csnavywx Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Folks tend to forget that the strongest ENSO forcing lags SSTs by a few months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roardog Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 The Winter may very well feature the classic strong El Nino look but the Autumn certainly hasn't. If I looked at a map of North America right now I'd think we had a Nina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainman Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 IMO, it's kind of dumb to forecast record anything in a long range forecast. It's hard to argue against a warm Nov-Jan, but I would use forecasts for records this year as a filter for who to ignore in the future. The science isn't there yet, which suggests they may be using voodoo. Edit: Even saying "periods of record warmth" is not necessarily crazy, although I wouldn't advise it. But a record warm entire season? Nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainman Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Back to the general topic of the thread, one factor that could reinforce warmth is the strong westerly QBO that has developed. Upper winds in the stratosphere are already stronger than normal and we could be setting up for a stronger than normal polar vortex. If I understand correctly, one of the factors that causes el Ninos to "flip" in February is a gradual wearing on the polar vortex. That may be in question this year, or at least be harder to achieve. Westerly QBOs are a direct opposition to the type of forcing that el Ninos put on the PV. In any case, it appears that Dec and Jan may have the strong duo of +QBO/strong PV and strong el Nino to help bring the torchiness. If I find time, I'll try to post some charts and stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinook Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Solid Modoki el Nino + low GLAAM state + east QBO + 100 year solar min led to record obliterating -AO values. I wouldn't worry about that happening again anytime soon Why was 2009-2010 a low GLAAM season? Surely the STJ was stronger than average due to the El Nino. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoMo Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Back to the general topic of the thread, one factor that could reinforce warmth is the strong westerly QBO that has developed. Upper winds in the stratosphere are already stronger than normal and we could be setting up for a stronger than normal polar vortex. If I understand correctly, one of the factors that causes el Ninos to "flip" in February is a gradual wearing on the polar vortex. That may be in question this year, or at least be harder to achieve. Westerly QBOs are a direct opposition to the type of forcing that el Ninos put on the PV. In any case, it appears that Dec and Jan may have the strong duo of +QBO/strong PV and strong el Nino to help bring the torchiness. If I find time, I'll try to post some charts and stuff. I've heard the QBO debate both ways. Some say western (+)QBO's end up with more eastern cold than eastern (-)QBO's. It probably comes down to the strength with somewhere closer to neutral being the 'best' for winter lovers. There's a lot of debate both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packbacker Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 I've heard the QBO debate both ways. Some say western (+)QBO's end up with more eastern cold than eastern (-)QBO's. It probably comes down to the strength with somewhere closer to neutral being the 'best' for winter lovers. There's a lot of debate both ways. The westerly QBO isn't ideal for a SSW but the fact that we are in a strong nino does help our chances with a SSW. If we were in a easterly QBO and a strong nino I think it would be a slam dunk -AO winter but we are not so....the low solar will help though. SAI/SCE, low solar, strong nino are plus's for SSW but +QBO is the negative, as of now. Would be nice to get the +QBO to start declining in Nov/Dec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geos Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Just a small example of some of the drivel out there. There are many good, scientific forecasts out there that have included plenty of time & thought to the forecasts. The best are the ones that not only include plenty of ideas, graphs etc for their forecast, but also a margin of error of what could go wrong. Then theres the ones that simply say "it will be warm because of el nino" then post some mush. Or the ones that say "it will be (warm/cold) because of (insert stats youve tailored to fit your forecast). I love the scientific Cleveland article linking 70F days in Nov & warmer than normal Novembers to warm winters. At Detroit, of the 20 warmest Novembers, 9 of the 20 winters were colder than normal...but of all Novembers that saw 70F+ days, 21 of the 35 winters were colder than normal. One things for sure, in spring, there will be a few winners and many losers to the grading of winter 2015-16 forecasts. Just spent 15 minutes reading those takes on this winter. Bunch of drivel that is, especially in the accuweather and MI article. Like that part where that student said we get more ice storms during el Niño winters. That idea probably doesn't hold much water - there probably an equal chance of an ice storm in any type of winter! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chambana Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Blowtorch, near normal, colder than normal, either way I've got my beer and popcorn ready. Will be fun to analyze this winter, especially for future analogs. Give me a white Christmas I'm fine. Absolutely do not want another cold spring similar to 13-15'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chambana Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 I love winter, but sometimes you gotta face the inevitable, and that's enduring a clunker winter every so often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 For curiosity, decided to average the 11 strong Ninos to see what the monthly averages came out to at Detroit (I will stress again...the only unanimous signal was a cold September, later Fall into winter were a much more mixed bag). As a reminder, these 11 strong nino winters are 1877-78, 1888-89, 1896-97, 1899-00, 1902-03, 1940-41, 1957-58, 1972-73, 1982-83, 1991-92, 1997-98. MONTH........Sep.......Oct......Nov......Dec.....Jan.......Feb......Mar......Apr. AVERAGE......64.4.....52.4.....41.5.....30.1.....25.6.....28.1......37.2.....49.2 Strong Nino...62.0.....51.4.....40.4.....32.0.....27.6.....26.8......36.8.....48.4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainman Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Why was 2009-2010 a low GLAAM season? Surely the STJ was stronger than average due to the El Nino. I don't know, tbh. I know global warming has produced a weaker Hadley cell which makes tropospheric high AAM harder to come by, but I don't know about the specifics for that year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 For curiosity, decided to average the 11 strong Ninos to see what the monthly averages came out to at Detroit (I will stress again...the only unanimous signal was a cold September, later Fall into winter were a much more mixed bag). As a reminder, these 11 strong nino winters are 1877-78, 1888-89, 1896-97, 1899-00, 1902-03, 1940-41, 1957-58, 1972-73, 1982-83, 1991-92, 1997-98. MONTH........Sep.......Oct......Nov......Dec.....Jan.......Feb......Mar......Apr. AVERAGE......64.4.....52.4.....41.5.....30.1.....25.6.....28.1......37.2.....49.2 Strong Nino...62.0.....51.4.....40.4.....32.0.....27.6.....26.8......36.8.....48.4 For ****s and giggles, just looked at the top 5 warmest Novembers on record since 1959. Most of them did not yield to particularly impressive winters from a cold nor snow perspective (2011, 2001, 1975, 1994). The only exception was 2009, and even that was a fairly average winter. It's not much better for top 10 warmest Novembers either (1999, 2003, 1990, 1987), with the exception being 1998, which was yet again an overall average winter. Of course, I'm not sure what the stats are like prior to 1959 nor what the ENSO state was for all of these years, so take it FWIW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 For ****s and giggles, just looked at the top 5 warmest Novembers on record since 1959. Most of them did not yield to particularly impressive winters from a cold nor snow perspective (2011, 2001, 1975, 1994). The only exception was 2009, and even that was a fairly average winter. It's not much better for top 10 warmest Novembers either (1999, 2003, 1990, 1987), with the exception being 1998, which was yet again an overall average winter. Of course, I'm not sure what the stats are like prior to 1959 nor what the ENSO state was for all of these years, so take it FWIW. curious....why are you only looking to 1959 and not 1874? http://w2.weather.gov/climate/local_data.php?wfo=dtx I scanned Nov's the other day. 9 of the 20 warmest went on to have colder than average winters (I didnt look at snow). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainman Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 The westerly QBO isn't ideal for a SSW but the fact that we are in a strong nino does help our chances with a SSW. If we were in a easterly QBO and a strong nino I think it would be a slam dunk -AO winter but we are not so....the low solar will help though. SAI/SCE, low solar, strong nino are plus's for SSW but +QBO is the negative, as of now. Would be nice to get the +QBO to start declining in Nov/Dec. I agree. QBO isn't the magic variable, so obviously a variety of outcomes are possible regardless of phase. A westerly QBO prevents wave energy from deflecting toward the polar vortex and weakening it. That's why, in a vacuum, a +QBO favors less blocking and a stronger PV. An easterly QBO, which we definitely won't have, allows poleward wave driving to weaken the PV and thus favors increased blocking. A strong el Nino like this one will put the resistence to poleward wave driving to the test this winter. In other words, it will be doing all it can to weaken the PV through the DJF period. I think that is why a lot of people go super-torch for DJ and then allow for a switch by Feb. I expect a similar stratosphere evolution (based on my limited stratosphere knowledge!) to 1997-98. Few people remember the decent dump of cold air in March 1998. Here is the DJF temp anomaly for 1997-98 followed by the March anomaly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 D-J in 1997-98 were actually not terrible here. They were well above normal temp-wise, but a huge part of this was the low temps. There was very, very little sun. That said, most things I have read have said do not expect a 97-98 repeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainman Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 The westerly QBO isn't ideal for a SSW but the fact that we are in a strong nino does help our chances with a SSW. If we were in a easterly QBO and a strong nino I think it would be a slam dunk -AO winter but we are not so....the low solar will help though. SAI/SCE, low solar, strong nino are plus's for SSW but +QBO is the negative, as of now. Would be nice to get the +QBO to start declining in Nov/Dec. How is it that low solar helps anyway? My understanding is that ozone is a primary driver of stratospheric temperature by its absorption of solar energy. Wouldn't increased solar be what is favorable for warming the stratosphere then? Or do we have to go back to that +QBO/low solar // -QBO/high solar thing that I don't really understand... Edit: Also, wasn't 97-98 a pretty active solar period? My solar knowledge is zilch, unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 curious....why are you only looking to 1959 and not 1874? http://w2.weather.gov/climate/local_data.php?wfo=dtx I scanned Nov's the other day. 9 of the 20 warmest went on to have colder than average winters (I didnt look at snow). It is the only data I could find right now. But yeah, going back to 1874 and including top 20 Novembers may offer a better sample size and different results. For some reason, DTX's links aren't working for me. Are they working for youy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 It is the only data I could find right now. But yeah, going back to 1874 and including top 20 Novembers may provide a better sample size. For some reason, DTX's links aren't working for me. Are they working for youy? I had this issue before...DO NOT use the "past weather" link on the bottom of the page. Go to "Climate and Past Weather", then click on "local data/records". the difference is in the www or w2 domain: WORKS http://w2.weather.gov/climate/local_data.php?wfo=dtx DOESNT WORK http://www.weather.gov/climate/local_data.php?wfo=dtx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 I had this issue before...DO NOT use the "past weather" link on the bottom of the page. Go to "Climate and Past Weather", then click on "local data/records". the difference is in the www or w2 domain: WORKS http://w2.weather.gov/climate/local_data.php?wfo=dtx DOESNT WORK http://www.weather.gov/climate/local_data.php?wfo=dtx I was using the bottom link before. Thanks for the tip. And just by eyeballing the top 10/20 warmest Novembers, none of them stand out as particularly snowy winters (though I notice a few winters with average snowfall mixed in). In fact, majority of them had seemed to have below average snowfall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packbacker Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 How is it that low solar helps anyway? My understanding is that ozone is a primary driver of stratospheric temperature by its absorption of solar energy. Wouldn't increased solar be what is favorable for warming the stratosphere then? Or do we have to go back to that +QBO/low solar // -QBO/high solar thing that I don't really understand... Edit: Also, wasn't 97-98 a pretty active solar period? My solar knowledge is zilch, unfortunately. Don't know squat about solar either except that's what "people" say is good. Agree 100% on your other post too, it's hard to mess up nino's in Feb. Like you said the PV should take some blows but it will probably be end of Jan into Feb before we see a -AO. 58/83 were westerly QBO and still good analogs for this winter. 58 did have a late Jan SSW, hopefully we see the same, the PV right now is getting strong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainman Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Don't know squat about solar either except that's what "people" say is good. Agree 100% on your other post too, it's hard to mess up nino's in Feb. Like you said the PV should take some blows but it will probably be end of Jan into Feb before we see a -AO. 58/83 were westerly QBO and still good analogs for this winter. 58 did have a late Jan SSW, hopefully we see the same, the PV right now is getting strong. Well in that case, I read a paper that broke down SSW occurrence by QBO and solar. It basically said that high solar/eQBO and low solar/wQBO are most favorable. I haven't a clue why that is and I don't think the paper explained it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainman Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Camp and Tung (2006) call wQBO and solar min the least perturbed and coldest state of the stratospheric PV. Also, Labitzke (2006) found that out of the 11 SSWs that occured during wQBO, exactly zero occured during solar minimum and 10 out of the 11 occured during the maximum. We are currently past the peak of solar cycle 24, which would not seem to bode well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packbacker Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Camp and Tung (2006) call wQBO and solar min the least perturbed and coldest state of the stratospheric PV. Also, Labitzke (2006) found that out of the 11 SSWs that occured during wQBO, exactly zero occured during solar minimum and 10 out of the 11 occured during the maximum. We are currently past the peak of solar cycle 24, which would not seem to bode well. In that Camp/Tung paper I recall a reference that with a nino that a easterly QBO doesn't help (or hurt) that the nino itself is enough. I need to re-read that and look at the solar max/w-qbo being the least helpful combo for a SSW. Curious, what solar reference do you use? I track it off this link below and we are technically not a max or a min but we are diving... It's interesting that high solar/e-qbo are favorable but that that's what we had last year which failed and I am wondering if the neutral enso was the cause. I like this article below which shows the enso relationships to ENSO. http://legacy-www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/f10.gif http://www.columbia.edu/~lmp/paps/butler+polvani-GRL-2011.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 I was using the bottom link before. Thanks for the tip. And just by eyeballing the top 10/20 warmest Novembers, none of them stand out as particularly snowy winters (though I notice a few winters with average snowfall mixed in). In fact, majority of them had seemed to have below average snowfall. Of the top 20 warmest Novembers, the following winters had 7 snowier than normal winters, 2 winters with normal snowfall, and 11 winters with below normal snowfall. A friend (Adam from the other board) who is into nature signs says that all the nature signs are going absolutely bonkers for this coming winter to be on the harsh side. Sounds like JB lol. Extremists aside, the conflicting signals of this winter are crazy, as witnessed by the winter threads on these forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Camp and Tung (2006) call wQBO and solar min the least perturbed and coldest state of the stratospheric PV. Also, Labitzke (2006) found that out of the 11 SSWs that occured during wQBO, exactly zero occured during solar minimum and 10 out of the 11 occured during the maximum. We are currently past the peak of solar cycle 24, which would not seem to bode well. Here is a great read on the QBO/Solar stuff. http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/bibliography/related_files/baldwin0101.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainman Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 In that Camp/Tung paper I recall a reference that with a nino that a easterly QBO doesn't help (or hurt) that the nino itself is enough. I need to re-read that and look at the solar max/w-qbo being the least helpful combo for a SSW. Curious, what solar reference do you use? I track it off this link below and we are technically not a max or a min but we are diving... It's interesting that high solar/e-qbo are favorable but that that's what we had last year which failed and I am wondering if the neutral enso was the cause. I like this article below which shows the enso relationships to ENSO. http://legacy-www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/f10.gif http://www.columbia.edu/~lmp/paps/butler+polvani-GRL-2011.pdf The big takeaway from the Camp/Tung paper was that the temperature perterbation due to solar maximum was the same in both + and -QBOs. They said that the findings in previous studies that emphasized the "role reversal" of QBO with respect to solar cycle were statistically insignificant. In other words, it is sufficient to say that solar maximums are favorable for SSW regardless of QBO phase. So that paper that I referenced about the Smax/-QBO and Smin/+QBO appears to be bunk. Which is good, because, like I said, I didn't understand the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainman Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Also, I don't have a solar reference. It's all new to me. I just googled solar cycle 24 and clicked some space link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainman Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Based on this discussion, it sounds like any SSW will have to be driven from the bottom up, something that is a lot harder to do during a +QBO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainman Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Here is a great read on the QBO/Solar stuff. http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/bibliography/related_files/baldwin0101.pdf I have read that one. It is a great read. QBO bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.