Typhoon Tip

Well yeah… I was trying to throw central New England folks a bone. Funny thing is if the Gfs corrects another tick like the one it just did then we’re probably getting ice down to the pike And west of Methuen. lol. Jk

Look at how narrow those fields are. Testament to compression I guess This whole b-c passage is kind of like a pseudo H.A. correction event. The lower latitude ridge is really in process of progressing east - so there’s action at synoptic inflection, so to speak. It’s just is getting crowded by the eager trough arriving. One can wonder if the trough slows down just a little bit and timing am I actually open the door for a little bit more of a New Jersey model type low.

I still think that’s over baked with that follow up southern trough thing… The thing is … it can happen. Yup but there are more reasons to be suspect of that. Ridging in the southeast is one but the other… How many times have shortwaves been over amplified by the GFS in that time range. It did pay off in the last system remember the euro actually had it no event till 36 hours out even though it turned out to be crap and rain and whatever, GFS it saw it first. I’m really more interested in the lead stuff trending colder like Phinny and I were tracking.

I don’t think that southern stream feature has much of a chance frankly unless it ends up correcting much more powerful. Not impossible but less likely perfect reason to have it go ahead and happen where it’s just strong enough lol. Otherwise hgts are so high over adjacent southeast that as a it comes in it’s just going to compress the flow/speed shear will absorb it.

Don’t forget the winter between April 11 and June 5th …

But isn’t that bad for soil chemistry the following farming season? I thought frozen ground was better for keeping nitrogen closer to the surface… Which would be particularly useful in a year where there’s less snow because snow is the nitrogen fix; so if you have less of it you don’t want it percolating down deep below root levels. It’s one of those things where I kind of understood it but didn’t dig very deep when I read about it in all honesty

Plus I wonder … you can also get an initiation of upslope snow happening pretty quick when cold air floods in and pushes a wet airmass up the topography etc. ANAs are mid-level mechanics though where there is still strong jet running parallel to the boundary over pass-through …. pulling moisture back across the boundary interface usually some 8000 feet up. Other aspect to your point is that your higher elevation up there may allow the precipitation actually make it to the ground because a lot of times what’s going on is that the models are not seeing evaporation going on below the fall column under the ANA area so they got fallacious QPF

Yeah I’m not convinced we ignore that down into central NE until 72 hrs no. Could end up a longer duration transitional ptype event. I gotta think you’re snowing in NNE above that boundary because that’s pretty cold near by southern QUE/SE Ontario so the thermal gradients would be packed.

I don’t really think of them as real possibilities… more like “placeholders“… Kind of like the models are making reservations in case they change their mind. I think I’ve seen one successful ANA verify. I’ve come to find that more often they either evolve into an actual cyclones or they go the other way and just become sharp cold fronts

You know you guys … it’s not as far fetched as we think that ice and/or mix could creep toward S VT/NH over the 1st .. 2nd - talking just prior to the ANA/frontal wave the GFS is pimping. some guidance hitting again at weightier high pressure setting up and with that type of flat open characteristic of the overall … if cold gets underneath it would be back built …. We’re not there yet but there’s both hints and time

Welp ... I've gone and done it. I've managed to earn myself what in all objective sense of it should as well be construed as a well-deserved and legitimate idiot check from moderation. Ah, a warning - Just waded into the wrong sub-forum, and let probably what is regular fair in that Off-Topic realm, pot shots masquerading behind a thin veil of congeniality, get the better of me. The only difference was ...I chose a direct approach - heh.. enter imagination here ( ). Funny thing is... if you cross that congeniality line too far and earn one of these warnings, apparently you can't do anything else until you acknowledge the warning. That's fine ...I understand the necessity to make sure the point is driven home, but to excoriate one, when the there is just as much at fault and doesn't get reprimanded, merely because they didn't use the c* word ( hahaha... I know, I got no excuse - ), ...effectively condones their behavior. I guess that's why they call it Off Topic? Cheers -

Good question ... let me know, too, when you find a 'free' site that does that.

yeah I see the edit - ha... Happens to me all the time. Anyway, the GEF - based PNA is struggling out of it's semi-persistent nadir beyond D7 ... The EPS computation 'probably' does so too, just eye-ballin' the graphics over the hemisphere .. .heights tending to rise over the S/W in both the EPS and GEF means. That would be step one in reducing the destructive interference east of Colorado. As far as these wild S/W's driving misty warm sectors ... those events may also succumb to pancaking. We could get one to work out - so to speak ... - for mutilating the system into more of mooshed over-running deal. Problem is...these S/W out there D5+ are over-magnified. Then they have to get corrected to reality anyway... Add that sort of hidden trend, with the above facets... it's not quite as clear that a Lakes cutter has to happen. It could also be a matter of perspectives - these could just turn out to be frontal passages in general. It seems the 06z GFS has enough S/W power conserved to clip SE zones with snow... so, that's one example where S/W wins a bit.

Meh.. there's a little hyperbole to that "sentiment" of nothin' vs somethin' Yes yes, of course, it's about more vs less. Although, if you wanna get assholier than thou and strict about it, I got nothin' last night from a very highly negate interaction of sending a modest S/W, ...through and over top a HUGEly powerful ridge ... So, there are extremes that can approach absolute in either direction. But the point is approaching sure. And the wave mechanical balancing stuff is true though.

Yeeah, re luck versus pattern. We have observed a semi-persistent, massive ridge arc imposing roughly IA-NS ( Nova Scotia) along mid latitudes. Actually rather remarkably fixated at that. The physics of taking shorter wave-length atmospheric perturbations over the rainbow ( haha) ... tends to cancel out storms. You really can add the two wave equations and divide by two... ( sign(S/W) + sign(L/W)) ... divided by 2 If the quotient you get is negative, you get nothin' ... If the quotient is positive, you get somethin' ... Depending how positive(negative) is related to how much you either get, or gets taken away. What we've just seen in the last 2 ... 3 days has been negative, commonly referred to as 'destructive interference' in the vernacular of the science. You could really watch this happen over 12 to 18 hours as light to moderate expression over the eastern Plains/southern Lakes got gobbled up by the negative quotient of the wave arithmetic of present S/W attempting to negotiate with an asshole L/W. lol That's not luck, if they 'know it is there.' Because one who knows and understands the basic wave mechanical interactivity ...Junior in college level dynamics stuff above, would have predicted less occurring. If they did not know that logic above, and just predicted or thought, or wanted ... or "felt" more for other mentality ... they might be inclined to say they were unlucky That's all it is... whether one is right or wrong, without knowing.

Meh... it's all simpler than that. Luck, is by definition, a more or less favorable outcome based upon probability. Forecasting is intrinsic to that - it is by virtue of the science/definitions of "predictability," intrinsically thus based upon probabilities. Not sure why that facet/logical scope escapes anyone. Looking at it more complex: I wonder if people are getting confused over narrowing the amount of reliance one has upon probability. If one is wholly reliant on probability, they may get rich...they might not. That is the extend of complexity to that model, though. Done. There is a kind of Relativity in probability and luck. If one is looking at a system and is predicting a future state of said system based upon observably changing components/analysis, in real time, they are relying on what they see - that is the one and done. However, there is a dense of array of forces that effect all systems in Nature, that cannot be readily perceived in that way. They more vs less impose changes to outcomes. If so happens to be on the more side, the "odds" ( i.e., luck ) of the result, will not fall in favor of the predictor because the system is "blindly" changing. If they are less imposing, than the observable, real-time components will tend to lead the result in line with initial predictions. In either case, the reliance is still on probability. To lower one's reliance on probability, they must improve their ability by having deeper insight... This is usually done by two means: one is to really dig in and ferret out those seductively innocuous, yet discrete forces that 'team up' ( if you will ...), somehow gain sight on what is not readily influencing the systems - thus, limiting reliance upon open chance. The 2nd way is via wisdom. There is nothing wrong with the a-priori as a method ( I mean ... don't bother explaining the virtue of that to a Millennial ... heh). The problem with a-priori is that one runs the risk of being stubbornly locked into presumption. The best insight or predictions are some inclusion of both wisdom/experience, together with profounder research. It really gets fuzzy, too when emergent properties kick in... where interactions emerge properties that did not exist in the array of primary assumptions. Now you have primary array, plus 2ndaries...and these 2ndaries may then interact to product tertiary emergent properties... And on and so on, they compound back in and modulate as well. Genius is the wild-card. It like 'emerges' out of the quantum foam of neuroplastisity and cannot really be explained in and of its self. We call that "flash of insight" moments. The eureka times. Einstein used flash of insight like a registry, and then discounted the flashes that were less likely...and he was left with one that was worth proving mathematically - but the flashes of insight happen first. It's fascinating as a topic, really.. Anyway, really all probability is, is a negation of what is unknown, thus making observable what influences a problem. Kind of like, " ...remove all that is impossible, whatever remains, however seemingly unlikely, must be the truth" At one end of the sophistication, you have pure guess...at the other, you have an " Occam's Razor " of weather.

Just a ten year old can kicker … minded me own business

One should not continue to elicit a positive angle on the MJO • Both velocity potential based MJO and RMM indices indicate an active West Pacific MJO event with little continued eastward propagation in recent weeks. • There is disagreement among the dynamical models regarding the predicted evolution of the MJO, leading to continued uncertainty in the outlook. • Tropical cyclone formation is favored over the southern Pacific where any coherence of the MJO is more likely to manifest itself during the next two weeks. • While West Pacific MJO events typically favor colder than normal conditions across the CONUS, extended range model guidance continues to mimic more of an amplified negative Pacific North American pattern, suggestive of La Niña dominating the extratropical response over North America.

I had posted this in the other Dec thread but ... seems this philosophy is needed in here - it's a perspective op ed Sometimes winter biased patterns will sea-saw ... Patterns come and go, the transient ones... But there are those 'footed' types, that appear to be the return, or base-line, after those either transient looks either constructively or destructively played out over top. The typical gestation time of those returning base-line pattern is seldom longer than 45 days ... Rarely, you can get 90 day persistence but that seldom occurs - I don't think I've ever seen that, personal. Case in point, the winter of 1995-1996, a very good example of the above playing out. There were three patterns that very coherently characterized that long winter. The first was early November through middle January. It was a neutral PNA in a slower flow, while pulsing -NAOs that favored the western limb of the domain. Sometimes there was more of a physical block, but other times ... trough/storm routing just seemed to move as though the block were still there - that's the non-linearity of the Pacific R-wave forcing, ...which officially checks out the reader - LOL. Anyway, it fit right into the 45 day model really... Then there was a break, a hUge thaw that came with it. Something triggered an impressive whole-scale hemispheric/R-wave repositioning event. I recall the Pacific from Japan all the way around the globe reconstructed - this forced retrograding W ( or progressing E... six'o dozen) of the persistent cold over eastern N/A. but it ony lasted 2 to 3 weeks, a time in which we saw striking reversal of winter fortune, with some big snows and cold retrograding back to the NP to western Great Lakes, while back east flipped from deep cold and prolific snow fall anomalies, to staggering warmth. It was a short gestation however. Not sure what happened to end it, but it proved to be more of an interlude pattern. What set back in really wasn't the same as the Nov-Jan pattern; in other words, it did not appear to merely return - least not per what I remember of the behavior. Nevertheless, and much to the joyous exhalation of the enduring winter weather enthusiasts, cold and snow returned, and the new paradigm lasted into mid April. I've had conversations with other Meteorologist, what would have been of that year, if that mid interlude did not take place. What if the three deep cutters just did what all others did. That one would have blown 2015 out of the water, ... because it was a continental -scaled event anomaly. 2015 was more local to New England. Not a 90-day variation. Two 45-day patterns, interceded with one that may have actually ( interestingly ...) been more statistically likely to be the case given to the weak-ish cool ENSO going on during an era when ENSO's meant shit ( half kiddin). Not to start a causality squabble, but I do wonder if what we are seeing so far this year could be La Nina forcing that is constructively interfering with EAMT tendencies - together that's getting the hemisphere 'stuck' in a sense... It's all speculation of course... but I know that this pattern persistence has "over-performed" relative to ENSO alone. Something is giving it a kick-back. Anyway, we've been pummeled with highly realized -PNA negative interference pattern over eastern N/A mid latitudes, and it has lasted over a month. I'm personally interested in how the next 10 days start behaving, as to whether these gestation lengths get tested.

I dunno, did they "snow" this ?

Put another way ... I suspect most would agree, if we can't get even so much as a reach-around redemption, we'd rather it be a 70 F climate change freak show the whole way, and green up in mid February...with thunderstorms and beach weather by March. Really just make it "the year without a winter" and stop f'in around with it. But nope - this has been an eerie finding more reasons to be worse. LOL

Saying this in the spirit of commiseration but heh, at least in 2012 it was so bad it actually got good because we were handed so many weekends in January and February 56 ...60 F and could do stuff outside. Not all of them, no. But we were doing disk golf in cargo shorts and light sweatshirts on a lot of those Saturday's that year. This? can't do that. It's just dog shit. It's really rather remarkable just how bad this is.

Just as an aside: the PNA domain is truly enormous. In fact, it probably in some statistical theory could be considered too big to be entirely practical. It encompasses some 1/4 of the geographic area of the planet to more or less hyperbole. That pragmatics of it comes into question when looking historically ... there have been notable storm episodes in -3 PNA's. This year? Is not one of those - so far. It is what it is. There are other factors - HC ain't helping...sorry to say, because laying a ridge tendency over a lower latitude Walker boundary that is tending to be N of the previous 'Millennial' climate signal, is inherently a constructive feed-back between the two. It may not express as huge heights extending clear to ORD-BUF-PWM, but when not ... we're trading tall tropospauses for increased wind velocities. Both represent the same energy in the budget. When the gradient relaxes, the rest state is a modest positive anomaly..etc, if perhaps not demonstrative - subtle variances have bigger impacts in that sense. That's how the HC shit works. I'm digressing.. I was just going to point out that with a huge PNA domain, it is possible to have it's west or east domain region more + or -, and given to which, that may pull the whole field up or down. If the west part of the domain is hugely negative, but the east aspect is modestly positive, we may be favored for storminess in that situation despite an overall -3 PNA... and vice versa. I'm not sure how it applies to now as an argument - I don't think it is. I think with the west biased -WPO/EPO thing that we collectively may have though 12 days ago would result better, that is sort of indicative of actually helping the -PNA expression.

Sometimes winter biased patterns will sea-saw, too - there's that... Patterns come and go, the transient ones... But there are those 'footed' types, that appear to be the return, or base-line, after those either transient looks either constructively or destructively play out over top. The typical gestation of the returning base-line pattern is seldom longer than 45 days ... Rarely, you can get 90 persistence but that seldom occurs - I don't think I've ever seen that, personal. Case in point, the winter of 1995-1996, a very good example of the above playing out. There were three patterns that very coherently characterized that long winter. The first was early November through middle January. It was a neutral PNA in a slower flow, while pulsing -NAOs that favored the western limb of the domain. Sometimes there was more of a physical block, but other times ... trough/storm routing just seemed to move as though the block were still there - that's the non-linearity of the Pacific R-wave forcing, ...which officially checks out the reader - LOL. Anyway, it fit right into the 45 day model really... Then there was a break, a hUge thaw that came with it. Something triggered an impressive whole-scale hemispheric/R-wave repositioning event. I recall the Pacific from Japan all the way around the globe reconstructed - this forced retrograding W ( or progressing E... six'o dozen) of the persistent cold over eastern N/A. but it ony lasted 2 to 3 weeks, a time in which we saw striking reversal of winter fortune, with some big snows and cold retrograding back to the NP to western Great Lakes, while back east flipped from deep cold and prolific snow fall anomalies, to staggering warmth. It was a short gestation however. Not sure what happened to end it, but it proved to be more of an interlude pattern. What set back in really wasn't the same as the Nov-Jan pattern; in other words, it did not appear to merely return - least not per what I remember of the behavior. Nevertheless, and much to the joyous exhalation of the enduring winter weather enthusiasts, cold and snow returned, and the new paradigm lasted into mid April. I've had conversations with other Meteorologist, what would have been of that year, if that mid interlude did not take place. What if the three deep cutters just did what all others did. That one would have blown 2015 out of the water, ... because it was a continental -scaled event anomaly. 2015 was more local to New England. Not a 90-day variation. Two 45-day patterns, interceded with one that may have actually ( interestingly ...) been more statistically likely to be the case given to the weak-ish cool ENSO going on during an era when ENSO's meant shit ( half kiddin). Not to start a causality squabble, but I do wonder if what we are seeing so far this year could be La Nina forcing that is constructively interfering with EAMT tendencies - together that's getting the hemisphere 'stuck' in a sense... It's all speculation of course... but I know that this pattern persistence has "over-performed" relative to ENSO alone. Something is giving it a kick-back. Anyway, we've been pummeled with highly realized -PNA negative interference pattern over eastern N/A mid latitudes, and it has lasted over a month. I'm personally interested in how the next 10 days start behaving, as to whether these gestation lengths get tested.

What makes the ENSO -heads worried in all this is that cool events tend to correlate to front loaded winters... then thaws and/or early springs favored.