2025-2026 ENSO

[40/70 Benchmark]

3 minutes ago, FPizz said:

We went through a great stretch that most living in our area never experienced and might never again. Some said that was the new norm too.  

CC probably did play a role in that, too....I am in agreement with the idea that it fosters greaters variability with the overall trend line pointed downward, but that doesn't mean that you have to go robocop on people to tie it to every missed opportunity for a snowstorm. There have always been misses and rough stretches during which the misses far outnumbered the hits.

[brooklynwx99]

12 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

CC probably did play a role in that, too....I am in agreement with the idea that it fosters greaters variability with the overall trend line pointed downward, but that doesn't mean that you have to go robocop on people to tie it to every missed opportunity for a snowstorm. There have always been misses and rough stretches during which the misses far outnumbered the hits.

there was a span of time where pretty much every KU pattern hit from like 2016 through 2021, and people got spoiled and thought that would continue... I am one of those people and have tried to remove that bias. it just happened so often that it was easy to assume that kind of loaded WB -NAO pattern would give a 75-90% hit rate - in reality it's much lower

[40/70 Benchmark]

13 minutes ago, brooklynwx99 said:

there was a span of time where pretty much every KU pattern hit from like 2016 through 2021, and people got spoiled and thought that would continue... I am one of those people and have tried to remove that bias. it just happened so often that it was easy to assume that kind of loaded WB -NAO pattern would give a 75-90% hit rate - in reality it's much lower

It goes both ways...there are plenty of deniers, too....so I get why some feel the need to overcompensate on the other end of the spectrum, but we need to all make a concerted effort to be a bit more moderate or else objectivity becomes compromised.

[LibertyBell]

36 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

At the end of the day, the snow drought is a product of CC enhancing what already would have been a very hostile multidecadal base state. I don't know what is unreasonable about that...jesus, CC is so politicized that its now just like actual politics in that everyone is so polarized that its the few moderates that bare the brunt of the cross fire.

it's very similar to the late 80s

we even had big southern snowstorms in 1988-89 and 1989-90 just like we did last winter

 

[LibertyBell]

18 minutes ago, brooklynwx99 said:

there was a span of time where pretty much every KU pattern hit from like 2016 through 2021, and people got spoiled and thought that would continue... I am one of those people and have tried to remove that bias. it just happened so often that it was easy to assume that kind of loaded WB -NAO pattern would give a 75-90% hit rate - in reality it's much lower

it was even longer than that, 2002-03 through 2004-05 and 2009-10 through 2014-15 too

 

[michsnowfreak]

2 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

At the end of the day, the snow drought is a product of CC enhancing what already would have been a very hostile multidecadal base state. I don't know what is unreasonable about that...jesus, CC is so politicized that its now just like actual politics in that everyone is so polarized that its the few moderates that bare the brunt of the cross fire.

I know you guys concentrate on big storms, but I actually have noticed that sometimes a wetter climate does lead to MORE snow in northern climates than it wouldve seemingly produced in the past during a similarly hostile pattern/base state.

[LibertyBell]

12 minutes ago, michsnowfreak said:

I know you guys concentrate on big storms, but I actually have noticed that sometimes a wetter climate does lead to MORE snow in northern climates than it wouldve seemingly produced in the past during a similarly hostile pattern/base state.

Usually in the form of one big storm.

It has juiced up the atmosphere, which is why 2015-16 was snowier than 1982-83 although it was warmer too.

 

[40/70 Benchmark]

18 hours ago, michsnowfreak said:

I know you guys concentrate on big storms, but I actually have noticed that sometimes a wetter climate does lead to MORE snow in northern climates than it wouldve seemingly produced in the past during a similarly hostile pattern/base state.

Yea, I think that is applicable more for your area through the LES belts and into NNE....but I do agree with Chris that CC maybe starting to infringe on SNE snowfall climo....at least a portion of SNE, anyway. That said, we are simply in a hostile pattern for SNE that is less so for your area over to NNE.

[michsnowfreak]

37 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Yea, I think that is applicable more for your area through the LES belts and into NNE....but I do agree with Chris that CC maybe starting to infringe on SNE snowfall climo....at least a portion of SNE, anyway. That said, we are simply in a hostile pattern for SNE that is les so for your area over to NNE.

I do understand that. But again I think that the hostile pattern is way overlooked by some. It may cause some to eat words when a pattern is favorable for SNE and provides some juicy noreasters

[bluewave]

19 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

It was off the west coast when the storm took place, which is all that matters. Yes, the jet was a factor, but so isn't the poor positioning of the ridge. I don't know why you inexoprably seek agreement on a 100% CC attribution for everything.

My pointing out a particular repeating pattern over time with our storm tracks leading to less snow is more about pattern recognition on my part. I use it in real time to point out that the models have been too snowy beyond 5 days. This has lead to the famous modeled snowstorm always being a week a way. Which is due to the models underestimating the influence of the Pacific Jet longer range. Adding extra warmth to the system in multiple locations causes shifts in the storm tracks. So we need to acknowledge this as a forecast aid. 

[LibertyBell]

15 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Yea, I think that is applicable more for your area through the LES belts and into NNE....but I do agree with Chris that CC maybe starting to infringe on SNE snowfall climo....at least a portion of SNE, anyway. That said, we are simply in a hostile pattern for SNE that is les so for your area over to NNE.

paradoxically, CC may cause ocean effect snow to increase for the Cape and Islands?

[LibertyBell]

31 minutes ago, bluewave said:

My pointing out a particular repeating pattern over time with our storm tracks leading to less snow is more about pattern recognition on my part. I use it in real time to point out that the models have been too snowy beyond 5 days. This has lead to the famous modeled snowstorm always being a week a way. Which is due to the models underestimating the influence of the Pacific Jet longer range. Adding extra warmth to the system in multiple locations causes shifts in the storm tracks. So we need to acknowledge this as a forecast aid. 

interestingly, in winters like 1993-94. 1995-96 and 2004-05 the models underdid snowfall.

[LibertyBell]

14 hours ago, michsnowfreak said:

I do understand that. But again I think that the hostile pattern is way overlooked by some. It may cause some to eat words when a pattern is favorable for SNE and provides some juicy noreasters

what you're describing sounds a lot like 2004-05 that was the famous Messenger (RIP) winter when everything trended favorably for coastal snowstorms.

 

[bluewave]

Just now, LibertyBell said:

interestingly, in winters like 1993-94 and 2004-05 the models underdid snowfall.

Yes, when we have great winter patterns in place the snowstorms can often overperferform relative to longer range model forecasts. But since February 2022 most of the snowstorms have been in the long range only to disappear once the models catch onto how strong the Pacific Jet is under 120 hrs. So in effect these models aren’t well suited for such a fast Pacific Flow regime. Our only two colder and snowier months in the 2020s have been February 2021 and January 2022. 

[mitchnick]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

Yes, when we have great winter patterns in place the snowstorms can often overperferform relative to longer range model forecasts. But since February 2022 most of the snowstorms have been in the long range only to disappear once the models catch onto how strong the Pacific Jet is under 120 hrs. So in effect these models aren’t well suited for such a fast Pacific Flow regime. Our only two colder and snowier months in the 2020s have been February 2021 and January 2022. 

I agree 100% models are too snowy. I've been an unapologetic snow lover all my life and started following snow threats religiously since the 72/73 winter. Since then when modeling was first being used as a tool, they have ALWAYS been too snowy beyond 24 hours. I can remember complaining to a friend in high school (before 1976) that the model forecasts were too snowy. My point is, modeling has always been too snowy outside of 24 hours for a variety of reasons and to use recent years' snowy +24 hours modeling errors as proof of anything is a mistake imho. 

[FPizz]

21 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

I agree 100% models are too snowy. I've been an unapologetic snow lover all my life and started following snow threats religiously since the 72/73 winter. Since then when modeling was first being used as a tool, they have ALWAYS been too snowy beyond 24 hours. I can remember complaining to a friend in high school (before 1976) that the model forecasts were too snowy. My point is, modeling has always been too snowy outside of 24 hours for a variety of reasons and to use recent years' snowy +24 hours modeling errors as proof of anything is a mistake imho. 

Models are too a lot of things, not just too snowy. Case in point, last year the gfs, accounting for the 3 runs per day, had philly over 100° more than 80x.  The Euro was better, but it still had them over 100 numerous times.  Philly reached 100 zero times last year.  A nws met tracks this on a Philly board, so im not making it up.  Too snowy. Too cold, but also yes, too hot.  I know some can't handle that last one.

[jm1220]

8 minutes ago, FPizz said:

Models are too a lot of things, not just too snowy. Case in point, last year the gfs, accounting for the 3 runs per day, had philly over 100° more than 80x.  The Euro was better, but it still had them over 100 numerous times.  Philly reached 100 zero times last year.  A nws met tracks this on a Philly board, so im not making it up.  Too snowy. Too cold, but also yes, too hot.  I know some can't handle that last one.

I think the rainy conditions to our west and the tendency once again of over-the-top heat and steep ridge patterns means our summer will probably be humid and hot but not excessively so. We'll hit 95 a few times but outside of Newark once or twice maybe no 100s. With the steep ridge we can't get the warming downslope westerly flow and instead drown in FL-like humidity with S flow. And that means the coast likely goes into summer drought mode stuck in the marine layer while inland gets the T-storms unless we can get a more organized system to drive them to the coast. I'm glad we all had the rainy May so we can stock up before it inevitably dries out for summer. We might already be starting it on the modeling which shows heavy rain inland and relatively dry NYC east. 

[LibertyBell]

41 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

I agree 100% models are too snowy. I've been an unapologetic snow lover all my life and started following snow threats religiously since the 72/73 winter. Since then when modeling was first being used as a tool, they have ALWAYS been too snowy beyond 24 hours. I can remember complaining to a friend in high school (before 1976) that the model forecasts were too snowy. My point is, modeling has always been too snowy outside of 24 hours for a variety of reasons and to use recent years' snowy +24 hours modeling errors as proof of anything is a mistake imho. 

In 1993-94 and 1995-96 and 2004-05 they were not snowy enough (at least for the northeast).

[LibertyBell]

9 minutes ago, jm1220 said:

I think the rainy conditions to our west and the tendency once again of over-the-top heat and steep ridge patterns means our summer will probably be humid and hot but not excessively so. We'll hit 95 a few times but outside of Newark once or twice maybe no 100s. With the steep ridge we can't get the warming downslope westerly flow and instead drown in FL-like humidity with S flow. And that means the coast likely goes into summer drought mode stuck in the marine layer while inland gets the T-storms unless we can get a more organized system to drive them to the coast. I'm glad we all had the rainy May so we can stock up before it inevitably dries out for summer. We might already be starting it on the modeling which shows heavy rain inland and relatively dry NYC east. 

if we go by number of 90 degree days probably less hot but this is bound to change at some point and we will return to our hot summers from the 90s once again

 

[LibertyBell]

18 minutes ago, FPizz said:

Models are too a lot of things, not just too snowy. Case in point, last year the gfs, accounting for the 3 runs per day, had philly over 100° more than 80x.  The Euro was better, but it still had them over 100 numerous times.  Philly reached 100 zero times last year.  A nws met tracks this on a Philly board, so im not making it up.  Too snowy. Too cold, but also yes, too hot.  I know some can't handle that last one.

Philly, NYC, JFK all have record lack of 100 day streaks right now.

[FPizz]

14 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Philly, NYC, JFK all have record lack of 100 day streaks right now.

And the models forecast it all the time to no avail

[40/70 Benchmark]

3 hours ago, bluewave said:

My pointing out a particular repeating pattern over time with our storm tracks leading to less snow is more about pattern recognition on my part. I use it in real time to point out that the models have been too snowy beyond 5 days. This has lead to the famous modeled snowstorm always being a week a way. Which is due to the models underestimating the influence of the Pacific Jet longer range. Adding extra warmth to the system in multiple locations causes shifts in the storm tracks. So we need to acknowledge this as a forecast aid. 

I'm not arguing that the active jet isn't inhibiting snowfall opportunities, or that forecasters shouldn't be mindful of it. My point it that it wasn't the only reason we didn't see a large east coast snowstorm last year. That said, I also think the jet plays a role making it more difficult to get a well placed PNA ridge. Its both.

[snowman19]

My confidence is increasing in at least a cold-neutral, possible weak La Niña forming this summer/fall. It looks like a rather substantial -IOD is taking shape. That along with the -PMM, and -PDO is a red flag

[40/70 Benchmark]

2 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

My confidence is increasing in at least a cold-neutral, possible weak La Niña forming this summer/fall. It looks like a rather substantial -IOD is taking shape. That along with the -PMM, and -PDO is a red flag
 

Yea, I thought we could see a modest warm ENSO late last winter, but have since backed off of that.

[michsnowfreak]

3 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

what you're describing sounds a lot like 2004-05 that was the famous Messenger (RIP) winter when everything trended favorably for coastal snowstorms.

 

I recall that username, messenger. Sorry to hear he passed. 2004-05 was an excellent winter here. One of the rare times when we both got slammed from the same storm (Jan 22-23). The most annoying thing about that winter was a handful of bad measurements at DTW; they ended up with 64" and I had 80". There's always the occasional storm you question, but that was the last winter I really was unhappy with DTW measurements (I know with nyc that's every year ). There were a few events that had razor cutoff so I did get more than them anyway, but id estimate they were really in the low 70s.

[michsnowfreak]

1 hour ago, FPizz said:

Models are too a lot of things, not just too snowy. Case in point, last year the gfs, accounting for the 3 runs per day, had philly over 100° more than 80x.  The Euro was better, but it still had them over 100 numerous times.  Philly reached 100 zero times last year.  A nws met tracks this on a Philly board, so im not making it up.  Too snowy. Too cold, but also yes, too hot.  I know some can't handle that last one.

Models overdoing heat the last few years has been a JOKE. in 2023 there were like 6-7 times the gfs had Detroit at like 106-108°. And im not talking day 16, im talking day 7-10. For reference, the hottest temp on record is 105° (1934). The end result is that 2023 was the first year since 1915 where Detroit didn't eclipse 90°.

[mitchnick]

2 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

In 1993-94 and 1995-96 and 2004-05 they were not snowy enough (at least for the northeast).

Not the case for BWI at all those years unfortunately. 93/94 was the worst. Horrendous. 

[mitchnick]

1 hour ago, snowman19 said:

My confidence is increasing in at least a cold-neutral, possible weak La Niña forming this summer/fall. It looks like a rather substantial -IOD is taking shape. That along with the -PMM, and -PDO is a red flag
 

Neutral Enso looks in the bag at this point, even though I know there's no such thing in weather. Which end of neutral is the question yet to be answered. Either way, RONI will probably be on the Niña neutral end, if not weak Niña territory methinks. 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Subsurface looks like there could be some warming over the next few months.. warmth is just below the surface. 

There is a big difference though between CPC and TAO/Triton maps. CPC has +2-3 subsurface anomalies in the thermocline where TAO shows negative.

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, michsnowfreak said:

Models overdoing heat the last few years has been a JOKE. in 2023 there were like 6-7 times the gfs had Detroit at like 106-108°. And im not talking day 16, im talking day 7-10. For reference, the hottest temp on record is 105° (1934). The end result is that 2023 was the first year since 1915 where Detroit didn't eclipse 90°.

I wanted to share something, not sure how accurate this is, but I found this while looking up big heat

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/newyorkcity/comments/1epkptr/central_park_ny_highest_maximum_temperature_f/

That 106° reading was on 07/09/1936 during the incredible 1936 heatwave that effected most of the US from the Midwest to the east coast. It was the highest temperature ever recorded in NYC. In those days the official weather bureau temperature was measured at the old Battery Maritime Building near Battery Park where it was always a little cooler due to it's proximity to the water. So the actual temperature in midtown may have been more like 112° if not higher.

My mother remembered that heat wave and said that people left their tenement windows open during the day even if they were at work. A very different city then.