Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

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

February 2023 Obs/Discussion


Baroclinic Zone
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

It’s just something to watch. If we lose any confluence it’s over.  There is no stopping the tendencies out west. 

I agree. if we don’t get the block, we’re screwed. if we do, we could be in for a nice period due to the confluence

i think it’s kinda all or nothing. the scenario where the block links up with SE ridging isn’t too much of a concern of mine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, brooklynwx99 said:

I agree. if we don’t get the block, we’re screwed. if we do, we could be in for a nice period due to the confluence

i think it’s kinda all or nothing. the scenario where the block links up with SE ridging isn’t too much of a concern of mine

I'm thinking more the longevity. Initially we'll have the confluence as it sets up. But seems like the EPS mean kind of loses some of that towards the end.  Again, something to watch, but I'm not enthusiastic yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, brooklynwx99 said:

I agree. if we don’t get the block, we’re screwed. if we do, we could be in for a nice period due to the confluence

i think it’s kinda all or nothing. the scenario where the block links up with SE ridging isn’t too much of a concern of mine

The block is coming IMO...two ways we can get porked. Some flukey crap with the PV, like December, or more likely via compression between the block and any RNA derived se ridging.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I haven't assessed it too much, but why do you say that? The very warm February? I think 1956 had more of an RNA...

I meant March. The March look seems closer to the ensembles and weeklies vs 1956. Even taking into account that 1956 on the reanalysis will show blue anomalies everywhere because it was colder back then...still seems 2018 might be a closer match. 

 

Edit week 3 on weeklies has some semblance of 56 too. 

 

I guess I need the caveat that in no way do I expect the outcome of those years lol. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CoastalWx said:

I meant March. The March look seems closer to the ensembles and weeklies vs 1956. Even taking into account that 1956 on the reanalysis will show blue anomalies everywhere because it was colder back then...still seems 2018 might be a closer match. 

 

Edit week 3 on weeklies has some semblance of 56 too. 

 

I guess I need the caveat that in no way do I expect the outcome of those years lol. 

I would view 1956 on the site that allows you to use 1951-2010 was a base climo period. 

That outcome is possible IMO...but yea, it's always dangerous to expect it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

The block is coming IMO...two ways we can get porked. Some flukey crap with the PV, like December, or more likely via compression between the block and any RNA derived se ridging.

 

 

i think it’s harder to see the -PNA screw things up than in December due to the shorter wavelengths 

March 2018 had a pretty deep -PNA but the block worked its magic

BA0AC04D-8E91-441B-B797-63E5B8E4AE67.png.ebc19c7257f6882ba264bd9247ea5191.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, brooklynwx99 said:

I agree. if we don’t get the block, we’re screwed. if we do, we could be in for a nice period due to the confluence

i think it’s kinda all or nothing. the scenario where the block links up with SE ridging isn’t too much of a concern of mine

kinda odd its not a concern of yours given the depth of the WC trough, SE ridge has been under modeled in the extended all winter.  I would say the main concern is any blocking that does develop actually moves too far south like we saw in Jan and links up with the SE ridge for a mega ridge.  Having the MJO try and fail repeatedly in phase 8 just reinforces this idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, qg_omega said:

kinda odd its not a concern of yours given the depth of the WC trough, SE ridge has been under modeled in the extended all winter.  I would say the main concern is any blocking that does develop actually moves too far south like we saw in Jan and links up with the SE ridge for a mega ridge.  Having the MJO try and fail repeatedly in phase 8 just reinforces this idea.

Not every pattern is similiar 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, brooklynwx99 said:

i think it’s harder to see the -PNA screw things up than in December due to the shorter wavelengths 

March 2018 had a pretty deep -PNA but the block worked its magic

BA0AC04D-8E91-441B-B797-63E5B8E4AE67.png.ebc19c7257f6882ba264bd9247ea5191.png

Yes but you can see higher heights over Alaska and western Canada in March 2018

If you're just relying on the -NAO then that could easily link with the SE ridge under a strong RNA pattern. 

This is not a 2018 look. SE ridge would likely correct stronger. At best you can get a gradient pattern.eps_z500a_nhem_fh360_trend.thumb.gif.581463fe2224d0e6b5297ca52d3aabb2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

Yes but you can see higher heights over Alaska and western Canada in March 2018

If you're just relying on the -NAO then that could easily link with the SE ridge under a strong RNA pattern. 

This is not a 2018 look. SE ridge would likely correct strongereps_z500a_nhem_fh360_trend.thumb.gif.581463fe2224d0e6b5297ca52d3aabb2.gif

i know, I’m not making a direct comparison, just stating that I don’t think a -PNA would be that big of a deal this late in the year if we get a legit block to develop

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, qg_omega said:

kinda odd its not a concern of yours given the depth of the WC trough, SE ridge has been under modeled in the extended all winter.  I would say the main concern is any blocking that does develop actually moves too far south like we saw in Jan and links up with the SE ridge for a mega ridge.  Having the MJO try and fail repeatedly in phase 8 just reinforces this idea.

I don’t think it’s impossible, but the GEFS indies show that if a legit -NAO develops, it is far more likely that it forces the typical 50/50 response rather than a full latitude ridge

therefore, I’ll keep it in the back of my mind, but I’m not gonna say it’s likely or anything 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...