the SE forum?

32 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

The Australian hasn’t been updated since February 

Ah I did not notice that.  Maybe it had to shut down when some of the members started breaking outside the freaking box.

1 hour ago, C.A.P.E. said:

Advertised LR pattern may be wrong. MJO forecast may be wrong. Do all the global ensembles agree?

I know you know this, but the MJO is not the sole driver of the long wave pattern either.

Well, it seems both the GEFS and the EPS  are agreeing it is time to head for the bunker.  Haven't checked the GEPS lately.

As far as MJO, the EPS has it floating around in the COD.  GEPS seems to be predicting an emergence into phase 5 or 6.

Euro seasonals has A LOT of spread but mean is 5/6.

Then there is the Austrailian model.  It clearly shows direction.

GEFS MJO forecast.  Kind of surprises me that the Pacific would be so hostile with this MJO forecast.

49 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

It will be funny if after years of not being able to buy any blocking the first legit NAO block we get suppresses a storm to Florada. 

So is it blocking or not blocking?  I don't know enough to tell the difference myself but some discussion in the main thread is claiming that it is not blocking at all but rather super progressive.

Got 2.46 for the event.

3 hours ago, NC_hailstorm said:

Temps through 12/13.Couple really warm days (12/1 and 12/10) keeping temps closer to average.

GSP  -0.6

HKY  0.0

AVL  +1.1

RDU  -0.2

GSO  -1.2

CAE  +1.3

CLT  +1.2

Unfortunately should be well above normal after the looking Pac puke.  Still not too bad for December in this new era.

24 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

How far are you from Snowshoe? 

Nearly six hours unfortunately.  NC has a couple of rinky-dink ski areas which aren't much closer.  Went to one once but predictably it was in the middle of a warm period so it was kind of pathetic.  Still had fun though. 

I have tried to interest the wife in a compromise with snowshoeing, but she still has no interest.  She hates cold.

Just now, Mr. Kevin said:

Both models are more erratic now than in the past.

I have heard that said repeatedly, but I have to admit that I am skeptical.  From my understanding, it is clear that model verification scores have significantly improved over the last two decades, so I have a hard time envisioning why they would become more volatile.  Perhaps the weather itself has become more volatile and therefore more difficult to simulate?  But again, that should show up in decreased verification scores.

2 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

You’re making me want to plan my annual ski trip. With the deluge out there I’m thinking early January maybe this year. Torn between hitting up Snowmass/aspen or Solitide/Snowbasin in Utah. I’ve yet to adequately explore those areas. I love off piste and tree skiing. I know snowmass has some excellent stuff off the cirque and burnt mnt glades. Salt lake is much easier access for a long weekend trip. I might just wait until a week before and let the snow conditions decide for me. 

I've wanted to get onto skiing for a while.  Living in eastern NC with parents who have no interest didn't start me off well.  My wife has no interest in it, so not much hope of it anytime soon.

Man I have enjoyed the seasonal-to-cool aspect of the first half-of December, but man I wish that the Pac puke had chosen that time to go apesh!t instead of right at Christmas.