Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,508
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

January 2016 Pattern Disco


Damage In Tolland

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Yeah a very basic lesson..lol. Don't want to confuse you, but those images are ensemble means. Like Oceanst said, there can be a lot of different solutions and the mean is sometimes not the best one.

Nah you didnt. I followed. I just need to get away from ens means because THAT confuses me. It doesn't give me an indication of what are the possibilities, instead it's a blended sloution of all of them. I'd rather see all the members and decide for myself what's more probable....even if I end up being wrong lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah you didnt. I followed. I just need to get away from ens means because THAT confuses me. It doesn't give me an indication of what are the possibilities, instead it's a blended sloution of all of them. I'd rather see all the members and decide for myself what's more probable....even if I end up being wrong lol.

 

Well the mean usually is the "best guess" type deal, but it is also important to see the different solutions. However, with ensembles being so wild after day 10...you may have a seizure looking at all the different solutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah you didnt. I followed. I just need to get away from ens means because THAT confuses me. It doesn't give me an indication of what are the possibilities, instead it's a blended sloution of all of them. I'd rather see all the members and decide for myself what's more probable....even if I end up being wrong lol.

 

The problem with ensembles is that people want to use them as deterministic. Which they aren't.

 

Individual shortwaves that lead to the development of low pressure are going to be washed out by the mean because they are smaller scale, poorly modeled features. Ensembles are much better for teasing out above/below normal temps, or a pattern favorable for above/below normal precip. Which drives some people nuts, because they want storm by storm information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah you didnt. I followed. I just need to get away from ens means because THAT confuses me. It doesn't give me an indication of what are the possibilities, instead it's a blended sloution of all of them. I'd rather see all the members and decide for myself what's more probable....even if I end up being wrong lol.

actually at LR the mean is what you should look at, you can also get cluster maps which show a percentage of Ens showing a particular solution

http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/cgi-bin/expertcharts?LANG=en&MENU=0000000000&CONT=namk&MODELL=gefs&MODELLTYP=2&BASE=-&VAR=cpre&HH=12&ARCHIV=0&PANEL=0&ZOOM=0&PERIOD=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am really confused about this. Nasa scientist's claim El Nino getting stronger in 2016?. 

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/4ff286092a5414f97ca794deb0c77e81.htm

 

Then you have the CFS going for well above normal temperatures for January and then apparently the Euro Ensembles saying yesterday no major pattern change now back to major pattern change. 

 

 

  1. Michael Ventrice Retweeted Dan Leonard

    Uncertainty at an all time high in the medium range. Models flopping more than a fish out of water.

     

     
    Dan Leonard @DanLeonard_wx
    Wild run to run changes on the ECMWF EPS: Yesterday it cancelled the pattern change, today it brought it back.
    6 retweets7 likes
    Reply
     
    Retweet
     
    6
     
     
    Like
     
    7
     
    More
    1.  Michael Ventrice Retweeted

      CFS just wants to tease winter #weather lovers- after a cold couple of forecasts, toasty again for January. #climate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

question for Kev could you explain IO forcing in detail for me and how it changes hemispheric flow. Also what indicators lead you to believe IO forcing will return. TIA

 

 

might not have to wait until the 10th, just sayin

 

 

Perhaps New England can do well a bit earlier with an initial ~January 8th wave, though I think there will still be a decent amount of Pacific air which would certainly hurt the airmass -- especially for NYC and the Mid-Atlantic -- though yeah perhaps New England can get away with it. Unless you're referring to the Arctic front/snow squalls on Monday?

 

As far as the IO forcing, Mike Ventrice tweeted this image out earlier today, showing convection returning to the IO. 

 

post-73-0-33086400-1451526557_thumb.png

 

The CFS (this might be a day old?) also shows the Walker Circulation gradually reversing with more convection in the IO to end the month and start February. 

 

post-73-0-65325500-1451527481_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with ensembles is that people want to use them as deterministic. Which they aren't.

 

Individual shortwaves that lead to the development of low pressure are going to be washed out by the mean because they are smaller scale, poorly modeled features. Ensembles are much better for teasing out above/below normal temps, or a pattern favorable for above/below normal precip. Which drives some people nuts, because they want storm by storm information.

 

Yeah as useful as ensembles are they can be badly misused. I really like the SREF profiles in BUFKIT because it's a really great way to view uncertainty/clustering of many different variables (e.g. the mid level warm punch with the SWFE). Now... that does assume 90% of the SREF members aren't dropping acid which is a big assumption. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps New England can do well a bit earlier with an initial ~January 8th wave, though I think there will still be a decent amount of Pacific air which would certainly hurt the airmass -- especially for NYC and the Mid-Atlantic -- though yeah perhaps New England can get away with it. Unless you're referring to the Arctic front/snow squalls on Monday?

As far as the IO forcing, Mike Ventrice tweeted this image out earlier today, showing convection returning to the IO.

2.png

The CFS (this might be a day old?) also shows the Walker Circulation gradually reversing with more convection in the IO to end the month and start February.

4.jpg

thanks Kevin lol, whoosh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah as useful as ensembles are they can be badly misused. I really like the SREF profiles in BUFKIT because it's a really great way to view uncertainty/clustering of many different variables (e.g. the mid level warm punch with the SWFE). Now... that does assume 90% of the SREF members aren't dropping acid which is a big assumption.

we are talking day 9 though
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha sorry! Just wanted to add to the discussion. Though I didn't really get into detail as to what exactly IO forcing is, except for mentioning that the Walker Circulation is getting reversed on the CFS.

jk , CFS flipped if you look 2 days prior. Lots of day to day flipping going on with some people, lol not you but ya know.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha sorry! Just wanted to add to the discussion. Though I didn't really get into detail as to what exactly IO forcing is, except for mentioning that the Walker Circulation is getting reversed on the CFS.

Ok. I'm assuming the downstream affect of this would be a less favorable pattern with more of a trough signal across the Western Us. Does anyone care to expound upon how this Walker circulation relates to the MJO and IO forcing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't really matter. Same principle applies. A mean of any variable can be misleading on an ensemble. Look at Joaquin - the mean track was a hurricane making landfall on Long Island (NHC was basically there to). How did that work out for everyone?

how far do srefs on Bufkit go out? If I remember right that mean was 1 run?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with ensembles is that people want to use them as deterministic. Which they aren't.

Individual shortwaves that lead to the development of low pressure are going to be washed out by the mean because they are smaller scale, poorly modeled features. Ensembles are much better for teasing out above/below normal temps, or a pattern favorable for above/below normal precip. Which drives some people nuts, because they want storm by storm information.

I believe this was my problem lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how far do srefs on Bufkit go out? If I remember right that mean was 1 run?

 

87 hours. What was only 1 run? I was just saying how beings able to use the clustering of individual members can tell you so much more than just looking at the mean. True in the short range and the long range. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't really matter. Same principle applies. A mean of any variable can be misleading on an ensemble. Look at Joaquin - the mean track was a hurricane making landfall on Long Island (NHC was basically there to). How did that work out for everyone?

 

GREAT example of the mean being the worst possible solution to follow.

 

That's why looking at clustering is important. dProg/dt can be useful too, to see how runs are changing with time.

 

The stuff they are doing with sensitivity analysis is interesting too, figuring out which feature is affecting the variance most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't really matter. Same principle applies. A mean of any variable can be misleading on an ensemble. Look at Joaquin - the mean track was a hurricane making landfall on Long Island (NHC was basically there to). How did that work out for everyone?

 

I had to freeze eight loaves of white bread and give eight gallons of milk to the neighborhood cats.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't really matter. Same principle applies. A mean of any variable can be misleading on an ensemble. Look at Joaquin - the mean track was a hurricane making landfall on Long Island (NHC was basically there to). How did that work out for everyone?

So would it have been more feasible to go with the clusters of members then? If I recall correctly most members were ots and a couple skewed the mean to LI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So would it have been more feasible to go with the clusters of members then? If I recall correctly most members were ots and a couple skewed the mean to LI.

 

For a while we had basically 2 clusters... one OTS and one into SC/NC. Few, if any, members had the storm hitting Long Island. However when you split the difference and take the mean of those 2 clusters you get a track down in the middle.

 

In that case the mean is the least likely scenario. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a while we had basically 2 clusters... one OTS and one into SC/NC. Few, if any, members had the storm hitting Long Island. However when you split the difference and take the mean of those 2 clusters you get a track down in the middle.

 

In that case the mean is the least likely scenario. 

 

And basically all of the Euro members were wide right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a while we had basically 2 clusters... one OTS and one into SC/NC. Few, if any, members had the storm hitting Long Island. However when you split the difference and take the mean of those 2 clusters you get a track down in the middle.

In that case the mean is the least likely scenario.

And people in authority were giving you a hard time for giving an honest scientific argument for the storm going out to sea. It was really disgraceful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...