January 2020 General Discussions & Observations Thread

[bluewave]

1 minute ago, PB-99 said:

Don`t post that we corrected warmer in the LR when we did not. 

We did with the the current day 8 from the previous 10. Why do you like to start arguments about the long range when the models  have the least skill. It just isn’t worth it. 

[PB-99]

Just now, bluewave said:

We did with the the current day 8 from the previous 10. Why do you like to start arguments about the long range when the models  have the least skill. It just isn’t worth it. 

 

I am not starting arguments. I am just pointing out what the model actually did at 12z yesterday and 0z this morning that should have everyone aware that the EPS sped up the trough and did not delay it.

 

Sorry man, when I am here I am factual not argumentative. 

[bluewave]

Just now, PB-99 said:

 

I am not starting arguments. I am just pointing out what the model actually did at 12z yesterday and 0z this morning that should have everyone aware that the EPS sped up the trough and did not delay it.

 

Sorry man, when I am here I am factual not argumentative. 

You misrepresented what I said,  so that is not factual. I never make definitive statements about the period beyond day 10. I always say that if something happens then we could see a particular outcome. But nothing is set in stone. 

[MJO812]

34 minutes ago, PB-99 said:

 

This is incorrect, Bluewave posted the difference between day 8 and day 10 ( 2 days ago ) . The EPS began to correct yesterday in the L/R

 

The LR CORRECTED TO MORE TROUGH  in the N/E in the L/R 

 

 

Not only the long range looks better , the big torch has been muted. The ensembles are also showing a possible storm around MLK day.

[LibertyBell]

1 minute ago, bluewave said:

You misrepresented what I said,  so that is not factual. I never make definitive statements about the period beyond day 10. I always say that if something happens then we could see a particular outcome. But nothing is set in stone. 

I would also say that we almost always have a small window of winter in a long-term warm pattern.  We had a 3" snowfall in Jan 07, as a case in point.  It doesn't change the fact that the overall pattern is very warm.

 

[MJO812]

27 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

14-15 and 15-16 being cases in point.  What I find concerning though is that the mild pattern started later this time, so it might be more like 05-06 or 06-07.

 

Jan 2016 was warm until Jonas  at the end of the month.

[LibertyBell]

Just now, Snow88 said:

Jan 2016 was warm until Jonas  at the end of the run.

Yes, and in 2015 we didn't get cold/snowy until around Jan 20th either.  

[MJO812]

Just now, LibertyBell said:

Yes, and in 2015 we didn't get cold/snowy until around Jan 20th either.  

Rich Hoffman ( he used to be a meteorologist  on News 12 ) had a picture on his facebook about what timeframe NYC sees the most snow and the image did show Jan 20 through March.

[LibertyBell]

1 minute ago, Snow88 said:

Rich Hoffman ( he used to be a meteorologist  on News 12 ) had a picture on his facebook about what timeframe NYC sees the most snow and the image did show Jan 20 through March.

I love the period Jan 20 to Mar 20 during our snowy winters.

[bluewave]

30 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

A good thing about late Jan is that you dont need temps to be abnormally cold to get a significant snowfall event.  Storm track is essential though.

 

It always comes down to getting favorable storm tracks. We can have snowy warm patterns or relatively snowless colder periods. Just look at the difference between January 2019 and February 2017.

NYC

Jan 2019....32.5....-0.1....snowfall....1.1

Feb 2017....41.6....+6.3....snowfall...9.4

[PB-99]

2 hours ago, snowman19 said:

It would appear the people who said the the models were too quick with the change to colder yesterday, were correct, they have backed down from what they were showing yesterday. Looks like a slower, post 1/21 change now..

 

@bluewave this the post you responded to.

 

You posted a day 10 to day 8 change , when yesterday`s 12z was the 1st to correct ( that`s what he was alluding to and then the 0z run drove more trough into the N/E )

Jan 21 is day 15. The EPS did not delay the L/R.

 

The EPS corrected again on day 11.

 

[LibertyBell]

4 minutes ago, bluewave said:

It always comes down to getting favorable storm tracks. We can have snowy warm patterns or relatively snowless colder periods. Just look at the difference between January 2019 and February 2017.

NYC

Jan 2019....32.5....-0.1....snowfall....1.1

Feb 2017....41.6....+6.3....snowfall...9.4

Yup, that was prevalent during the late 80s and early 90s.  Note how cold our Jan avg temps were during the 80s with low snowfalls.  Thats a good side effect of our increasing precip totals since 2000- it's now difficult to get a below avg temp month combined with below avg snowfall, however it can still happen if the pattern dictates cold/dry followed by warm/wet followed by cold/dry, etc.  And such a pattern is very stable and difficult to dislodge.

[bluewave]

2 minutes ago, PB-99 said:

 

@bluewave this the post you responded to.

 

You posted a day 10 to day 8 change , when yesterday`s 12z was the 1st to correct ( that`s what he was alluding to and then the 0z run drove more trough into the N/E )

Jan 21 is day 15. The EPS did not delay the L/R.

 

The EPS corrected again on day 11.

 

Responding to a post doesn’t mean I am endorsing the posters specific POV. Notice how I brought the discussion back to the day 6-10 and mentioned the uncertainty of the longer range.

[PB-99]

Just now, bluewave said:

Responding to a post doesn’t mean I am endorsing the posters specific POV. Notice how I brought the discussion back to the day 6-10 and mentioned the uncertainty of the longer range.

 

I did not see an attempt to correct is false statement that the cold was delayed. you quickly posted a day 10 to day 8 fix.

 

So I felt it was my obligation to let the posters know that the EPS did not delay anything. 

 

Don`t be sensitive. 

[Brian5671]

LR is indeed a crapshoot of sorts especially with some horrid model outputs.   

[PB-99]

1 minute ago, Brian5671 said:

LR is indeed a crapshoot of sorts especially with some horrid model outputs.   

But the LR is fine when you post that we are going to loop back into p6 right ? 

 

lol

 

Just stop . 

[bluewave]

Just now, PB-99 said:

 

I did not see an attempt to correct is false statement that the cold was delayed. you quickly posted a day 10 to day 8 fix.

 

So I felt it was my obligation to let the posters know that the EPS did not delay anything. 

 

Don`t be sensitive. 

It’s not my job to correct what other posters say about the LR. You are probably more sensitive than I am. You will notice that I just let the winter is over type posts roll off my back . These always pop up when people get bummed out by the current pattern. You seem to get angered by them. But you shouldn’t since opinions can’t drive the actual pattern. Defending misrepresentations of my statements isn’t being sensitive.

[Brian5671]

1 minute ago, PB-99 said:

But the LR is fine when you post that we are going to loop back into 6 right ? 

 

lol

 

Just stop . 

Never said we we going to loop back into 6, speculated that we COULD. (and yes, we still could)   Big difference.   It's a discussion, no need to get defensive when someone brings up a differing point of view that's not cold/snowy.   

 

back on 12/25 no model showed anything near what's occurring with the MJO going strong into 4/5.   hence my post that the LR is a crapshoot.

[MJO812]

4 minutes ago, Brian5671 said:

LR is indeed a crapshoot of sorts especially with some horrid model outputs.   

It definitely is

We have been teased so many times by the models showing a good pattern which then turns to crap.

All we do now is wait and see.

[MJO812]

Gefs MJO loops in 6 and the Euro has it going into the COD after 6.

[Brian5671]

Just now, Snow88 said:

It definitely is

We have been teased so many times by the models showing a good pattern which then turns to crap.

All we do now is wait and see.

anything past day 10 or 12 is subject to big changes....especially this year with models struggling so much-maybe due to the fast Pac Jet, but this year/last year seem especially bad

[donsutherland1]

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

I wasn't aware of what was going in Europe, Don!  How bad is it over there?  Is there a global temp map for December?  I also heard that Australia just had its hottest and driest year on record, and it's not even close.

 

December 2019 Temperature Anomalies:

[donsutherland1]

59 minutes ago, PB-99 said:

This current 5 day period was picked out on Dec 26th , when there was nothing but a ridge in the east. I called this a 5 day window in the middle of the torch period that would correct in the means. I think @donsutherland1 will attest here. 

 

Absolutely. That is correct.

[PB-99]

4 minutes ago, Brian5671 said:

Never said we we going to loop back into 6, speculated that we COULD. (and yes, we still could)   Big difference.   It's a discussion, no need to get defensive when someone brings up a differing point of view that's not cold/snowy.   

 

back on 12/25 no model showed anything near what's occurring with the MJO going strong into 4/5.   hence my post that the LR is a crapshoot.

Back on Dec 26, the Euro RIMM plots had this going into p4. This was seen in the L/R and when it was, you did not question it.

Now any cold in the L/R is a " crapshoot  " . There is absolutely no skill in chiding cold and pumping warmth even as the guidance is coming towards the 1 month of AN period ending.

Anything " could " happen but why ignore the guidance, it`s not just model output, I explained above what the models are doing. 

Here`s the warm GFS  see that heading away from 6 ? It pushes the vortex east of the Rockies , not into the east, it doesn`t have to yet it`s real deal cold air so it pushes on the ridge.

 

 

 

Here`s the CFS seeing this going into p7 

 

 

 

Here we are heading towards p7 after d 10 

 

 

That is why you are seeing the push off the WC by the EPS. 

 

You winter`s over posters and nothing changes until Feb 15 goes against the guidance. I guess you can post it all you want , but it doesn`t match up with what the models are seeing

[PB-99]

1 minute ago, donsutherland1 said:

Absolutely. That is correct.

Thank you sir.

 

[FPizz]

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

I wasn't aware of what was going in Europe, Don!  How bad is it over there?  Is there a global temp map for December?  I also heard that Australia just had its hottest and driest year on record, and it's not even close.

 

Over the last 120 years, Australia's average rainfall has gone up by 20% according to a chart posted on their government website.

[Brian5671]

12 minutes ago, PB-99 said:

Back on Dec 26, the Euro RIMM plots had this going into p4. This was seen in the L/R and when it was, you did not question it.

Now any cold in the L/R is a " crapshoot  " . There is absolutely no skill in chiding cold and pumping warmth even as the guidance is coming towards the 1 month of AN period ending.

Anything " could " happen but why ignore the guidance, it`s not just model output, I explained above what the models are doing. 

Here`s the warm GFS  see that heading away from 6 ? It pushes the vortex east of the Rockies , not into the east, it doesn`t have to yet it`s real deal cold air so it pushes on the ridge.

 

 

 

Here`s the CFS seeing this going into p7 

 

 

 

Here we are heading towards p7 after d 10 

 

 

That is why you are seeing the push off the WC by the EPS. 

 

You winter`s over posters and nothing changes until Feb 15 goes against the guidance. I guess you can post it all you want , but it doesn`t match up with what the models are seeing

never said nothing changes til 2/15, I did opine that based on the stuck pattern we're in, I'm skeptical of change.  This does not mean I'm "rooting for warmth".  I love a good cold/snowy pattern just like anyone else but I'd like to see it in the nearer range before jumping on board.   Last year was a great example-models (and you for that matter) kept showing a great pattern that never materialized.   While winter may or may not be over, just because models are "seeing" something does not mean it's coming.   Lessons learned from last year....

Not sure why you get so angry at anyone who doesn't push a cold/snowy agenda....it's kind of odd really.    It's a discussion board, respect others opinions even if you don't agree with them.

[PB-99]

5 minutes ago, Brian5671 said:

never said nothing changes til 2/15, I did opine that based on the stuck pattern we're in, I'm skeptical of change.  This does not mean I'm "rooting for warmth".  I love a good cold/snowy pattern just like anyone else but I'd like to see it in the nearer range before jumping on board.   Last year was a great example-models (and you for that matter) kept showing a great pattern that never materialized.   While winter may or may not be over, just because models are "seeing" something does not mean it's coming.   Lessons learned from last year....

Not sure why you get so angry at anyone who doesn't push a cold/snowy agenda....it's kind of odd really.    It's a discussion board, respect others opinions even if you don't agree with them.

 

There is 0 anger when pointing out guidance. 

[MJO812]

Nice squalls for midweek on the modems reaching the coast.

[bluewave]

You can see the struggle that the models are having as they transition from phase 5 to phase 6 longer range. Phase 6 composites move the NPAC ridge closer to the West Coast. So those wavelength changes may be hard for the models to properly resolve until under 10 days. We can see more of a -EPO emerge when we start getting closer to 6-7. But you need a strong enough -EPO response to really knock the SE ridge down from such an amped up phase 4-5.