Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,502
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Weathernoob335
    Newest Member
    Weathernoob335
    Joined

January Medium/Long Range Discussion Part 2


WinterWxLuvr

Recommended Posts

not a bad gfs run.  Trended more amplified with the trough in general day 8-12.  It wouldn't take much for one of those vorts diving down to become something.  A lot of "almosts" on the run but a better look.  After that the long range look isn't that bad.  Its not a cold look but there is a reason what little snow signal there is on the ensembles is mostly day 13-15.  If we get a storm it might have to be as the cold relaxes and something can get going from the south again.  Yea temps will be an issue and we will need to be on the right side of the boundary but the PV is displaced just enough to think we could be.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

GGEM still says places with some elevation NW should look out for some wet snow.  Most other guidance has abandoned that idea.  THey didn't trend warmer, simply shifted the track of the storm west enough that we keep too much of an east component to the wind to get the cooling needed.  

If the map that is posted of the 12z run in the storm thread (lol, storm thread) verified, I'd be shocked if it wasn't wet snow out here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

If the map that is posted of the 12z run in the storm thread (lol, storm thread) verified, I'd be shocked if it wasn't wet snow out here.

Didn't realize there was a storm thread...been busy today.  But yea, if the track and everything else on the ggem was correct (lol at that idea) then it would be a heavy wet snow for places with any elevation in western VA and up my way.  But unless more reliable guidance supports that idea its not worth it to speculate.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

Actually we need to sell some to some of our posters.

Sell them two.........in case they miss with the first one.

But remember each of us would do something different with a hammer.  I would use it to build a structure without actually touching the physical hammer.  If February verifies like some of the seasonal forecaster pros have been hinting at (Cohen, DT, JB), then many of the local winter outlooks could verify quite well!  To me there's a big difference between someone saying with confidence that our winter is completely done versus speculating on multiple possibilities for better or worse.  The current pattern is challenging and was anticipated over the last couple weeks.  Our best climo for cold temps from about January 13 to 23 for cold is ongoing soon approaching while the MJO is actually being modeled to continue to go into favorable territory into phase 2.  But one example of a mecs during a crappy mjo was 2003!  The signals in the long range are mixed and that's expected!  Let's not hammer anything just yet.

eta: Also cips

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bob Chill said:

The only way long range guidance won't change on the regular is if it's able to consistently nail a pattern at 3-6 weeks lead. That type of skill won't exist probably in my lifetime and maybe my kid's. If the next weeklies doesn't shift then the one after that probably will and on and on. 

I'm kinda with mitch too. I've seen enough this year and have stopped chasing and analyzing every run. I'm finding it much more peaceful just waiting for a real threat to come in view inside of 5 days and not worrying about anything else. There is no long tracking this winter unless we get a big fat stable block. 

We've had multipe periods where ensembles showed a higher prob of snow d10-15 and nothing has come into focus at a skilled lead time. There's one exception with the SE storm. Guidance did a good job locking into that opportunity at fairly long leads. We almost backed into an event leading up but it wasn't meant to be for 95'ers and west. But even with that storm we were on the outside looking the whole time.

We haven't had a single stable good pattern this year that has held long enough to keep us in the game for more than a few days. All of our chances have been one off followed by reverting to a low/no chance pattern. We've had some real good looks d10+ but they have all been ghosts with no staying power. Until that type of persistence breaks overhead and not in LR model land I'll go with persistence above all else. 

One thing I think can break in our favor is the ao/nao. It sorta has the feel that the massive + streak might be getting close to running its course. Imho- to get a decent stretch of good opportunities, we need the ao/nao far more than the epo or pna this winter.  

I tried to send this as a pm, but wasn't allowed so I hope people won't hurt the messenger just for asking...

Why do you favor the arctic teleconnections over the Pacific this year? Is it not better to go with the signals I tend to go with the signals furthest from neutral.  Just wondering

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Lets just pretend the bottom left one knows what it is doing

bottomleft.png

What I get out of those looking at snowfall distribution is that southern VA/NC does better than DC/BWI. on 2 out of 4, similar snowfall for SEVA on north to us on 1 of them, and then one  where we do better than S & E of us. That tells me odds favor another southern storm(s) that likely misses us for the most part. In the end, however, even the bottom right panel would work, and would not be inconsistent with what I was mentioning for late Feb/early March. It seems that in some bad snow years, once the sun gets higher and starts to make subtle changes to the winter pattern heading toward spring, that's enough of a reshuffle/change to give us a shot at a a few small event(s) (2-4"), if not a moderate one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

I tried to send this as a pm, but wasn't allowed so I hope people won't hurt the messenger just for asking...

Why do you favor the arctic teleconnections over the Pacific this year? Is it not better to go with the signals I tend to go with the signals furthest from neutral.  Just wondering

The AO/NAO (especially AO) are by far the most reliable factors in determining higher probability of snowfall. That can't be disputed because the evidence is overwhelming. Yes, the Pac can drive the bus all by itself. We saw it 2 years in a row before last year. But that isn't the norm and over time having a favorable pac but crap AO/NAO will not get it done on a regular basis. Recency bias always comes into play when things work out in untraditional fashion. I've said multiple times over the last few years that relying solely on the EPO/PNA will lead to more disappointment than success. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

The AO/NAO (especially AO) are by far the most reliable factors in determining higher probability of snowfall. That can't be disputed because the evidence is overwhelming. Yes, the Pac can drive the bus all by itself. We saw it 2 years in a row before last year. But that isn't the norm and over time having a favorable pac but crap AO/NAO will not get it done on a regular basis. Recency bias always comes into play when things work out in untraditional fashion. I've said multiple times over the last few years that relying solely on the EPO/PNA will lead to more disappointment than success. 

Agree, also keep in mind the correlation between cold/snow and the NAO grows stronger later in the season, so going into Feb and March its even more important.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

The AO/NAO (especially AO) are by far the most reliable factors in determining higher probability of snowfall. That can't be disputed because the evidence is overwhelming. Yes, the Pac can drive the bus all by itself. We saw it 2 years in a row before last year. But that isn't the norm and over time having a favorable pac but crap AO/NAO will not get it done on a regular basis. Recency bias always comes into play when things work out in untraditional fashion. I've said multiple times over the last few years that relying solely on the EPO/PNA will lead to more disappointment than success. 

Thank you. I don't remember reading that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Agree, also keep in mind the correlation between cold/snow and the NAO grows stronger later in the season, so going into Feb and March its even more important.  

Part of the issue is that it "can" snow when all the indices are saying it can't. All kinds of flukes over the years are always brought up when facing a sh!t LW pattern. Yes, it can no doubt snow when it shouldn't and otoh it can not snow when it should. But you and I both know over time how things work. Keep getting +AO/NAO winters are we'll get many more duds than booms. We've pretty much used up all our +AO/NAO luck in 13/14-14/15. I'm totally prepared for a complete dud without flukes unless we get some help where santa's factory is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bob Chill said:

Part of the issue is that it "can" snow when all the indices are saying it can't. All kinds of flukes over the years are always brought up when facing a sh!t LW pattern. Yes, it can no doubt snow when it shouldn't and otoh it can not snow when it should. But you and I both know over time how things work. Keep getting +AO/NAO winters are we'll get many more duds than booms. We've pretty much used up all our +AO/NAO luck in 13/14-14/15. I'm totally prepared for a complete dud without flukes unless we get some help where santa's factory is. 

Totally agree with this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freind just linked me to a Jb post on the weeklies because he thought it sounded like what I said. I just read it and I hate hate hate to agree with him but he did just say exactly what I did last night. That it looks very odd and a bit confusing that it builds a western ridge and rushing over the top with a negative AO but yet no response over the us. Just higher heights across all of North America. It's not like most of winter where the trough is stuck in the west or where we're flooded with PAC air because of a vortex over AK. With ridging in the west and AK we shouldn't be flooded with a PAC firehouse. And with a higher heights in the AO space we shouldn't have a roided se ridge. I've given my best guess to the possible cause. But I'm honestly curious what anyone else's take is. I so wish we could see the members. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Freind just linked me to a Jb post on the weeklies because he thought it sounded like what I said. I just read it and I hate hate hate to agree with him but he did just say exactly what I did last night. That it looks very odd and a bit confusing that it builds a western ridge and rushing over the top with a negative AO but yet no response over the us. Just higher heights across all of North America. It's not like most of winter where the trough is stuck in the west or where we're flooded with PAC air because of a vortex over AK. With ridging in the west and AK we shouldn't be flooded with a PAC firehouse. And with a higher heights in the AO space we shouldn't have a roided se ridge. I've given my best guess to the possible cause. But I'm honestly curious what anyone else's take is. I so wish we could see the members. 

Which weeklies does he use if anyone knows the answer?  I'd guess the cfsv2?  What's interesting to me is I think JB does a stellar job of anticipating model trends even if his magnitude tends to be over-hyped.  I can't think of another met who points out an h5 map so easily publicly to say "this is why this output will not verify in this region and here is what to expect."  I had a subscription with wxbell last year and I still watch every video from them I can.  I'd honestly favor eps weeklies over anything climate-based for the medium-range because of resolution, but that's personal preference.  I think ttdb is catching up with them with the data offerings all except the fine details of the ecmwf products, so no complaints!  I'm curious if the cfs weeklies on tropicaltidbits verifies his analysis?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

Freind just linked me to a Jb post on the weeklies because he thought it sounded like what I said. I just read it and I hate hate hate to agree with him but he did just say exactly what I did last night. That it looks very odd and a bit confusing that it builds a western ridge and rushing over the top with a negative AO but yet no response over the us. Just higher heights across all of North America. It's not like most of winter where the trough is stuck in the west or where we're flooded with PAC air because of a vortex over AK. With ridging in the west and AK we shouldn't be flooded with a PAC firehouse. And with a higher heights in the AO space we shouldn't have a roided se ridge. I've given my best guess to the possible cause. But I'm honestly curious what anyone else's take is. I so wish we could see the members. 

I think it was you who said this yesterday and I agreed when I read it. The conflicting signals are likely just a byproduct of spread out in time. Prob just best to like the look in the high latitudes and hope its right. If it is then the mid latitudes will be just fine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

I think it was you who said this yesterday and I agreed when I read it. The conflicting signals are likely just a byproduct of spread out in time. Prob just best to like the look in the high latitudes and hope its right. If it is then the mid latitudes will be just fine. 

Yea that was my take.  There must be a minority cluster with maybe a neutral AO and a huge ridge over the US. It's the only thing I can think of. It's just rare something looks that odd to me. Seen most every look imaginable but that looked off. So just wanted to see what others take was.  Thanks 

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...