2025-2026 ENSO

[snowman19]

7 hours ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

I think the only difference between this year and last year is 2nd year La Nina's have a little more Winter -PNA than the first year, and 2nd year -PDO's, when they don't correlate the first year, correlate the 2nd year at +1.24x. But La Nina is struggling right now.. it's starting to look like at the surface it won't make the 5 consecutive ONI month criteria. Subsurface is also weak right now.. barely -1 to -2 subsurface anomalies, and the SOI is weakly hanging around +5. Border line weak-Nina/negative-Neutral.

Also last Summer we had a strong 4-corners High pressure.. that rolled forward to a pretty cold composite for the eastern 2/3 of the US for December and January (+PNA).. the SW, US High pressure wasn't as strong this Summer. However, 9 of the last 14 months have been +PNA [CPC], despite negative-ENSO. The Aleutian ridge hasn't yet gone back to levels it was before the 23-24 Strong Nino fwiw. It would surprise me if we saw a strong/persistent Aleutian ridge this cold season. It seems like it would have to kind of come out of nowhere. 

I’m very confident that we see an Aleutian ridge regime this winter as opposed to an Alaskan ridge regime. I’m also extremely confident that we see a lot more -PNA this winter as well, if I’m wrong, I’ll own it

[snowman19]

The new model runs are showing a brick wall of subsidence continuing in the tropical PAC. It’s been in place for months now (Niña/-IOD related). Don’t be surprised if the MJO wave doesn’t make it very far east of the Maritime Continent (phase 7) before it completely dies off. 
 
As far as the Atlantic hurricane season, I think after whatever forms in the central Caribbean next week, the season comes to an end. I don’t think it will be any threat at all to the U.S. mainland and it probably just moves west and buries itself into Central America or gets picked up and swept way OTS in the westerlies 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

I was surprised NOAA had 19 Named Storms at the high end of their range this season.. their high end was 25 Named Storms last season.. they have been too high 2 years in a row. Global ACE hasn't been as the same as Atlantic ACE and I think that is going to level out a bit in the coming years. 

As for the MJO, long range models have been trying with the idea of a +PNA last few days of October, into the first week of November. It will be interesting to see how that verifies.. I think there is some expectation of the MJO making it to Phase 7. 

[bluewave]

On 10/18/2025 at 6:33 AM, snowman19 said:

Yes. It is a category 5 (beyond extreme) marine heatwave and I think it’s being completely overlooked in regards to this upcoming winter. A marine heatwave this extreme is going to dramatically alter the global heat budget and I think it’s going to play a way bigger role than most people expect. Just like the extreme marine heatwave north of Australia that was totally overlooked back in the fall of 2019 and it ended up playing a very big role in the 2019-20 winter (++IOD)   @bluewave

 

 

 

 

Even warmer than the previous record at this time back in 2022.

 

 

[GaWx]

 Joe D’Aleo posted this yesterday:

The northwest and northeast Pacific had warm water mid September, a cold signal for the US in the colder months if it persisted.

*The latest warmth relating to the latest deep sea volcanism is moving east through the north Pacific.

The QBO mode (east or west) modulates the favored trough ridge. This is an east QBO, favoring more cold further east in the USA.

The La Nina is weak but supported by cold PDO. You can see that the east QBO La Ninas are colder than the west.

Compositing the average year matching the east QBO, weak La Nina cold PDO and warm AMO with declining to weak solar matches JB's/WB's winter outlook.

West QBO, strong La Ninas a very different tendency.

 

——————
 *Aside regarding what I bolded/asterisked, D’Aleo is attributing the W Pac warming to an increase in deep sea volcano activity there, which is a theory originating from Dr. Arthur Viterito, someone who doesn’t believe in AGW as the main reason for GW. I’m not agreeing with it, largely based on many@donsutherland1posts in our CC forum, but am posting it only because it is part of D’Aleo’s quote.

—————

 Any comments regarding D’Aleo’s support of JB’s winter outlook being like the colder top map and much colder than the mild bottom map?

 I see some problems with the QBOs for the winters he included for the 2nd map per this 30 mb table that I always use:

https://psl.noaa.gov/data/correlation/qbo.data

-1973-4 DJFM QBO was a slowly dropping neutral rather than W

-1949-50 DJFM was E rather than W

-1988-9 DJFM was neutral rather than W

-2007-8 DJFM was a rapidly diminishing E rather than W

 

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

12 hours ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

I think the only difference between this year and last year is 2nd year La Nina's have a little more Winter -PNA than the first year, and 2nd year -PDO's, when they don't correlate the first year, correlate the 2nd year at +1.24x. But La Nina is struggling right now.. it's starting to look like at the surface it won't make the 5 consecutive ONI month criteria. Subsurface is also weak right now.. barely -1 to -2 subsurface anomalies, and the SOI is weakly hanging around +5. Border line weak-Nina/negative-Neutral.

I think the huge difference is in 1+2. Last year, we were still in el nino there, which is why I'll never consider it a traditional la nina. This year, we at least have neutral to weak la nina conditions there, which correspond to the rest of the basin.

Also, this -PDO is a continuation of the one that started in 2019-20, and went through the 2020-23 la nina. This is more like a 7th year -PDO, than a 2nd year -PDO (that was early in the 2020-23 la nina).

[donsutherland1]

13 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 Joe D’Aleo posted this yesterday:

The northwest and northeast Pacific had warm water mid September, a cold signal for the US in the colder months if it persisted.

*The latest warmth relating to the latest deep sea volcanism is moving east through the north Pacific.

The QBO mode (east or west) modulates the favored trough ridge. This is an east QBO, favoring more cold further east in the USA.

The La Nina is weak but supported by cold PDO. You can see that the east QBO La Ninas are colder than the west.

Compositing the average year matching the east QBO, weak La Nina cold PDO and warm AMO with declining to weak solar matches JB's/WB's winter outlook.

West QBO, strong La Ninas a very different tendency.

 

——————
 *Aside regarding what I bolded/asterisked, D’Aleo is attributing the W Pac warming to an increase in deep sea volcano activity there, which is a theory originating from Dr. Arthur Viterito, someone who doesn’t believe in AGW as the main reason for GW. I’m not agreeing with it, largely based on many@donsutherland1posts in our CC forum, but am posting it only because it is part of D’Aleo’s quote.

—————

 Any comments regarding D’Aleo’s support of JB’s winter outlook being like the colder top map and much colder than the mild bottom map?

 I see some problems with the QBOs for the winters he included for the 2nd map per this 30 mb table that I always use:

https://psl.noaa.gov/data/correlation/qbo.data

-1973-4 DJFM QBO was a slowly dropping neutral rather than W

-1949-50 DJFM was E rather than W

-1988-9 DJFM was neutral rather than W

-2007-8 DJFM was a rapidly diminishing E rather than W

 

 

The QBO differences you point out are real. I am not sure why he grouped things as he did.

[donsutherland1]

1 hour ago, GaWx said:

 Joe D’Aleo posted this yesterday:

The northwest and northeast Pacific had warm water mid September, a cold signal for the US in the colder months if it persisted.

*The latest warmth relating to the latest deep sea volcanism is moving east through the north Pacific.

The QBO mode (east or west) modulates the favored trough ridge. This is an east QBO, favoring more cold further east in the USA.

The La Nina is weak but supported by cold PDO. You can see that the east QBO La Ninas are colder than the west.

Compositing the average year matching the east QBO, weak La Nina cold PDO and warm AMO with declining to weak solar matches JB's/WB's winter outlook.

West QBO, strong La Ninas a very different tendency.

 

——————
 *Aside regarding what I bolded/asterisked, D’Aleo is attributing the W Pac warming to an increase in deep sea volcano activity there, which is a theory originating from Dr. Arthur Viterito, someone who doesn’t believe in AGW as the main reason for GW. I’m not agreeing with it, largely based on many@donsutherland1posts in our CC forum, but am posting it only because it is part of D’Aleo’s quote.

—————

 Any comments regarding D’Aleo’s support of JB’s winter outlook being like the colder top map and much colder than the mild bottom map?

 I see some problems with the QBOs for the winters he included for the 2nd map per this 30 mb table that I always use:

https://psl.noaa.gov/data/correlation/qbo.data

-1973-4 DJFM QBO was a slowly dropping neutral rather than W

-1949-50 DJFM was E rather than W

-1988-9 DJFM was neutral rather than W

-2007-8 DJFM was a rapidly diminishing E rather than W

 

 

FWIW, the top 3 QBO analogs regardless of any other variables e.g., ENSO, for the past three months are 1974, 2014, and 1979. 1974 ranks 3rd best over a wider 6-month period while 2014 ranks first over a wider 6-month period. 1979 is just 20th for a wider 6-month period. So, the 1974 and 2014 cases probably offer a reasonable picture on how the QBO will evolve over the next few months.

[Terpeast]

1 hour ago, donsutherland1 said:

FWIW, the top 3 QBO analogs regardless of any other variables e.g., ENSO, for the past three months are 1974, 2014, and 1979. 1974 ranks 3rd best over a wider 6-month period while 2014 ranks first over a wider 6-month period. 1979 is just 20th for a wider 6-month period. So, the 1974 and 2014 cases probably offer a reasonable picture on how the QBO will evolve over the next few months.

If coupled with ENSO and if we’re willing to go that far back, perhaps a climo-adjusted 1974-75 analog might be considered. 

[raindancewx]

The cold wave in the West we've seen this week did show up at this time in 2013 for what its worth. I blend 2013 & 2024 for a reason - its not as cold/widespread as 2013 but definitely not as warm as 2024. The cold has displaced the warmth further east than last year.

[GaWx]

30 minutes ago, raindancewx said:

The cold wave in the West we've seen this week did show up at this time in 2013 for what its worth. I blend 2013 & 2024 for a reason - its not as cold/widespread as 2013 but definitely not as warm as 2024. The cold has displaced the warmth further east than last year.

Raindance, I assume you realize those two analogs had opposite QBO (west) to our current/upcoming east. Any thoughts about that and why they’re still good analogs?

[donsutherland1]

This is another example why I call out hypesters such as Bamwx, et al., at times:

Notice his claim about the Fall NAO vs. the Winter NAO.

Most of his readers likely don't know that the NAO's values can be found here: https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/norm.nao.monthly.b5001.current.ascii.table

They take for granted what he says, especially as it might fit their winter preferences.

But if one actually takes a look at the actual data, during 1950-2024, there were 38 cases where the fall NAO averaged < 0. From those cases, just 13 (around 34%) saw the winter NAO average < 0. So, almost the opposite of what he claims. That's a fact. It's not speculation.

Hype, misleading information, and repeatedly low forecast verification from pushing extremes creates bad perceptions about the many meteorologists who do their best to provide the public with useful, actionable weather information.

 

[snowman19]

15 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

This is another example why I call out hypesters such as Bamwx, et al., at times:

Notice his claim about the Fall NAO vs. the Winter NAO.

Most of his readers likely don't know that the NAO's values can be found here: https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/norm.nao.monthly.b5001.current.ascii.table

They take for granted what he says, especially as it might fit their winter preferences.

But if one actually takes a look at the actual data, during 1950-2024, there were 38 cases where the fall NAO averaged < 0. From those cases, just 13 (around 34%) saw the winter NAO average < 0. So, almost the opposite of what he claims. That's a fact. It's not speculation.

Hype, misleading information, and repeatedly low forecast verification from pushing extremes creates bad perceptions about the many meteorologists who do their best to provide the public with useful, actionable weather information.

 

I take nothing seriously from a quack who failed out of meteorology school

[GaWx]

21 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

This is another example why I call out hypesters such as Bamwx, et al., at times:

Notice his claim about the Fall NAO vs. the Winter NAO.

Most of his readers likely don't know that the NAO's values can be found here: https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/norm.nao.monthly.b5001.current.ascii.table

They take for granted what he says, especially as it might fit their winter preferences.

But if one actually takes a look at the actual data, during 1950-2024, there were 38 cases where the fall NAO averaged < 0. From those cases, just 13 (around 34%) saw the winter NAO average < 0. So, almost the opposite of what he claims. That's a fact. It's not speculation.

Hype, misleading information, and repeatedly low forecast verification from pushing extremes creates bad perceptions about the many meteorologists who do their best to provide the public with useful, actionable weather information.

 

 Only 13% of winters since 1980 have had a sub -0.25 DJF averaged NAO and they were all within 2 years of a sunspot minimum. All 4 sunspot minimums since the mid 80s have had either 1 or 2 sub -0.25 NAO winters. They were way more common from the late 1950s through late 1970s. This is despite Octobers pretty heavily favoring -NAO the last 15 or so years!

[donsutherland1]

2 hours ago, GaWx said:

Raindance, I assume you realize those two analogs had opposite QBO (west) to our current/upcoming east. Any thoughts about that and why they’re still good analogs?

Analogs, because they are derived from boundary conditions, do not capture synoptic details. Thus, very short timeframes aren't great for assessing them. Periods of 1-3 months provide greater assessment value, as things essentially average out from a series of synoptic events. In theory, the better analogs should come up with a reasonable but not perfect approximation of the 1-3 month period. 

As North American data is available for October 12-17, I used that to make some comparisons:

2013-2024 Composite:

2011-2016-2021 Experimental Statistically-Generated Cases (discussed earlier in this thread):

Actual: October 12-17, 2025:

Overall, the actual 2025 data is more amplified than the composite analog cases, aside from spatial differences e.g., misaligned areas of cold and warm anomalies. These kind of differences are to be expected at the very short timeframes used, as synoptic details outweigh boundary conditions at such timeframes. If there is value in either set of analogs, that would become evident over the longer periods of time where boundary conditions outweigh synoptic details.