Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    15,322
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    John Brash
    Newest Member
    John Brash
    Joined
Ginx snewx

Winter 2016/2017 because its never too early

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

 

I also prefer to see H5 anomalies and not what they are spitting out at 2 meters...some of these seasonal models are climate models with a global warming component to them so they like to forecast a bunch of oranges at the surface even if the upper air doesn't support it. (even the Euro did this in 2014-2015...it had huge AK block with some downstream troughing, but decided that was like +1 to +2 at the surface over the Great Lakes and NE which is obviously pure hogwash)

The UKMET forecast I posted is the H5 anomaly forecast. It supports warmth with a strong WAR. The CanSIPS also has a strong WAR. I don't have the forecasts from the NMME and POAMA.

 

cansips_z500aMean_month_us_3.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

This makes sense to me because I have never really understood the December cancel stuff.

Scott and I were discussing this the other day.

 

There is definitely precedent for big December cold after intense Nino...1983 would be the year.

 

But yeah, maybe it's recency bias coming into play. We've had two deplorable Decembers in a row, so it seems hard to imagine a good one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tim198 said:

The UKMET forecast I posted is the H5 anomaly forecast. It supports warmth with a strong WAR. The CanSIPS also has a strong WAR. I don't have the forecasts from the NMME and POAMA.

 

 

UKMET has conflicting signals though...it has a potent PNA ridge and -EPO and also a SE ridge....that's not common at all. The Canadian definitely looks the warmest because it has troughing further west in the northern rockies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Please not an 83 winter . Crushing Dec then it  ends 

 

Jan and Mar '84 were great...Feb sucked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

 

There is definitely precedent for big December cold after intense Nino...1983 would be the year.

 

But yeah, maybe it's recency bias coming into play. We've had two deplorable Decembers in a row, so it seems hard to imagine a good one.

Though December snow has been decent during my 18 years here - about 20% of winter's average - deep cold has been rather scarce.  I find it odd that I've recorded 11 March mornings at -20 or colder, and just one in December, and only four days below -15 (19 for March.)

Please not an 83 winter . Crushing Dec then it  ends 

Depends on location.  83-84 (in Ft. Kent) was the year my snow stake needed an extension - 61" wasn't tall enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

Here is exactly what he said so I don't misquote him or anything. 

IMG_8123.PNG

IMG_8124.PNG

IMG_8126.PNG

Don't forget to mention that the correlation is not as strong with weak Ninas. Plus, most winters had at least one decent -NAO month.

https://www.americanwx.com/bb/topic/48650-winter-2016-17-discussion/?do=findComment&comment=4276023

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey gang, long time no see. 

Although this is a weakish Nina by all typical accounts and certainly the door is open for other forcings to dominate at times, I do note that in conjunction with a -IOD, the atmospheric Nina state appears stronger than you would think from looking at the SSTs or generic ONI figures. Thats not good or bad really at this stage, but given the location of the last 30 days if that is persistent, I'm warming to the idea of your classic Nina Aleutian high look in the means this winter. The +QBO/Nina post above is interesting because I remember HM a long time ago noting that the Nina/Aleutian high will be more poleward in +QBO and flatter in a -QBO, even though the Polar vortex state tends to still follow the theory of stronger in +QBO/weaker -QBO. Note the last 3 cool/nina winters with +QBO all had cold and a poleward Aleutian high feature (13-14, 10-11, 08-09). The latter 2 (especially 10-11) had plenty of NAO/AO help to drive the cold, so I'm looking for the NAO to be a bigger modulating factor with north pac ridging being further west than a 13-14 in my opinion. Just some early thoughts.

30 day vp 101116.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tim198 said:

 

CuWOUhfWcAAtpxf.jpg

 

Just a question on these types of progs...probability of above/below/neutral doesn't make sense to me in this case.

Say this area has a 40-50% chance of above normal temps....does that mean there's a 50-60% chance of below normal?  How does neutral fit into a probability forecast?  

Or is it displaying the most likely answer based on a bunch of ensembles?  Like it ranks the probability of each option and go with the highest...such as 40% chance above normal, 30% chance of neutral, and 30% chance of below normal.  Since the 40% chance of above normal is the highest, that's what the model draws?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

Just a question on these types of progs...probability of above/below/neutral doesn't make sense to me in this case.

Say this area has a 40-50% chance of above normal temps....does that mean there's a 50-60% chance of below normal?  How does neutral fit into a probability forecast?  

Or is it displaying the most likely answer based on a bunch of ensembles?  Like it ranks the probability of each option and go with the highest...such as 40% chance above normal, 30% chance of neutral, and 30% chance of below normal.  Since the 40% chance of above normal is the highest, that's what the model draws?

Many seasoned Mets have said to ignore departures by seasonal models at this point & pay attention to 500mb. NMME doesn't even know what the shade blue looks like

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, NJwinter23 said:

Hey gang, long time no see. 

Although this is a weakish Nina by all typical accounts and certainly the door is open for other forcings to dominate at times, I do note that in conjunction with a -IOD, the atmospheric Nina state appears stronger than you would think from looking at the SSTs or generic ONI figures. Thats not good or bad really at this stage, but given the location of the last 30 days if that is persistent, I'm warming to the idea of your classic Nina Aleutian high look in the means this winter. The +QBO/Nina post above is interesting because I remember HM a long time ago noting that the Nina/Aleutian high will be more poleward in +QBO and flatter in a -QBO, even though the Polar vortex state tends to still follow the theory of stronger in +QBO/weaker -QBO. Note the last 3 cool/nina winters with +QBO all had cold and a poleward Aleutian high feature (13-14, 10-11, 08-09). The latter 2 (especially 10-11) had plenty of NAO/AO help to drive the cold, so I'm looking for the NAO to be a bigger modulating factor with north pac ridging being further west than a 13-14 in my opinion. Just some early thoughts.

30 day vp 101116.PNG

HM just tweeted this morning that you can see Classic -IOD forcing in the OLR. Is this OLR configuration altered further due to the modoki La Niña?  

IMG_8128.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NJwinter23 said:

Hey gang, long time no see. 

Although this is a weakish Nina by all typical accounts and certainly the door is open for other forcings to dominate at times, I do note that in conjunction with a -IOD, the atmospheric Nina state appears stronger than you would think from looking at the SSTs or generic ONI figures. Thats not good or bad really at this stage, but given the location of the last 30 days if that is persistent, I'm warming to the idea of your classic Nina Aleutian high look in the means this winter. The +QBO/Nina post above is interesting because I remember HM a long time ago noting that the Nina/Aleutian high will be more poleward in +QBO and flatter in a -QBO, even though the Polar vortex state tends to still follow the theory of stronger in +QBO/weaker -QBO. Note the last 3 cool/nina winters with +QBO all had cold and a poleward Aleutian high feature (13-14, 10-11, 08-09). The latter 2 (especially 10-11) had plenty of NAO/AO help to drive the cold, so I'm looking for the NAO to be a bigger modulating factor with north pac ridging being further west than a 13-14 in my opinion. Just some early thoughts.

30 day vp 101116.PNG

This is a good post and why the Nina watch cancel from NCEP is kind of silly. Perhaps the SSTs aren't telling much, but the atmosohete is talking as we can see from this graphic. There is more to ENSO than SST anomalies and location...graphics like these help show that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stadiumwave said:

Many seasoned Mets have said to ignore departures by seasonal models at this point & pay attention to 500mb. NMME doesn't even know what the shade blue looks like

Yeah I know not to pay attention to the 2 meter temps...I actually wanted someone to explain to me how those probabilities work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

500mb tells the story more than the srfc temps. Period. I could give to poopies what it shows at the srfc.

Yeah of course.  Completely forgetting about what that map is telling us, pretend that's 500mb heights or something.  what the heck does a 40% chance of above normal mean?  A 60% chance of below normal?  And if so why wouldn't it paint 60% below?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, powderfreak said:

Yes but what the heck does a 40% chance of above mean?  A 60% chance of below normal?

 

It means 60% of the other two combined. So yeah, it's probably the highest of the 3 categories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

Yes but what the heck does a 40% chance of above mean?  A 60% chance of below normal?

Honestly, I just look at the 500mb mean. I am a casual observer of the seasonal as they are voodoo most of the time. I don't bother at tercile means or whatever. Just show mean the mean, and look for Dprog/DT with each month.  I also admit I don't look a lot at NMME of CANsips much either. IIRC last year they weren't warm enough from what they showed this time last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

 

It means 60% of the other two combined. So yeah, it's probably the highest of the 3 categories.

Gotcha.  Thanks.

So completely irrelevant it seems haha if you have to say there's a 40% chance of above normal and 60% chance of normal to below normal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, powderfreak said:

Gotcha.  Thanks.

So completely irrelevant it seems haha if you have to say there's a 40% chance of above normal and 60% chance of normal to below normal.

 

It's more for to see where the best probs of AN or BN are really. However, I just care about this area and if I see what the mean is..that's all I need. I don't need to overthink this stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

Gotcha.  Thanks.

So completely irrelevant it seems haha if you have to say there's a 40% chance of above normal and 60% chance of normal to below normal.

 

 

It's useless anyway...it's amazing how disconnected the sfc temps on some of those are when you look at the H5 anomalies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the winters of 1980-81 and 1983-84 followed an el nino and was cold overall...Dec-Jan were cold...February was mild both years...March was cold both years with the biggest snowfall of the season in NYC...

1983-84 and 1980-81.png

feb 1981 84.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Further backs up how probabilities are worthless 

Probability is basically the backbone of any forecast you see today.

/discussion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, andyhb said:

Probability is basically the backbone of any forecast you see today.

/discussion

Probabilities transmitted to the GP are useless /discussion 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ginx snewx said:

Probabilities transmitted to the GP are useless /discussion 

That's the point of dissemination methods and coordinating with the social sciences. To say "probabilities are worthless" is mindless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probability is powerful if explained well. If you are Joe Public it won't mean much to see a graphic with probabilities. However, explain the thought process and you really have a powerful tool. Too many people throw **** on the wall to see if it sticks. You need to add value and explain the products. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, andyhb said:

That's the point of dissemination methods and coordinating with the social sciences. To say "probabilities are worthless" is mindless.

Pretty sure he was speaking from a GP perspective. Face it LR forecasts have a long long way to go to accurately depict seasonal patterns. Easy when Super Nino hits, best of luck this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, andyhb said:

That's the point of dissemination methods and coordinating with the social sciences. To say "probabilities are worthless" is mindless.

They are absolutely worthless when forecasting on tv or to the public. They aren't used properly or conveyed or understood.  People want a forecast not a probability graph that is meant to mask uncertainty. 

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.

×