Possible strong/super El Niño forming?

[RubiksDestroyer]

they think classifying this as central based will magically make this winter awesome

 

Really, the whole "East-based/West-based" nomenclature is poor; it is too overgeneralizing, and has become associated with extremes. East-based equates 97/98 to many, and west-based equates 09/10. It is more of a spectrum if anything, but it's harder to classify an El Nino like this, so we use broad names instead. I would say that this is really smack-dab in-between the two, but recent trends have been leaning towards a more western-centered El Nino. In this regard, it's hard to make any assumptions as to what this El Nino will imply for this winter in some regards.

[Deck Pic]

Let's cut a few words out of that question; how many strong Ninos have there been? 

 

There've been 5 strong Ninos. 57-58, 65-66, 72-73, 82-83, 97-98. Even if they were all east-based (which they weren't), the sample size is too small to suggest "it's not happened before, so why would it happen now?"

 

assuming you wanna classify 65 and 57 as strong (I wouldn't necessarily) they were both east of the norm...The die is already cast with this one anyway.....we're not getting a center-west nino...It's going to be one of the most east based on record

[Deck Pic]

140 to 180 would be considered more west based than center.

 

If you take a composite of Ninos that gave 40N a lot of snow, the core anomalies were between 140-160...that's the bottom line...It doesn't mean this winter won't be great, but the Nino core is east of where you ideally want it. Full stop.

[ClicheVortex2014]

assuming you wanna classify 65 and 57 as strong (I wouldn't necessarily) they were both east of the norm...The die is already cast with this one anyway.....we're not getting a center-west nino...It's going to be one of the most east based on record

By definition, they were strong events (>1.5 ONI) and nowhere near being east-based.

 

http://ggweather.com/enso/oni.htm

 

The way El Nino biases are defined isn't by the average against the "norm", whatever that means. It's which region has the highest anomaly. By claiming this is gonna be east-based, you're claiming that Nino 1+2 are gonna be the warmest of all regions. There's no support for that. The consensus is that the warmest anomalies will be in 3.4 and 3. 

 

I honestly have no clue how you can say this will be not only an east-based Nino, but more east-based than 97-98. That's absurd. Even based on your definition of east-based, that's insane. We're talking about Nino 1+2 being ~4C above average and Nino 3 being ~3C above average.

[Isotherm]

assuming you wanna classify 65 and 57 as strong (I wouldn't necessarily) they were both east of the norm...The die is already cast with this one anyway.....we're not getting a center-west nino...It's going to be one of the most east based on record

 

 

Well, your classification system aside, the official CPC stratification of +ENSO events involves thresholds of +0.5c, +1.0c, and +1.5c trimonthly for weak, moderate, and strong Nino's respectively. Thus, 1957 and 1965 are well over that threshold, with 82-83 and 97-98 being the two "super" Nino's.

 

http://ggweather.com/enso/oni.htm

[Isotherm]

By definition, they were strong events (>1.5 ONI) and nowhere near being east-based.

 

http://ggweather.com/enso/oni.htm

 

The way El Nino biases are defined isn't by the average against the "norm", whatever that means. It's which region has the highest anomaly. By claiming this is gonna be east-based, you're claiming that Nino 1+2 are gonna be the warmest of all regions. There's no support for that. The consensus is that the warmest anomalies will be in 3.4 and 3. 

 

I honestly have no clue how you can say this will be not only an east-based Nino, but more east-based than 97-98. That's absurd. Even based on your definition of east-based, that's insane. We're talking about Nino 1+2 being ~4C above average and Nino 3 being ~3C above average.

 

 

 

Agree.

[Deck Pic]

By definition, they were strong events (>1.5 ONI) and nowhere near being east-based.

 

http://ggweather.com/enso/oni.htm

 

The way El Nino biases are defined isn't by the average against the "norm", whatever that means. It's which region has the highest anomaly. By claiming this is gonna be east-based, you're claiming that Nino 1+2 are gonna be the warmest of all regions. There's no support for that. The consensus is that the warmest anomalies will be in 3.4 and 3. 

 

I honestly have no clue how you can say this will be not only an east-based Nino, but more east-based than 97-98. That's absurd. Even based on your definition of east-based, that's insane. We're talking about Nino 1+2 being ~4C above average and Nino 3 being ~3C above average.

 

I never said it would be east of 97-98...but it is currently it is east of most ninos, even with the recent region 4 spike

[Deck Pic]

Agree.

 

I agree too, if you want to use a fixed reference point...

[40/70 Benchmark]

as JB is saying alot right now though, you really have to like the mild October and now likely mild November for the foreseeable future. Most of the bigger Ninos that were mild in November and late October tended to be cold in December-February. Cold now is usually not good.

How I feel.

[uncle W]

cold and snow now is great if it's one of many storms that year...2011 was an all time greatest October event over shadowed by Sandy a year later...2011-12 was a terrible winter if you like snow...2012-13 started out similar but a snowy February and March saved that season...

[ClicheVortex2014]

as JB is saying alot right now though, you really have to like the mild October and now likely mild November for the foreseeable future.  Most of the bigger Ninos that were mild in November and late October tended to be cold in December-February.  Cold now is usually not good. 

Surely hasn't been the case for the past 3 winters. We, or I, haven't had a warm November since 2011.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Surely hasn't been the case for the past 3 winters. We, or I, haven't had a warm November since 2011.

Not all of the past three winters were Ninos.

 

They were all good for me, though.

[ClicheVortex2014]

Not all of the past three winters were Ninos.

 

They were all good for me, though.

How could a cold November during an El Nino signify trouble?

[uncle W]

How could a cold November during an El Nino signify trouble?

el nino Novembers before our snowiest el nino winters...Novembers before our least snowiest el nino winters...

[The_Global_Warmer]

I never said it would be east of 97-98...but it is currently it is east of most ninos, even with the recent region 4 spike

Yes and the warm pool is still moving East.

7C+ now showing up. And at depth

[PB GFI]

I am not sure you have seen this approach in other threads , but in NYC you are held accountable when you are this bad over a 5 weeks period . We tell you .
You have been posting over a 5 week period in here how 1.2 and the water off the S/A coat would boil . Since Sept 30 R1 has gone from 2.8 - 2.7 - 2.5 - 2.2 - 2.3 . No where near the " exploding " that one would have expected after reading all of your posts .
There needs to some acknowledgment by the poster when they have been wrong before anyone can take another post seriously .

In this thread we notice when someone yells 1.2 for a month  then tries to stick in 3 as if it were there baseline argument with no regard for the reader .

Your analysis has been poor . This is a polite way of saying when you are wrong and ignore it , the board could view you as the ,

[packbacker]

I am not sure you have seen this approach in other threads , but in NYC you are held accountable when you are this bad over a 5 weeks period . We tell you .

You have been posting over a 5 week period in here how 1.2 and the water off the S/A coat would boil . Since Sept 30 R1 has gone from 2.8 - 2.7 - 2.5 - 2.2 - 2.3 . No where near the " exploding " that one would have expected after reading all of your posts .

There needs to some acknowledgment by the poster when they have been wrong before anyone can take another post seriously .

In this thread we notice when someone yells 1.2 for a month , then tries to stick in 3 as if it were there baseline argument with no regard for the reader .

Your analysis has been poor . This is a polite way of saying when you are wrong and ignore it , the board could view you as the ,

 

 

I assume he must be joking...

[PB GFI]

I assume he must be joking...

 

He is serious . 

 

Here is 15 vs 97 .  That water was warmer and centered further east . 

This is the  following 4 weeks starting Nov 5 th  in 97 and it  yielded  3.7  4.3  4.1   3.9 - Even this does not constitute " exploding " 

 

So any tick up in 1.2 should be marginal ( like we have been saying ) and would be met by another  decline shortly thereafter , making it a non event . 

[The_Global_Warmer]

No one said it would be just like 1997/98.

it's incredible how threatened people are over this going nucleaR that it keeps getting personal.

Incase anyone forgets enso 1-2 is a tiny region Right along the SA coast.

the exploding surfacing heat may not be causing thowe all important(he says sarcastically) ssts to go from 16C to 21C right off the SA coast South of the equator.

But the big time heat that drives Convection continues to press Eastward.

Absolutely nasty at this point.

[PB GFI]

it's incredible how threatened people are over this going nucleaR that it keeps getting personal.

 

Requesting acknowledgement for being wrong over a 5 week period is personal and nasty ?

If you want cred here , we ask one simple thing . Admit when you are wrong and don`t move the goal post .

We have all been wrong in here , but we state the mistakes and don`t yell foul when someone points it out .

( PS that`s the worst thing one can do here ) .

 

We know 1.2 is a small area off the S/A coast , we told you the evolution did not support warming in that 1 small area .

You were the one who has been specific about 1.2 and the S/A coast .   You have now shimmied in R 3 as part of your argument which along with 3.4 and 4 was the basis of ours . 

 

But the big time heat that drives Convection continues to press Eastward.

 

 

The eastward progression of the convection is MJO related .  The warmest CFS guidance forces at 160 . There is an abundance of guidance that force at the D/L . Below is the furthest east in the guidance package . 

 

 

So ok , Just want to be clear , you are off the exploding , nuclear call in the 1.2 region and have progressed to an argument of east based forcing now ? 

[Morris]

Thank you PB.

[Isotherm]

Model data remains quite divergent with respect to MJO guidance going forward; however, it seems that the tropical convection is responding fairly quickly w/ new convection in the central tropical Pacific. GFS based guidance still insists upon the retrogression of the MJO forcing into phase 1, while ECMWF based guidance attempts to weaken the wave completely. In terms of the resumption of region 3.4 forcing, the latter MJO scenario would be more conducive than the former [although phase 1 does include central tropical pacific upward motion]. The MJO propagation perturbs the mean state, and once it leaves the playing field, the tropical convection will naturally return to the region in which there exists the greatest amount of available energy. OLR plots suggest this occurs as early as this weak, with strong 150W-180 convection developing. CHI 200Hpa plots indicate the subsidence will reverse w/ at least weak negative anomalies by November 6-7th.

[Isotherm]

It may take time for the changes to show up in the 500 mb pattern. The Euro weeklies are showing more ridging 

returning to Alaska later in the month where the strong vortex will be located from early to mid-November. This

makes sense since it took a while for the current height falls to materialize out west after the MJO shift back in

late October. But even the Euro VP anomalies forecasts have shown some big changes from run to run

after the first week or two.

 

 

Yeah, the tropospheric pattern going forward is certainly less than ideal for any significant changes (i.e., in the AO / NAO modality), probably for at least a few weeks if not several. Even if we do resume more favoring tropical Pacific forcing, there are other factors that may preclude the development of a conducive pattern for quite some time. The progged 500mb pattern for the next two weeks isn't particularly encouraging for tropospheric-stratosphere heat transfer, so the AO will probably remain positive for awhile, which means generally higher heights in the Eastern US. I see the SAI / SCE signal was supportive of a -AO winter, but the science behind the hypothesis really focuses on the mid to latter part of the winter anyway insofar as the tropospheric NAM state is concerned.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Several more weeks of the benign pattern is fine by me, as being 20 miles from the Atlantic, any sooner would be a waste.

[The_Global_Warmer]

This thing has grown into a monster in short order thanks to the sub surface priming that took place the past month.

And yes I believe that enso 1-2 is going to see substantial warming.

While enso 4 will start to cool.

But there will be a peak probably soon where this thing rages from Peru to the dateline like no other nino has.

[mitchnick]

This thing has grown into a monster in short order thanks to the sub surface priming that took place the past month.

And yes I believe that enso 1-2 is going to see substantial warming.

While enso 4 will start to cool.

But there will be a peak probably soon where this thing rages from Peru to the dateline like no other nino has.

you do mean like no NINO other than 97/98, don't you?

12NOV1997     25.8 4.3     28.5 3.6     29.3 2.7     29.5 0.819NOV1997     25.8 4.1     28.6 3.6     29.3 2.7     29.7 1.126NOV1997     25.9 3.9     28.7 3.7     29.4 2.8     29.7 1.103DEC1997     26.2 3.9     28.6 3.6     29.2 2.6     29.4 0.910DEC1997     26.7 4.2     28.7 3.6     29.2 2.7     29.4 0.917DEC1997     27.0 4.1     28.8 3.6     29.3 2.7     29.3 0.824DEC1997     27.2 4.0     28.8 3.5     29.3 2.7     29.3 0.931DEC1997     27.7 4.1     28.9 3.5     29.2 2.7     29.2 0.8

[The_Global_Warmer]

you do mean like no NINO other than 97/98, don't you?

12NOV1997     25.8 4.3     28.5 3.6     29.3 2.7     29.5 0.8
19NOV1997     25.8 4.1     28.6 3.6     29.3 2.7     29.7 1.1
26NOV1997     25.9 3.9     28.7 3.7     29.4 2.8     29.7 1.1
03DEC1997     26.2 3.9     28.6 3.6     29.2 2.6     29.4 0.9
10DEC1997     26.7 4.2     28.7 3.6     29.2 2.7     29.4 0.9
17DEC1997     27.0 4.1     28.8 3.6     29.3 2.7     29.3 0.8
24DEC1997     27.2 4.0     28.8 3.5     29.3 2.7     29.3 0.9
31DEC1997     27.7 4.1     28.9 3.5     29.2 2.7     29.2 0.8

Spatial distribution of the absolute warmth.

Enso 1-2 is not only small but not very warm in general.

Enso 3-4 is about to destroy what 1997 put up.

Enso 4 has already done that. Which is where the 30C ssts are.

Once the anomalies are spatially weighed the gap between the two closes.

And given the current situation its a solid bet this nino ends up the most anomalous on record.

In other news enso 1-2 is seeing the expected warming.

[snowman19]

Several more weeks of the benign pattern is fine by me, as being 20 miles from the Atlantic, any sooner would be a waste.

Right on schedule as we head into November and the jets mature and wavelengths change, here comes the super Nino juiced, raging STJ: https://twitter.com/strawn_04/status/661611887226830849

[Isotherm]

Spatial distribution of the absolute warmth.

Enso 1-2 is not only small but not very warm in general.

Enso 3-4 is about to destroy what 1997 put up.

Enso 4 has already done that. Which is where the 30C ssts are.

Once the anomalies are spatially weighed the gap between the two closes.

And given the current situation its a solid bet this nino ends up the most anomalous on record.

In other news enso 1-2 is seeing the expected warming.

 

 

 

On the official ONI trimonthly scale, there's virtually no chance, IMO, that this El Nino attains the level of 1997-98. We had 5 consecutive trimonthly values > 2.0c, two of which were +2.3c. This Nino's cycle initiated 2-3 months earlier than 1997 as well, so I'm anticipating the peak to occur, likely within the next few weeks. We may have daily / weekly region 3.4 readings up near 1997, but I don't believe the forcing is present to maintain those extreme anomalies such that the trimonthlies surge into the territory of 1997.

[snowman19]

On the official ONI trimonthly scale, there's virtually no chance, IMO, that this El Nino attains the level of 1997-98. We had 5 consecutive trimonthly values > 2.0c, two of which were +2.3c. This Nino's cycle initiated 2-3 months earlier than 1997 as well, so I'm anticipating the peak to occur, likely within the next few weeks. We may have daily / weekly region 3.4 readings up near 1997, but I don't believe the forcing is present to maintain those extreme anomalies such that the trimonthlies surge into the territory of 1997.

An early/mid December peak looks really good right now. There is still zero sign of the subsurface cold pool pushing east yet, this leads me to believe a final 3.4 peak is still 4 or more weeks away from now