Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    16,910
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    blackrdr69
    Newest Member
    blackrdr69
    Joined

Winter 2021-2022


40/70 Benchmark
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I wonder if that Indonesian convection that scooter keeps hinting at could induce somewhat of a STJ presence this season? I'm not saying 100" in Boston, but you know what I mean...

I always thought the STJ stuff was a result of convection in the east pac. For instance if Nina was west based, you wouldn't have such cool waters in the eastern Pacific and naturally there will always be some convection there in the tropics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1994-95 was active but warm outside of the Tip alluded to deep and short lived cold snap after the one good storm that imby flipped with a net gain of 2 inches but we had 6-8 down in the initial hours.   
 

MLK Weekend was warm per memory-I remember talking a. Long walk in just a tee shirt MLK day.   

1997-98 was going to be good but super ninos don’t work for anyone.  I do remember the potential wasted that winter and the 12/23/97 event was really good.   Tom Chisholm reporting on the fact that it was snowing hard by 7:30 AM telling viewers not to worry, the strong December sun will bring bare ground by afternoon.   Never to be heard from again...lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, George001 said:

I think it is very possible we see North Atlantic blocking the entire winter, and even if we don’t there is a good chance we get severe polar vortex intrusions to offset that, as the polar vortex is looking weak on the models.

How many 48-60” blizzards will George forecast for this winter?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, 512high said:

lol, after this crappy summer, I should have been more specific as a "wish", Scott please don't piss on my parade as we head towards winter, I am prepared however, for a repeat or worse then last wi 

My comment was directly towards the 48-60” comment. Not happening. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overall, I don't know that the winter will have super different features than last year. You have a lot of warmth by Indonesia right now like last year. You have more cold to the East by Peru (although not really Nino 1.2) than to the West in the Nino zones like last year. Solar is still rising like last year. You had major -NAO blocking in April like in 2020. The big Gulf hurricanes hits (and even NE tropical hits/impacts) are there too.

We're not following an El Nino this year, but one of the reasons I use ENSO order is because the warmth by Indonesia tends to be there in Fall in those La Ninas (look at 1998, 2010, 2016, 2020 as examples, opposite tends to hold for El Nino after La Nina too). Not as important this year.

I do think the "weaker (surface) La Nina" after a "stronger (surface) La Nina" thing is interesting. Present in a lot of the "good" colder La Ninas/ near Ninas like 2000-01, 1974-75, 1996-97, 2011-12 out here. You can even throw in the cold-Neutrals. 2001-02, 2012-13, 1967-68 are cold here too and weaker than their predecessors. You do have exceptions, like 1985-86, 2008-09 that are a bit shit here. But they're generally very cold at times even in the Southwest.

These are years with a winter reading under 26.5C, when the prior winter was also under 26.5C, but a colder/stronger La Nina. 

Image

There is some estimation on my end for the pre-1950 years. So this is the more recent 60 years.

Image

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, CoastalWx said:

I always thought the STJ stuff was a result of convection in the east pac. For instance if Nina was west based, you wouldn't have such cool waters in the eastern Pacific and naturally there will always be some convection there in the tropics. 

West based la ninas are warmer, though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 512high said:

Who cares! If he gets one right I will be happy, I hoping and praying for a better winter, I just hope we can retain whatever snow we get and build from there and not be washed away.

An entire seasons worth of snow in one storm, a blizzard of that magnitude would be the most severe blizzard on record. If you take the most severe blizzard I have ever experienced in my life (Feb 2013) and double that, you get a 48-60 inch blizzard. That seems like it would be extremely difficult to do, maybe if you get the early Jan 2018 blizzard (about 14-18 inches eastern mass) with severe North Atlantic blocking to slow it down. The strength of that low got all the way down to the 950 mb, but due to the lack of North Atlantic blocking it didn’t really stall much. Just 2 months later we had a slightly “weaker” low come up the coast in the 960s, yet I ended up with 2 feet of snow from that blizzard. Some areas got close to 3 feet. Imagine if we got a rapidly strengthening 930s mb low that just sat there right over the cape, if we get that I don’t think it’s out of the question that my area ends up getting enough snow that it piles up over my head from that blizzard alone.

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, raindancewx said:

Overall, I don't know that the winter will have super different features than last year. You have a lot of warmth by Indonesia right now like last year. You have more cold to the East by Peru (although not really Nino 1.2) than to the West in the Nino zones like last year. Solar is still rising like last year. You had major -NAO blocking in April like in 2020. The big Gulf hurricanes hits (and even NE tropical hits/impacts) are there too.

...

 

We have differing ways and means, but arrive upon a similar conclusion.

I think that the silver bullet in seasonal forecasting is right there, like an egg on a plate for those starving for insight, but they just don't like eggs I guess. Or, don't recognize it as food for thought. 

Short version: The HC is subsuming ENSO signal; reliance on the latter is becoming less than credible.

Longer version: with empirical evidence, now spanning more than a decade, papers have been/being turning of phrases, that separating the effects of Hadley Cell expansion, from those attributed more specifically to the ENSOs, is blurred(ing). 

"Blurring" suggests that it is not complete.   That is true... hence why above we say, "Becoming less than credible"  So, it may be more apropos to say over-reliance. 

But the last two warm cycles, including the 'super' Nino now 6 or so years ago, demonstrated impacts beneath the typical spectrum, along known climate routes.  Meanwhile, the La Nina side of the machinery has correlated at times with the general hemispheric circulation mode, but only transiently.  In fact, I've argued when it did during the last two years ...it was mainly because there were times when the D(pattern)/DT happened to be differentiating through the La Nina construct template. This gave a daily scalar appeal be consistent.  I.e., it just happened to align while in route to some other destination  ... One that interestingly too often arrived to mangled versions of more El Nino -esque.  

But, whether one looks at the pallet of environmental circumstances that, in theory, are related to what drives the governing characteristic of the total circulation engine - such as what you suggested, or they see it through the lens above and reasons ... that is using different mathematics to come to the same notion. 

The HC phenomenon isn't gone or going anywhere.   The present ENSO signal is unclear, but likely less than extraordinary.  I'd suggest that the distribution of SD events/phenomenon, over time, will be less identifiable/attributable squarely to ENSO ...although I guarantee, the narrative consensus will attempt to do so. 

It's funny ..there's like two climate changes going on.  The geo-physical one ...caused ( most likely) by the "Anthropocene" epoch as it rages henceforth. Then there is a virtual climate in the zeitgeist of willingness to accept former changes change.  Those are definitely lagged -

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Typhoon Tip said:

We have differing ways and means, but arrive upon a similar conclusion.

I think that the silver bullet in seasonal forecasting is right there, like an egg on a plate for those starving for insight, but they just don't like eggs I guess. Or, don't recognize it as food for thought. 

Short version: The HC is subsuming ENSO signal; reliance on the latter is becoming less than credible.

Longer version: with empirical evidence, now spanning more than a decade, papers have been/being turning of phrases, that separating the effects of Hadley Cell expansion, from those attributed more specifically to the ENSOs, is blurred(ing). 

 

 

My research suggests that a lot of what you focus on for the "expansion" of the Hadley Circulation is really the shape of it changing more than anything. It doesn't expand in consistent ways each season you get "angled" looks to it sometimes. The subtropical counter to the rising air in the tropics has also changed shape a bit too. I've known that for a while. My main teacher in college wrote some of the research on the circulation expanding. Her speciality was on how changes in the Walker and Hadley cells could impact MJO intensity and timing.

Long-term, I think an expanded area of tropical forcing / convection makes sense for wilder weather patterns. All that said, there have always been periods where Fall and Spring were wilder. Heavy Fall snow events here cluster every 30-years or so about half way through the AMO cycle. I get the impression that people like see the Hadley Circulation is an excuse to throw seasonal forecasting out the window to some extent. The truth is, even before recent years, it never really made much sense to base more than 25-30% of a seasonal pattern off ENSO. I actually give it less weight than that of the seven factors I use, even though it's "first among equals" for me.  You can find a similar warm December in a strong El Nino just like you can in a strong La Nina. Same for cold years or other months. That's not the Hadley Cell doing that. December 1988 and December 1957 are at near opposite ends of the ENSO spectrum, and not recent years when the expansion should be subsuming ENSO. You must know that your argument is also as old as time. When ENSO was proposed as a regular recurring phenomenon in the 1920s people like Walker got push back for the patterns not working in each event back then too. The idea that ENSO+/ENSO- equals PNA in a certain period has always been kind of wrong, it's just a stronger weighted roll of the dice than the other features.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, raindancewx said:

My research suggests that a lot of what you focus on for the "expansion" of the Hadley Circulation is really the shape of it changing more than anything. It doesn't expand in consistent ways each season you get "angled" looks to it sometimes. The subtropical counter to the rising air in the tropics has also changed shape a bit too. I've known that for a while. My main teacher in college wrote some of the research on the circulation expanding. Her speciality was on how changes in the Walker and Hadley cells could impact MJO intensity and timing.

Long-term, I think an expanded area of tropical forcing / convection makes sense for wilder weather patterns. All that said, there have always been periods where Fall and Spring were wilder. Heavy Fall snow events here cluster every 30-years or so about half way through the AMO cycle. I get the impression that people like see the Hadley Circulation is an excuse to throw seasonal forecasting out the window to some extent. The truth is, even before recent years, it never really made much sense to base more than 25-30% of a seasonal pattern off ENSO. I actually give it less weight than that of the seven factors I use, even though it's "first among equals" for me.  You can find a similar warm December in a strong El Nino just like you can in a strong La Nina. Same for cold years or other months. That's not the Hadley Cell doing that. December 1988 and December 1957 are at near opposite ends of the ENSO spectrum, and not recent years when the expansion should be subsuming ENSO. You must know that your argument is also as old as time. When ENSO was proposed as a regular recurring phenomenon in the 1920s people like Walker got push back for the patterns not working in each event back then too. The idea that ENSO+/ENSO- equals PNA in a certain period has always been kind of wrong, it's just a stronger weighted roll of the dice than the 

The recent Hadley studies have nothing to do with what was going on back in 1920s, which that decade vastly predates the observation and posited effects of the Hadley cell expansion since 1990; and in particularly the last two decades.  Apples and oranges – in fact completely disparate topical causalities. 

You didn’t say anything in your response that really refutes the notion that HC expansion could be affecting the ENSO ability to modulate the circulation…

I definitely agree with the MJO aspects though. This is no kind of a credit grab in saying so please do not try to go down any petty roads… But I’ve been saying the same thing about the MJO also getting muted because of the Hadley expansion for about 10 years. Fact the matter is… These things are almost always concurrently determined by multiple sources and it’s always a race to be the first one to say x-y/z whatever  

My personal observation with the HC is that it took a leap in the 1998 actually during that super Nino, and never really fell back to its original state before that particular El Niño took place - it has if anything grown somewhere between 3 and 5° of latitude since.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

My personal observation with the HC is that it took a leap in the 1998 actually during that super Nino, and never really fell back to its original state before that particular El Niño took place - it has if anything grown somewhere between 3 and 5° of latitude since.

A question: If you said it took a leap during THAT super nino...does it stand to reason that it took another leap during the 2015-16 super niño? Because let me tell ya...feels like that year broke something, lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

The models were an abysmal failure for last winter. Every one of them insisted on raging +AO/+NAO run after run after run. 

I'm pretty sure the runs around this time last year hinted a a more -AO too. Almost like the forecasts got worse as we got closer to winter. They are hinting at that this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been seeing a lot of talk about the upcoming winter pattern possibly being similar to last year, and honestly I don’t hate that. Last year we had some bad luck with a decent pattern late Jan through mid feb and one in December. A lot of close misses, a massive ocean low missed to the south in late Jan, one in early March, early Feb missed a 2 ft+ blizzard by about 20 miles, ect. If we can get last years pattern with a weaker pacific jet and maybe a little less blocking, with a more favorable polar vortex intrusion that could lead to a big winter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, George001 said:

I have been seeing a lot of talk about the upcoming winter pattern possibly being similar to last year, and honestly I don’t hate that. Last year we had some bad luck with a decent pattern late Jan through mid feb and one in December. A lot of close misses, a massive ocean low missed to the south in late Jan, one in early March, early Feb missed a 2 ft+ blizzard by about 20 miles, ect. If we can get last years pattern with a weaker pacific jet and maybe a little less blocking, with a more favorable polar vortex intrusion that could lead to a big winter. 

I would not think it a very long guess that for most winter enthusiasts ...last year sucked ballz. 

It ranked very low on redemption scoring, outside of a narrow band through Central NE ..which will IMBY-lens arguments no doubt. 

Having said that ... I guess for pure objective reasoning, the bold means there was "at least" a chance?   

- no bueno.  The humanity of the enthusiast would rather roll up that reasoning and beat the high-roader into a coma.  Missing events by 500 mi is almost preferred over being C.H.ed ... It means one's region never was in the game. But a steady of diet near-misses is excruciating. 

No but 2020-2021 was a winter marred by velocity/shearing and negative interference tendencies the majority of time. That atones in most cases why those misses took place.  If the scaffold of the pattern is circumstantially doing that, than the pattern sucks, and the reality did to.  So I guess in this sense ... I would suggest using this objective reason to prove that subjectively, last winter sucked ballz, as being the fairest distinction.  Ha ha

yeah yeah, maybe it was just "bad luck" ...but I think the probability of a better vs worse result, relative to preference notwithstanding, is parlayed off of canvased winter pattern.  Personally, I would rather not stack the deck with bad luck.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CoastalWx said:

I'm pretty sure the runs around this time last year hinted a a more -AO too. Almost like the forecasts got worse as we got closer to winter. They are hinting at that this year.

Yep I remember the November runs getting stronger with the +AO/+NAO they were showing, it was unanimous at that point. All the models missed it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

Missed the blocking. Models were going the other way with positive AO and NAO closing in on last winter is what he’s saying. 

Yeah... I get that much. But I was hung up on the "last year" - ha!   They meant earlier 'this' year... as in Jan/Feb of 2021.   funny -

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...