Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    15,470
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Greenmachine1123
    Newest Member
    Greenmachine1123
    Joined
snowman19

Possible strong/super El Niño forming?

Recommended Posts

After last year's debacle with the Nino that never formed I don't think anyone wanted to take any guesses.  I'm still not sure how this thing evolves in the next 2-3 months although confidence is at least higher now it would not surprise me if this weakens faster than some models think, that has been the tendency the last few years where El Ninos find ways to not be as strong as expected.

They usually overdo it at extended leads.

That is why I undershot model consensus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't this always supposed to be a basin-wide, non modoki?

 

Why the surprise?

 

 

Yes this was always going west ( basin wide ) . It is all in the 1st 10 pages of this thread . This went right to what many called for .

 

And yes the " modoki style " forcing as per the guidance is what WSI and guys like JB alluded too . 

The non east based forcing will matter . I don`t think some of the others understand that NO guidance sees forcing east of 100 

The majority of the guidance sees the strongest forcing between 120- 180 . The further west this forces the further west you pull the NEG in the GOA the further W you pull the Height field in Canada . 

 

At this point , model run after model are coming around to this idea and there are only  2 people left ( 1 from your forum and 1 from ours )  that are buying the CFS . I am not being critical, but  I am  asking what other guidance sits in that camp ?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes this was always going west ( basin wide ) . It is all in the 1st 10 pages of this thread . This went right to what many called for .

 

And yes the " modoki style " forcing as per the guidance is what WSI and guys like JB alluded too . 

The non east based forcing will matter . I don`t think some of the others understand that NO guidance sees forcing east of 100 

The majority of the guidance sees the strongest forcing between 120- 180 . The further west this forces the further west you pull the NEG in the GOA the further W you pull the Height field in Canada . 

 

At this point , model run after model are coming around to this idea and there are only  2 people left ( 1 from your forum and 1 from ours )  that are buying the CFS . I am not being critical, but  I am  asking what other guidance sits in that camp ?  

The CFS is not warm because of the position of ENSO anomalies. It's a combination of PAC vortex flooding and AGW that prevents North America from building acceptable airmasses for most of us. Deep interior may cash in more than usual tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CFS is not warm because of the position of ENSO anomalies. It's a combination of PAC vortex flooding and AGW that prevents North America from building acceptable airmasses for most of us. Deep interior may cash in more than usual tho.

Can you link as to why the cfs would see agw at 3 months lead time better than other models? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CFS is not warm because of the position of ENSO anomalies. It's a combination of PAC vortex flooding and AGW that prevents North America from building acceptable airmasses for most of us. Deep interior may cash in more than usual tho.

 

I would argue it has more to do with ridge positioning. The UKMET/Euro series of models all have a  ridge position in central or western Canada. The CFS has the ridge in eastern Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a little soon, but I'm beginning to wonder whether the warmest anomalies will be centered in Regions 3 and 3.4 rather than Regions 3.4 and 4. The coming weeks will provide insight, but the delayed warming in Region 4 bears watching.

I didn't even know there was even a thought that this Nino would be based in regions 3.4 and 4, rather than 3 and 3.4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to the CFSv2, which is currently an outlier, below are the last four forecast assessments for the December-February period. The forecasts were based on a lead time of 20-30 days e.g., the November 1-10 timeframe for December-February.

 

2011-12:

  • Both the CFS and AMIP simulation captured observed precipitation and Z200 anomalies in the subtropics and tropics
  • The forecasted and simulated z200 in the mid-high latitudes are quite unrealistic.
  • The models failed to reproduce  observed overwhelming warmth over most of the North America.

2012-13:

  • CFSv2 captured overall T2m pattern in North America but failed to produced the observed anomalies in Eurasian continent.
  • CFSv2 captured the positive Z200 anomalies in polar regions but failed to reproduce the variability in the tropics and mid-latitudes.

2013-14:

  • CFSv2 captured overall T2m pattern in North America but failed to produced the observed anomalies in Eurasian continent.
  • CFSv2 captured the positive Z200 anomalies in polar regions but failed to reproduce the variability in mid-latitudes.  It is interesting to see that Z200 anomalies in high latitudes are well reproduced in AMIP runs as well as the 0-day-lead forecasts.  Since the AMIP simulation is quite reasonable, does the erroneous Z200 anomalies at 20-day-lead time mean the ocean surface conditions became erroneous after 20 days?

2014-15:

  • The observed warm anomalies in the Eurasian mid-high latitudes and western North America, and cold anomalies in the eastern North America are not forecasted by CFSv2.
  • CFSv2 failed to capture the observed Z200 anomalies pattern in the mid-high latitudes.

In sum, especially from this far out, one should be very cautious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CFS is not warm because of the position of ENSO anomalies. It's a combination of PAC vortex flooding and AGW that prevents North America from building acceptable airmasses for most of us. Deep interior may cash in more than usual tho.

 

The CFS  is warm because it is displacing the NEG in the EPO region too far east . There has been an error pattern on the CFS as it  sometimes focuses  the trough too far east .

In turn it is pushing the higher heights too far EAST in Canada . So it cuts the cold air off and it keeps the N JET 

away from the CONUS .

 

Its NEG does not match the warm anomalies in the EPO REGION  especially S in the Aleutians . It is biased warm in the LR and It is has no support in the guidance. 

 

Deep interior argument is a silly one .  - EPO/+PNA regimes with positives on the west shores of HB allow HP  to move through the lakes and high lat blocking actually helps the coastal plain . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was the main error last winter. But the older V1 version did very well with the -EPO/-AO during the 09-10

El Nino. Sometimes there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason why one model or group of models does

so well with one winter and so poorly with others.

 

attachicon.gifglbz700SeaInd2.gif

 

attachicon.gifglbz700Sea.jpg

Check this out . Issued last Nov 11,

glbT2mSeaInd2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to the CFSv2, which is currently an outlier, below are the last four forecast assessments for the December-February period. The forecasts were based on a lead time of 20-30 days e.g., the November 1-10 timeframe for December-February.

2011-12:

  • Both the CFS and AMIP simulation captured observed precipitation and Z200 anomalies in the subtropics and tropics
  • The forecasted and simulated z200 in the mid-high latitudes are quite unrealistic.
  • The models failed to reproduce observed overwhelming warmth over most of the North America.
2012-13:
  • CFSv2 captured overall T2m pattern in North America but failed to produced the observed anomalies in Eurasian continent.
  • CFSv2 captured the positive Z200 anomalies in polar regions but failed to reproduce the variability in the tropics and mid-latitudes.
2013-14:
  • CFSv2 captured overall T2m pattern in North America but failed to produced the observed anomalies in Eurasian continent.
  • CFSv2 captured the positive Z200 anomalies in polar regions but failed to reproduce the variability in mid-latitudes. It is interesting to see that Z200 anomalies in high latitudes are well reproduced in AMIP runs as well as the 0-day-lead forecasts. Since the AMIP simulation is quite reasonable, does the erroneous Z200 anomalies at 20-day-lead time mean the ocean surface conditions became erroneous after 20 days?
2014-15:
  • The observed warm anomalies in the Eurasian mid-high latitudes and western North America, and cold anomalies in the eastern North America are not forecasted by CFSv2.
  • CFSv2 failed to capture the observed Z200 anomalies pattern in the mid-high latitudes.
In sum, especially from this far out, one should be very cautious.
I use extreme caution with any model Don that's a good point. I don't consider any of them to be that good and I think a member of the NE forum made the point that none of them have exactly had stellar track records. I remember a few years back, I believe it was 2011, pretty much every model was showing a blockbuster winter and we all know how that turned out...I think actually looking at fall patterns going into November are more telling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use extreme caution with any model Don that's a good point. I don't consider any of them to be that good and I think a member of the NE forum made the point that none of them have exactly had stellar track records. I remember a few years back, I believe it was 2011, pretty much every model was showing a blockbuster winter and we all know how that turned out...I think actually looking at fall patterns going into November are more telling

 

I think he saying / at least we are saying the outlier CFS POS model should be treated with caution . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he saying / at least we are saying the outlier CFS POS model should be treated with caution . 

Correct. Even as one can't rule out a warm scenario, relying of the CFSv2 from this far out doesn't really add much support. Its monthly forecasts have some skill, but it's seasonal ones don't seem to have too much skill. That past verification coupled with a model consensus that differs from the CFSv2's idea strongly argues that the CFSv2 is more likely to be incorrect, than the model consensus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he saying / at least we are saying the outlier CFS POS model should be treated with caution .

I'm not believing ANY model whether it be the consensus or an outlier until I see where we actually and are headed to come early November. I think by the 1st week of November we will have a good idea of where things are really going. I can careless what any of the seasonal models are saying until I see the evidence of it actually verifying come 2 months from now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. Even as one can't rule out a warm scenario, relying of the CFSv2 from this far out doesn't really add much support. It's monthly forecasts have some skill, but it's seasonal ones don't seem to have too much skill. That past verification coupled with a model consensus that differs from the CFSv2's idea strongly argues that the CFSv2 is more likely to be incorrect, than the model consensus.

 

Thanks Don, I didn`t mean to assume .  The CFS mid month forecast for the following month does really well .

That` why I said up in NE, it is a good " super ensemble " and probably 2m wise as good as the euro weeklies .

 

But it`s seasonal is poor . I posted last winters J -M 2M  forecast issued last Nov , so I am looking at the other seasonal`s right now to get a better idea . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not believing ANY model whether it be the consensus or an outlier until I see where we actually and are headed to come early November. I think by the 1st week of November we will have a good idea of where things are really going. I can careless what any of the seasonal models are saying until I see the evidence of it actually verifying come 2 months from now

 

 

If every model was warm right now and only one cold , I find it hard to believe you would ignore it . 

 

You did not wait this summer to see if the NINO " verified " strong . The models were strong from April and you screamed every day for the last 4 months .

 

Come on , you`re talking to me . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The easterlies have actually been stronger than average in Niño 1-2 and Niño 3 recently. Looks like primary forcing/WWBs will be shifting west for a bit as easterlies strengthen further over Niño 1-2 and Niño 3. Also notice the flip in the IO.

This may allow for some relative cooling in the eastern regions:

800.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the warmer anomalies surfacing up around Hawaii. That may aid to the westward push.

 

R4 is plus 1c . It is no where near the plus 2c the models were seeing , however plus 1C for SEPT 16 is close to record territory and if this can keep pushing west ( as per the guidance ) then one can understand  why the guidance sees the forcing between R 3 - 3.4 and the dateline as R1.2 is forecast to level off and fall a bit . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The PDO remained strongly positive in August. The August value was +1.56, which ranks 9th highest on record for August.

 

This data argues strongly for a PDO+ during the December-January-February period. Some data:

 

August PDO: +1 or above:

DJF average > 0: 88%

DFJ average +1 or above: 44%

Months > 0: 81%

Months +1 or above: 46%

 

August PDO: +1.5 or above:

DJF average > 0: 89%

DJF average +1 or above: 56%

Months > 0: 85%

Months +1 or above: 56%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where'd you read that? Week 3 and week 4 both have a +PNA going:

 

Didn't realize +PNA means eastern ridge/western trough in September. I assume Snowman was unaware of that, as was I. But it doesn't really matter... what you posted confirms what he meant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't want to see later Euro runs continue the slight eastward shift of the warmer waters in later runs that we

just saw this month. With near record forcing, we need the warmer waters and forcing to migrate as far west

as possible.

September forecast

attachicon.gifNEW.gif

August forecast

attachicon.gifOLD.gif

The models were too warm in R 4 all year but I don`t think that`s a cause for concern . Those departures are running really close to record levels . I still think as long as there is that much plus 3C water between 100 - 140 with a cooling 1.2 region , you have to force from the central basin on west .

If anything the 500 was " cooler " or its " normal " was more expansive in Sept than it was in Aug and those heights in Canada were actually pulled a bit more west than Aug .

I will always keep one foot outside the trap as with any strong ENSO event of this size I am aware of the overwhelming scenario being there , but there is a lot of guidance that sticks a trough in the SE and a NEG S of the Aleutians .

So I have 1 foot in and the other in the air, we are getting close Chris .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the buoys off LI and Nantucket within 100 miles of land are only 67-74 degrees. The offshore Canyon buoy is only 67 degrees as I type this.

Not sure what the SST maps being posted here are using.

67-74 degrees is not that much above normal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The easterlies have actually been stronger than average in Niño 1-2 and Niño 3 recently. Looks like primary forcing/WWBs will be shifting west for a bit as easterlies strengthen further over Niño 1-2 and Niño 3. Also notice the flip in the IO.

This may allow for some relative cooling in the eastern regions:

800.jpg

 

 

 

 

The response has already initiated in regions 1+2. The values are not to be taken at face value, but relatively speaking, we've seen cooling in those regions over the past week:

 

nino12.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The response has already initiated in regions 1+2. The values are not to be taken at face value, but relatively speaking, we've seen cooling in those regions over the past week:

 

nino12.png

Tropicaltidbits Nino indices have been quite a bit off over the past 2 weeks. A dip in 1+2 makes sense though... perhaps not to that extent yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would like to see the NEPAC pattern change in October and November to have more

confidence in the winter forecast. The current Aleutian ridge...West Coast trough

is the reverse of what the colder winter guidance has for the fall. Even the JMA

September outlook had the Aleutian trough...West Coast ridge pattern for

September and SON.

500.gif

Y201508.D0900_gl0.png

SON.png

cahgt_anom.1.gif

cahgt_anom.3.gif

Bluewave, thought you would find this interesting, here is a map comparing this year to 1997 and 1982 up until this point of the year. It shows where the main Nino tropical convective forcing cell is. This year is almost identical to 1997, in fact it's maybe even a tad further east. Link: https://twitter.com/griteater/status/643916292446158849

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×