Winter 2015-16 Discussion

[Harry]

I have read that one.  It is a great read.  QBO bible.

 

 

Indeed. That also touches on enso as well.

 

Also.. From that..

Decadal variability, possibly related to the 11-year

solar cycle, clearly exists in data records which began in

the 1950s.

Labitzke

[1987] and

Labitzke and van Loon

[1988] studied the observed late-winter NH circulation

classified by both the level of solar activity and the QBO

phase. They found a strong relation to the solar cycle

during late winter.

Naito and Hirota

[1997] confirmed

this relationship and found that early winter is domi-

nated by a robust QBO signal. Figure 19 summarizes the

solar-QBO results as scatterplots of mean 30-hPa geo-

potential heights during January and February above the

North Pole versus 10.7-cm solar radio flux (a proxy for

the 11-year cycle in solar activity). The data set can be

grouped into four categories based on the QBO phase

and solar activity level. In years with low solar activity

the polar winter vortex tends to be disturbed and weak

when the QBO is easterly, but deeper and undisturbed

when the QBO is westerly. In years with strong solar

activity, however, westerly phases of the QBO are asso-

ciated with disturbed winters, whereas easterly phases of

the QBO are accompanied by deep and undisturbed

polar vortices. Hence the QBO acts as predicted by

Holton and Tan

[1980] in years with low solar activity but

appears to reverse its behavior during years with high

solar activity. Only two cases do not fit this scheme: 1989

and 1997.   

[Harry]

For those wondering what the QBO# is..

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/correlation/qbo.data

 

 

-QBO is easterly and so the other is west which is what we have as Rainman said. 

[Rainman]

Indeed. That also touches on enso as well.

 

Also.. From that..

 

Ah, that must be paper that Camp 2006 debunked.  At least that particular part of it.

[Harry]

Ah, that must be paper that Camp 2006 debunked.  At least that particular part of it.

 

 

You have a link to that?

 

One of my peeves with that one i posted is them listing 98 as a QBO west? This says East----->http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/correlation/qbo.data

 

Guessing it was a accident?

[packbacker]

Indeed. That also touches on enso as well.

 

Also.. From that..

  

Ah, that must be paper that Camp 2006 debunked.  At least that particular part of it.

Thanks for the link to that paper, still combing though it but Figure 19 is like a death knell to a SSW for this winter. We will most likely be below 100sfu with a westerly QBO and that combo is not good. Also explains last winter which was 150-160sfu with -QBO. Bummer....

[Rainman]

 

 

You have a link to that?

 

One of my peeves with that one i posted is them listing 98 as a QBO west? This says East----->http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/correlation/qbo.data

 

Guessing it was a accident?

 

97-98 winter was west, but 98-99 was east.  Technically 98-99 transitioned to west at 30mb late, but that doesn't really seem sufficient to qualify the winter as +QBO.

 

Here is the Camp & Tung abstract.  Link to full article is there if you have access.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JAS3883.1

[Rainman]

FWIW, I have run some plots that suggest that a +QBO that completes downwelling early enough to transition the (top-bottom) shear to negative early in the winter favors a stronger polar vortex pretty strongly.

 

In layman's terms, QBO winds start higher up in the stratosphere and move down over time.  That's why the QBO is measured at 30mb and 50mb by CPC.  Once the strong winds finish moving down (downwelling), the upper winds start to weaken...reverse...and start the process over again.  Then the QBO changes phase as the next anomaly moves downward.

 

Anyway, I think this month we'll probably get to the point where the QBO shear (not sure if that's what it's actually called, but that's what I'm calling it!) turns negative.  In other words it will be stronger down low than they are up top.  There is a physical significance to that, but don't understand it yet.  But composites show that a +QBO entering negative shear during the winter favors quite a strong stratospheric PV.

[Powerball]

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.

 

 

Agreed. There are really no reliable analogs for this winter, which makes it even harder when trying to determine what to expect for this winter. Things have been marching to a brand new drum thus far.

[Harry]

97-98 winter was west, but 98-99 was east.  Technically 98-99 transitioned to west at 30mb late, but that doesn't really seem sufficient to qualify the winter as +QBO.

 

Here is the Camp & Tung abstract.  Link to full article is there if you have access.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JAS3883.1

 

 

Huh?

1997   -3.57    1.94    4.77    9.74   12.37   14.50   14.85   11.69   11.64    9.91    5.74    0.781998   -0.85   -2.96   -4.92   -7.82  -14.08  -18.57  -22.97  -24.70  -22.12  -18.77  -12.22   -3.96

 

Jan 98 was -0.85 and Feb was -2.96 which is a easterly QBO?

 

Oh and thanks for the link up!

[michsnowfreak]

Agreed. There are really no reliable analogs for this winter, which makes it even harder when trying to determine what to expect for this winter. Things have been marching to a brand new drum thus far.

Expect the unexpected needs to be the theme of this winter. Just a reminder too....it is absolutely plausible that a "warm" winter month for us could yield more, if not much more, snow than a "cold" winter month. The possibilities are endless.

[Rainman]

Huh?

 

 

Jan 98 was -0.85 and Feb was -2.96 which is a easterly QBO?

 

Oh and thanks for the link up!

 

WTF, haha.

 

Here are my QBO sources:

 

30mb

http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/data/indices/qbo.u30.index

 

50mb

http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/data/indices/qbo.u50.index

 

I got

+0.74 at 30mb and +5.13 at 50mb for JAN 1998.

[Harry]

WTF, haha.

 

Here are my QBO sources:

 

30mb

http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/data/indices/qbo.u30.index

 

50mb

http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/data/indices/qbo.u50.index

 

I got

+0.74 at 30mb and +5.13 at 50mb for JAN 1998.

 

 

Yeah.. I have been using this one..

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/correlation/qbo.data

[Rainman]

Yeah.. I have been using this one..

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/correlation/qbo.data

 

Well then.  CPC + ESRL =

[Powerball]

 

Expect the unexpected needs to be the theme of this winter. Just a reminder too....it is absolutely plausible that a "warm" winter month for us could yield more, if not much more, snow than a "cold" winter month. The possibilities are endless.

 

Regardless of what the overall winter theme will be, I do think the chances are relatively high that our subforum will see a massive/moisture-laden winter storm at some point this season (speaking a once in a decade-type event), as the STJ is finally showing signs of life again.

[Harry]

Well then.  CPC + ESRL =

 

 

[Chinook]

Well then.  CPC + ESRL =

CPC+ESRL= dancing tomato?

 

I don't understand this equation.

[Rainman]

CPC+ESRL= dancing tomato?

 

I don't understand this equation.

 

It just felt right 

[Geos]

I had a thread two winters ago on the QBO topic. Here: http://www.americanwx.com/bb/index.php/topic/38318-qbo-influence-on-our-winters/?hl=%2Bqbo#entry1983655

 

Upon researching the data myself I found a strong correlation between the "wintry" and the positive vs. negative phase of the QBO (Quasi-biennial oscillation). When the index (measurement taken at 30hPa) emerges from being in the deep negative side right before winter starts, the winter are usually a bit harsher or at least snowier than normal. Same goes if the index is positive going into winter. When the index is deep in the negative you tend to get benign winters ~ like 11-12.

 

Right now we're quite positive, in a low solar stage, and with the dominating warm northern Pacific still. So I would go against el Niño ruling the roost on the weather pattern all winter long.

As of October the index is 13.38. October of 2013 it was 11.69 for comparison. October of 2014 it was strongly negative at -23.86 and I think it weren't for the warm northern Pacific the Midwest winter would have been much calmer and/or milder than it was. 

I updated my chart showing the QBO index value at 30hPa and the ONI index.

 

 

Thing about this winter is that we still have the same pattern in the northern Pacific with an el Niño - and we haven't seen that in our lifetimes.

 

 

 

 

[buckeye]

I wonder if this will be a winter of cut off lows.  Deep sharp troughs cutting off in the midsection of the country and creating odd ball storm systems where you get snow to the south and rain to the north.   Thinking of Feb '98 for instance.

[Hoosier]

I wonder if this will be a winter of cut off lows.  Deep sharp troughs cutting off in the midsection of the country and creating odd ball storm systems where you get snow to the south and rain to the north.   Thinking of Feb '98 for instance.

 

 

That's kind of a hallmark of Nino.

[Hoosier]

[Hoosier]

 

 

[andyhb]

That's pretty ugly regarding possible weakening of the +PDO.

[Geos]

Very interesting, thank you for this.

And I do think that is the thing.... On the bright side, in about 5 months we'll all have an analog to refer back to for that setup :-)

 

That is very true!

 

Found this interesting. Don't remember what the snowfall was like really well back during the 97-98 super Niño, but I do remember some snow. MKX posted this map of the departure of snowfall throughout the region. The snow belts suffered and the eastern corn belt, but everyone else was slightly under or even over normal snowfall.

 

[Hoosier]

Here's the whole snow season in 1997-98.  Amounts and departures from average

 

 

 

 

[michsnowfreak]

summaryCFSv2.NaT2m.201512.gif

From the beginning the cfs has been the torchiest model (nasa the coldest). It's nothing if not consistent. Someone in NE posted the cfs forecast for DJF from Nov last year...and let's just say it was WAY too warm.

What is that second model you posted? It looks more like the jamstec.

[BuffaloWeather]

There is a strong coorelation between record warm Novembers and less overall snowfall in our region of the Great Lakes. Add to it a record strong El Nino and I'm going with an average of -20-25% average snowfall for the year with temp anamolies 2-4 Deg above average from Nov-March.

[Hoosier]

From the beginning the cfs has been the torchiest model (nasa the coldest). It's nothing if not consistent. Someone in NE posted the cfs forecast for DJF from Nov last year...and let's just say it was WAY too warm.

What is that second model you posted? It looks more like the jamstec.

 

 

From here:

 

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/people/wd51hd/sst/201510/carealtime.html

 

Found it not that long ago.  Don't really know much about it.

 

By the way, if you have time, can you run the stats for Detroit as far as September, October, and November all being warmer than average (each month being +, not the Sep-Nov composite) and the following winter temperatures.  Would be curious to see if there's any correlation as I found with Chicago.

[JoMo]

The SST CA forecast from Sept 2013, and Sept 2014 did pretty well for their respective (DJF) winters when it comes to temps. Precip wasn't that close but temp wise they had the right idea for the most part.

[michsnowfreak]

Locally there is a slight correlation to warm Novembers and below normal snow, but not a strong one.

 

Longterm avg snow at Detroit ~41"

 

Top 20 warmest Novembers and that winters snowfall

1931 – 26.2”

2001 – 33.7”

1902 – 51.3”

1975 – 55.9”

2011 – 26.0”

1963 – 32.5”

1948 – 13.7”

1994 – 33.5”

2009 – 43.7”

1999 – 23.7”

1964 – 49.2”

1909 – 46.8”

1953 – 40.0”

2003 – 24.1”

1883 – 50.3”

1990 – 31.4”

1946 – 30.0”

1998 – 49.5”

1934 – 32.2”

1960 – 18.0”