Typhoon Tip

I won’t typically get involved in that sort of thing but where is this troll post? - ‘nough energy spent in it finally triggers morbid curiosity heh. I mean I just scanned back a few didn’t see anything that antithetic but perhaps I missed it.

Lol "useless nodes" ...exactly, 'snicker bars in the swimming pool'

Boom! you know ... I think it's been screwing with the teleconnectors, both dependability ( they are unstable in signals ), but also, because the velocities, +1 PNA and -1 NAOs... -1 AO whatever, they don't seem to materialize the distance mass-field forcing as obviously.. It's almost as though the telecon domains have to get more anomalous strong to get to the same forcing as they use to. -1 NAO west based doesn't exert here the same way it used to, when the Pacific is pointing space shuttle thrusters at us... so to speak -

Cool .. but, as intimated in that - I wonder if the 'strength' of coupling can persist. Once the compression maelstrom of the ensuing deeper cold season kicks in, that may alter the landscape a bit. I actually agree that the base-state right now appears as such - for now...

Oh I was being hyperbolic and snarky dude. lol.. I mean, there's a some truth in dark comedy - but I wouldn't submit that to the AMS for publication either. Yeah, I don't know about DJF this year as confidently as last, honestly. For the Oct/November thus, I am seeing hallmarks in the hemisphere for more La Nina, agreed there - does it last? mm I think we are advantaged, thus far, because we are in the blurred distinction era between standard autumn and deeper winter. In this space, the gradient of winter isn't maximized just yet.. so it's mitigation isn't happening. There are evidences now - like literally this last two weeks --> - that the hemispheric velocity is increasing though. Once the latter truly envelops the hemisphere more fully, I wonder if that - again ... - is when the ENSO contribution begins to get damped/mask beneath the compression/velocity soaking. It's simple theoretical Meteorology, which deals with wave mechanics in the atmosphere. If the velocity in the ambience increases, that intrinsically changes the wave resonance... Well? if that's true, we can't expect La Nina to 'force' the same way as it did when the velocities were more like mid-last century. It just means these ENSO has to be contributory along a newer idea, hopefully statistically demoed at some point. It is noted ... the 2nd year of cool ENSO's tend to drive better - again, the problem I have though, that was/is based upon a pre-HC expansion era... Personal posits: I've always thought that the HC would get in the way of the El Nino forcing, more so than the La Nina ( * believe you and I had this discussion last year in the main forum somewhere's) ...the circulation of the expanding HC is - counter intuitively - weaker, not stronger. Growth in the cell does not mean it is stronger in that sense. It's probably something more like the same mechanics, but spread out over a wider area, so it moves slower. The wider HC band/slower circulation, isn't mine, btw way - it's in a growing bevy of accredited papers. Anyway, if the ONI is in concert, that means that in spite of the HC, the circulation is still breaking down KW propagation allowing easterlies to dominate. So that would be my suggestion - keep an eye on the ONI ... I do think that at times the La Nina will present, but I think we will have other times when former gets in the way. That's what I'm leaning. Unfortunately, this is just a comment to the characterization of the flow/expectation ... I don't have a f'n clue what this will do to snow... ( although as we were hypothesizing in the other thread a while ago, the fast flow may shred wave structures, and rob lower tier events. ...etc) ... I think storms will tend to move fast, and if we lost to weak waves we could make up in having more of them - there's that too. We should also note, the HC expansion --> speeding up the hemisphere by ambient gradient, .... that's not all or nothing? These are moving amounts, week to week and probably more like month to month.

And the confidence is a hard on, huh

The Euro trended pretty heavily toward the GFS for that gig next week... That's a polar warm sector for SNE on just this one 12z cycle. plus, it's likely over-amped - like I just got done saying... - but how about -30C over mid Ontario D7 poised and ready wow... and right after we get rain, too - perfect!

The other aspect that's as fun as a splinter lodged in the rib area of a sweater's fabric is that these individual horizon emergence' ? They unrelentingly become less and less as they get closer and closer in time. Maybe not on a straight diagonal to hell but the end points invariable seem to feature a verification that is downsized -

But are we kicking the can ... It seems both warm and cool pattern looks are being pushed off in lieu of just oscillatory and uninspired. -nice

One wonders if that can really end very well ... https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/29/americas/xenobots-self-replicating-robots-scn/index.html

Wait - what was urs ? Mine was like this... Bookending -NAO/-EPO tendencies, with hyper fast shearing flow in between... and patterns that only coincidentally look like La Nina when they do, but a 'blizzard' of posts running to the bank because they just couldn't wait to evidence it as ENSO-caused, when the real cause for the winter behavior is CC gradient destroying the previous climate dependencies... So maybe a run-on sentence ... haha

ah yeah... that's an interesting veneer for it - LOL

Yeah I was a considering the exact same aspects but ... the thing with this progressive nature to the flow ... the "correction vector" may actually be less supportive of the UKMET. it sucks sick of it. like everything just tries get around the planet immediately when it emerges

It does ... no this is an excellent point. ( EDIT: oh ..ha. I read "Earth" as "Euro" ... haha sorry. But hey - both balance ) The Euro's 4-d variable system is all ooh and ahh sounding and all, but what it ultimately achieves is 'smoothing' - or attempting to do so .. It tries to mute unwanted 'spontaneous emergence' along the way of processing. They are natural bi-products of complex systems operating in time ..etc..etc.. But, they then propagating onward to seriously f-up a total outlook when they do - or can. But, the only problem with that is,... sometimes the emergence are real. Chaos can't be ultimately, entirely de-cluttered; noise is a real aspect of complex systems, too - to wit, the atmosphere is definitely representative. lol. I suspect that's why crossing D5 to D7 in that model routinely takes trough and ridges and ends up adding to their anomaly - in either direction, ...by some percentage. It's basically canceling out the features that are negatively interfering, then the feature in question gets a surge for 'virtual god' ( if you will ...) washing the processing by shedding those mitigations.

heh, m'yeah, sorry - I do. Lol. Fond memories with those. I have seen more positive busts with those than any other type. And in some weird personal 'holistic' symbology ... for some reason cool things were always going on in my life around the time one happened. So it's like a lighthouse in the sea of disparity, when one gets modeled... I might be able to get laid. hahahaha.., kidding, but the reason the positive busts happen more frequently with those is likely do to them being smaller in latitude and thus not having a hugely physically detectable presence at long-ish leads in guidance. Simply put, they're sneaky. Both the events in the double pop in 1996 Will and I were reminiscing yesterday were both NJ model lows. So was the exit bomb the nailed SE zones way back in '86 or '87 ... it seems there were NJ lows in both those autumns though so ... One could argue the mega snow bomb of Dec 23 1997 was a NJ hybrid.

Something like this ..yeah. As a gross estimate or point of conjecture ... it'd be like; 20% cut into low tier event climate. Then, 10% cut into low to mid range ... Followed by (+)(-)5% around some mid point/middling events. +5% adds to middling+ with +20+% on majors. It's a grab and give spectrum, from low to high in that sense. And, I would almost be willing to conjecture that their is an increase in freak over production events, enough so to add new category - perhaps call it 'hyper events' ... So low, mid, upper, hyper ...and so on Fwiw, the PWAT increase stuff does come from formalized climate science and modeling therein. That's not just our surmise and educated guessing - it's mathed out. As it "may" apply to our local corner of the world and record keeping .. mm, sometimes when it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...it's a duck. The notion of a velocity saturation as secondary modulator? ( which i have personally noted has become more like a base-line prevalence over recent decade(s), regardless of ENSO this or polar telecons ) That is an offset to that > PWAT model, as a early posit. But I like it

It's an interesting discussion because by atmospheric physics, principles of ..., there should be more snow ( and rain) regardless small, middling, or major events. It comes down to a warming ambience holding greater theta-e ( WV), such that synoptic forcing in a richer medium becomes more proficient. I think there are other factors... Speed of the flow ( imho ) is bigger in this than people realize. And it fits that ... because the faster flow field is becomes a mechanical delimiter ? And the first to go in that scenario would be the weaker S/W's in the field. So that "might" account for why their is increases except for those lowered tiered events.

Right right … when it’s obvious totals could exceed 75 in both - what’s the explanation for that discrepancy

There’s been a striking correlation between favorable model depictions vs pulling the rug immediately upon the most available eyes drawn to observe them. weird

still, there are examples where two pops took place ... In 1996 there were two storms 18 hours apart ... between last flakes of the first, 4- 9", and then Jim Cantore almost getting struck by lightning in ORH thundersnow lol it was barely a day between the two. It was early Dec that year, and both were flattish waves spaced closely but managed to get it done.

My experience with systems spaced closely in fast flows like this is one or the other tends to become dominant. Both by wave spacing arguments, but also feed-backs in the environment. If the lead gets a little more potent it'll sweep the dynamics away so that might belay developing the 2nd, ( next Mon ). But if the 2nd evolves stronger, it'll tend to damp the first out more so.

but even in the Euro.. the Dec 4 wave is hugely powerful. nada. hmm I don't know to question the Euro paltry result of that, or, pat it on the back for seeing the compression in the field as an inherent limitation - which it is... But, how much or how little.

Just thinking back ..isn't this the same system the Euro had 3 days ago on a D9/10 run, that drove pressure to historic depths? - perhaps this is coincidentally in the same timing window. Not sure. I had mused that the following run was an 'overcompensation' when it came in flat and devoid of anything, but this flat fast flow ... remember the metaphor re the 'unmanned firehose' we flop -

Unfortunately science does .. .heh. It was a white xmas whether we're spurned or not - 12:01 AM probably had 5" inches still or something... lol. Oy

I almost wouldn't be 'as' concerned at the present notion of the EPS and GEFs means being so flat with some of these ( otherwise ) interesting oper. runs. Namley... D8-ish. Lower resolution model types, such that individual ensemble members are ... are trying to operated in a progressive open wave pattern. The flow is fast, ...it doesn't lend to helping forecast accuracy of these individual ensemble members, that don't employ the 'souped up' physics of the operational runs. It "might" offer a bun explanation for why the there is an interesting coherent agreed upon signal from the Euro and GFS for D8, for a flat fast mover, yet vague in the clusters. If the flow were slower and more meridian in structure, that might lend to the means picking it up better at this range.