October 2025 Discussion and Obs

[SnoSki14]

4 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

The moisture, not the whole system. 

At best some moisture will be pulled in. There's no big block to the NE to prevent this from going OTS. 

But a strong closed low could pull it further west as it departs thus pulling in moisture 

[qg_omega]

7 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

The moisture, not the whole system. 

Whole system up in Canada

[qg_omega]

2 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

At best some moisture will be pulled in. There's no big block to the NE to prevent this from going OTS. 

But a strong closed low could pull it further west as it departs thus pulling in moisture 

Drunk?

[NEG NAO]

8 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

At best some moisture will be pulled in. There's no big block to the NE to prevent this from going OTS. 

But a strong closed low could pull it further west as it departs thus pulling in moisture 

that hurricane doesn't have to get very close to the coast to be able to combine forces with the trough and inland storm along it to create another situation along the coast similar to what happened a couple weeks ago which would be devastating in areas prone to flooding and beaches eroded even further..........

[bluewave]

27 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

Hopefully it's not too much at once though. All or nothing patterns are becoming common 

The Canadian is the only model with hurricane so far west. The Euro and GFS are further east. So a nice compromise would be a deepening low going to our west opening a moisture channel with the hurricane staying offshore like a PRE or IVT to enhance the rainfall potential.

[SACRUS]

 

61 and mostly sunny about to go mostly cloudy

 

[SnoSki14]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

The Canadian is the only model with hurricane so far west. The Euro and GFS are further east. So a nice compromise would be a deepening low going to our west opening a moisture channel with the hurricane staying offshore like a PRE or IVT to enhance the rainfall potential.

Euro looked to be trending towards Canadian though. GFS has performed poorly overall with Melissa

[bluewave]

12z Euro doesn’t quite connect all the way to the offshore hurricane moisture. But still has some spots going 2”+ with a decent looking squall line as the low cuts to our west. Maybe with some luck we can get a little more of a moisture connection in later runs to push the rainfall potential higher.

 

[snowman19]

29 minutes ago, bluewave said:

12z Euro doesn’t quite connect all the way to the offshore hurricane moisture. But still has some spots going 2”+ with a decent looking squall line as the low cuts to our west. Maybe with some luck we can get a little more of a moisture connection in later runs to push the rainfall potential higher.

 

The models have gone from showing a true coastal storm/nor’easter to an inland runner/cutter

[Sundog]

3 hours ago, bluewave said:

The only way to determine whether a lack of weather ballon data is causing a specific model error is to do a data denial experiment which is impossible without the data.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/14/weather/alaska-storm-weather-balloons-trump-cuts-nws-climate

How big of a difference the missing balloon data made, though, may never be known. The best way to determine that would be to run computer models with weather balloon data fed into them and without it, in what is known as a data denial experiment — impossible to do without the data itself.

About eight times the current missing American balloon data is absent globally on any given day, and yet we don't see extensive articles talking about models not performing as they should because of all those missing balloons. 

[Dark Star]

7 hours ago, bluewave said:

Pretty strong signal for a little cooler than average trough in the Northeast into early November.

 

No cold (direct) polar air yet in our area.  If I read Don correctly, when the coldest air is in Siberia around this time, we should probably expect the dreaded Pacific Jet to dominate?

[Dark Star]

4 minutes ago, Sundog said:

About eight times the current missing American balloon data is absent globally on any given day, and yet we don't see extensive articles talking about models not performing as they should because of all those missing balloons. 

I hope we don't get into a pissing contest, blaming poor forecasts on budget cuts?

[donsutherland1]

2 minutes ago, Dark Star said:

No cold (direct) polar air yet in our area.  If I read Don correctly, when the coldest air is in Siberia around this time, we should probably expect the dreaded Pacific Jet to dominate?

With regard to the latest literature on Siberian snow cover, that would tend to be the case when snow cover is above normal during the fall.

[SnoSki14]

3 minutes ago, Dark Star said:

I hope we don't get into a pissing contest, blaming poor forecasts on budget cuts?

That does play a role. Model performance has been very inconsistent and poor lately 

[FPizz]

9 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

That does play a role. Model performance has been very inconsistent and poor lately 

When have they been good exactly?  I dont remember that time.  Just look at past threads here over the years for confirmation 

[bluewave]

37 minutes ago, Sundog said:

About eight times the current missing American balloon data is absent globally on any given day, and yet we don't see extensive articles talking about models not performing as they should because of all those missing balloons. 

Tom Skilling and Matt Lanza have a nice in depth discussion here on what the lack of balloon soundings may mean for the accuracy of weather model forecasts.

https://www.facebook.com/TomSkilling/posts/weather-forecast-models-produce-forecasts-of-varying-accuracy-interestingly-some/1319935109491429/

With weather balloon observations regularly going off line at a whole series of key observation stations, we're moving into uncharted territory and hoping forecast models still behave. The concern is legitimate. Weather satellite and in flight aircraft data may help fill the void--but the data they provide is different than the more thorough balloon measurements. We may not see issues with model accuracy each day. But it's been established in some research work--and we know for a fact---that the upper air observations gathered by weather balloons carry disproportionate weight in influencing model accuracy. That's because their measurements of the atmosphere are in many ways more complete than other sources--such as satellite or in flight aircraft. NASA runs a global weather forecast model--the GEOS model. Among its roles is to look at the impacts of and distribution of gases and particulates in the atmosphere. It's also been useful in studying greenhouse gases and also the movement of dust and other particulates off the Sahara Desert westward out over the Atlantic and all the way to South and North America. It could also be used, were, God forbid, biological agents released into the atmosphere or a nuclear accident sent a huge amount of radioactivity into the atmosphere to track these agents and where they might go. So the NASA GEOS model isn't exclusively used for weather forecasting alone. But it IS an atmospheric forecast model and the data fed into it is comparable to the data fed into the full range of weather forecast models. You might have asked when you hear discussions of the fact different models come up with varying forecasts at times---"why is it they employ multiple models in the weather forecast process? Why not just one??" It's a reasonable question--and the answer is quite simple. It's because NO single model is perfect. Nor are our measurements of the atmosphere. Having multiple solutions from multiple models, each making slightly varied assumptions on how to handle the physics of the imperfectly measured atmosphere, offers human forecasters a range of possible forecasts scenarios--each valid yet some more likely to work out than others. When a common set of forecast solutions appears from varying models, it makes it easier to "cull" the less likely forecasts from the mix settling on the most accurate of the varied forecasts. NASA modelers have spent time looking at the observations fed into their model. By studying how the model behaves when certain data is flawed or missing, they've produced a ranking of which of the 210-million observations which go into many global forecasts based on their importance to the forecasts these models generate. A graphic I'm posting with this post lays out what they found. And interestingly, radiosonde data--in other words, weather balloon data--comes out as 2nd most influential of the different data sets which go into computer weather forecast models. This places weather balloon data in a uniquely powerful position. Eliminating balloon data from a set of stations, which has begun happening in greater numbers in recent months due to budget cuts, won't be something which messes up model predictions every day or in the same way. What it DOES suggest is that unexpected, hard to identify impacts may well occur. And who's to say that won't happen on a day when tornadoes or a snowstorm is a occurring and you need an accurate model read on how the extreme weather situation is evolving----or, equally scary, when a hurricane is approaching. That unpredictable and varying accuracy is introduced into the weather forecast environment is very concerning. Also, since many of the stations which have been pulled off line by budget cuts are in tornado and severe weather prone areas, the uniquely accurate 3-D measurements of the atmosphere weather balloons provide is worrisome. ----------------------------------------------- One other period provided meteorological forecast modelers a unique opportunity to check out the impact of losing upper air data from weather balloons--and it resulted in a measurable loss in computer model accuracy. The world lost Russian weather balloon soundings during an outage in 2015. European Centre researchers studied the impact on the loss of these balloon reports during that outage. This was a much broader loss of weather balloon data than what is happening now. But the outage led to a significant loss in model forecast accuracy. Because global weather is part of a vast, interconnected system, the loss of a critical data set produces forecast accuracy issues upstream and downstream of the regions where such data is usually taken. The 2015 outage provided a rare glimpse of what happens when weather balloon data is lost. That was a much different era in meteorological science so it's difficult to precisely anticipate the sort of problems such an out would produce today. But the loss of data as critical as that which is provided by our radiosonde (i.e. weather balloon) network can't be dismissed. ----------------------------------

https://theeyewall.com/weather-balloon-launch-cuts-an-honest-look-at-how-it-should-impact-forecasts/

 

 

[wdrag]

On modeling while awaiting a hayride return.., imo ballon launches help confirm but imo, satellite,aircraft . Radar all contribute to improved modeling.     We wouldn’t have had a clue in the 20th century. Modeling is pretty darn good and is the reason threads are startednonce some sort  mood reliable agreement is reached.  We evaluate the threads once started. Today’s D5 is reliable telling you whether something significant will happen. 
 

We on this forum have a difference of opinion.
 

Model sensitivity to theNew England trough is part of the problem.?  Others in NWS can explain 

[MJO812]

45 minutes ago, Dark Star said:

No cold (direct) polar air yet in our area.  If I read Don correctly, when the coldest air is in Siberia around this time, we should probably expect the dreaded Pacific Jet to dominate?

Still colder than normal which is great to see. Hopefully winter comes early this year.

[Sundog]

20 minutes ago, bluewave said:

Tom Skilling and Matt Lanza have a nice in depth discussion here on what the lack of balloon soundings may mean for the accuracy of weather model forecasts.

https://www.facebook.com/TomSkilling/posts/weather-forecast-models-produce-forecasts-of-varying-accuracy-interestingly-some/1319935109491429/

With weather balloon observations regularly going off line at a whole series of key observation stations, we're moving into uncharted territory and hoping forecast models still behave. The concern is legitimate. Weather satellite and in flight aircraft data may help fill the void--but the data they provide is different than the more thorough balloon measurements. We may not see issues with model accuracy each day. But it's been established in some research work--and we know for a fact---that the upper air observations gathered by weather balloons carry disproportionate weight in influencing model accuracy. That's because their measurements of the atmosphere are in many ways more complete than other sources--such as satellite or in flight aircraft. NASA runs a global weather forecast model--the GEOS model. Among its roles is to look at the impacts of and distribution of gases and particulates in the atmosphere. It's also been useful in studying greenhouse gases and also the movement of dust and other particulates off the Sahara Desert westward out over the Atlantic and all the way to South and North America. It could also be used, were, God forbid, biological agents released into the atmosphere or a nuclear accident sent a huge amount of radioactivity into the atmosphere to track these agents and where they might go. So the NASA GEOS model isn't exclusively used for weather forecasting alone. But it IS an atmospheric forecast model and the data fed into it is comparable to the data fed into the full range of weather forecast models. You might have asked when you hear discussions of the fact different models come up with varying forecasts at times---"why is it they employ multiple models in the weather forecast process? Why not just one??" It's a reasonable question--and the answer is quite simple. It's because NO single model is perfect. Nor are our measurements of the atmosphere. Having multiple solutions from multiple models, each making slightly varied assumptions on how to handle the physics of the imperfectly measured atmosphere, offers human forecasters a range of possible forecasts scenarios--each valid yet some more likely to work out than others. When a common set of forecast solutions appears from varying models, it makes it easier to "cull" the less likely forecasts from the mix settling on the most accurate of the varied forecasts. NASA modelers have spent time looking at the observations fed into their model. By studying how the model behaves when certain data is flawed or missing, they've produced a ranking of which of the 210-million observations which go into many global forecasts based on their importance to the forecasts these models generate. A graphic I'm posting with this post lays out what they found. And interestingly, radiosonde data--in other words, weather balloon data--comes out as 2nd most influential of the different data sets which go into computer weather forecast models. This places weather balloon data in a uniquely powerful position. Eliminating balloon data from a set of stations, which has begun happening in greater numbers in recent months due to budget cuts, won't be something which messes up model predictions every day or in the same way. What it DOES suggest is that unexpected, hard to identify impacts may well occur. And who's to say that won't happen on a day when tornadoes or a snowstorm is a occurring and you need an accurate model read on how the extreme weather situation is evolving----or, equally scary, when a hurricane is approaching. That unpredictable and varying accuracy is introduced into the weather forecast environment is very concerning. Also, since many of the stations which have been pulled off line by budget cuts are in tornado and severe weather prone areas, the uniquely accurate 3-D measurements of the atmosphere weather balloons provide is worrisome. ----------------------------------------------- One other period provided meteorological forecast modelers a unique opportunity to check out the impact of losing upper air data from weather balloons--and it resulted in a measurable loss in computer model accuracy. The world lost Russian weather balloon soundings during an outage in 2015. European Centre researchers studied the impact on the loss of these balloon reports during that outage. This was a much broader loss of weather balloon data than what is happening now. But the outage led to a significant loss in model forecast accuracy. Because global weather is part of a vast, interconnected system, the loss of a critical data set produces forecast accuracy issues upstream and downstream of the regions where such data is usually taken. The 2015 outage provided a rare glimpse of what happens when weather balloon data is lost. That was a much different era in meteorological science so it's difficult to precisely anticipate the sort of problems such an out would produce today. But the loss of data as critical as that which is provided by our radiosonde (i.e. weather balloon) network can't be dismissed. ----------------------------------

https://theeyewall.com/weather-balloon-launch-cuts-an-honest-look-at-how-it-should-impact-forecasts/

 

 

I don't disagree that weather balloons are important, but missing balloon data is commonplace throughout the world for various reasons, and the average daily missing balloon data globally far outpaces the missing American balloon data. 

The conversation started about model accuracy. 

 

[Sundog]

I'm reading the Omaha weather balloons were resumed in April 2025 after a brief pause in March 2025. 

 

 

[Tatamy]

32 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Still colder than normal which is great to see. Hopefully winter comes early this year.

We need Arctic stream involvement for snow to the coast this time of year.  Polar stream involvement means possible snow for the Poconos/Catskills.

[jbenedet]

Thought this was pretty interesting. Would be much less so if not for the GFS being biased well east already…

To be sure, not looking at Sandy and its forecast as a verbatim but an analog. That’s all.

Right now the H5 output consensus is for east of Sandy, but I’m not discounting a hook back to eastern New England…

Of course will have to monitor closely especially given the reduction in real time data, as noted above.

[MJO812]

8 minutes ago, Tatamy said:

We need Arctic stream involvement for snow to the coast this time of year.  Polar stream involvement means possible snow for the Poconos/Catskills.

Of course but its nice to see a cooler pattern showing up .

[donsutherland1]

1 hour ago, MJO812 said:

Still colder than normal which is great to see. Hopefully winter comes early this year.

Yes. Consistent with what would expect from the strong NAO block.

Select Mean Temperature Data for October 22-31, 1980-2024:
NAO -2.000 to -1.000: 51.0°
All Other Cases: 55.0°
1980-2024 Mean: 54.3°

If we can get such blocking regimes during winter, things will likely be quite a bit different in terms of snowfall from the last several paltry winters.

[wdrag]

NO thread before tomorrow morning.  Surprisingly WPC DECREASED the expected rainfall in its afternoon forecast. 

Yet...all 12z ensemble models are same or increased amounts with CMCE leading the way.

Could be routine less than 1" event... I think more than that due to likely southern track scoop, 150M 12 hr HFC passing across PA and a pretty strong 5H jet.

Have to go with what will work best for the outcome which is modeled with varying solutions. Waiting it out. Maybe tomorrow morning at 630A... could end up <1" but I thiink significantly more for a part of the forum with wind 50+ for a 6 hr period Thu or early Fri.  

Patience and model watching...  

[donsutherland1]

A strong NAO blocking regime is in place and will persist into early November. As a result, an extended period of cooler than normal weather will prevail through the end of the month. 

Tomorrow will be another cool day. Temperatures will top out in the lower and middle 50s across much of the region. The unseasonably cool weather will continue into at least the middle of next week. Rain could arrive Wednesday night or Thursday. A significant rainfall is possible through Friday.

The ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly was -0.4°C and the Region 3.4 anomaly was -0.6°C for the week centered around October 15. For the past six weeks, the ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly has averaged -0.15°C and the ENSO Region 3.4 anomaly has averaged -0.47°C. La Niña conditions will likely continue through mid-winter.

The SOI was +24.62 today. 

The preliminary Arctic Oscillation (AO) was +0.187 today. 

Based on sensitivity analysis applied to the latest guidance, there is an implied 50% probability that New York City will have a cooler than normal October (1991-2020 normal). October will likely finish with a mean temperature near 57.9° (near normal). 

Supplemental Information: The projected mean would be 1.0° above the 1981-2010 normal monthly value.

 

[steve392]

4 hours ago, Stormlover74 said:

This would be catastrophic for my parts if that happened.  The winds would be pushing everything up the ny harbor into the rivers and high tide would be devastating with all that rainfall going nowhere.  Would be IDA all over again if it happens.

[Stormlover74]

1 hour ago, steve392 said:

This would be catastrophic for my parts if that happened.  The winds would be pushing everything up the ny harbor into the rivers and high tide would be devastating with all that rainfall going nowhere.  Would be IDA all over again if it happens.

True but not likely to happen. 18z already looks different 

[steve392]

4 minutes ago, Stormlover74 said:

True but not likely to happen. 18z already looks different 

Good.  It will keep my candy bowl filled for myself now LOL

[sussexcountyobs]

Cloudy, calm, 47.2°