2026-2027 El Nino

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Agree 100%.

So why wouldn't the opposite produce an opposite anomaly pattern? 

[40/70 Benchmark]

10 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

If someone asked me, I'd take a repeat of 91-92 styled El Nino. the 2nd and 3rd strongest like that were 09-10 and 02-03

I would prefer it a bit weaker...but I don't doubt we could have had a good interlude(s) if the polar domain were not so hostile.

I compare all of these analogs with a fine-tooth comb this summer and fall.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I would prefer it a bit weaker...but I don't doubt we could have had a good interlude(s) if the NAO were not so hostile.

I see where you are getting stuck, you are taking analogs too literal. There are only really 2. The mechanics of the situation don't change, it only changes the amplitude. If forcing is west-based, that's +PNA and a stronger +PNA if it's >2.0 in the west (RONI). I'll take a really, really strong +PNA.  You just don't want it to get too close to the west coast, US, which is more tropically east-based

[40/70 Benchmark]

7 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

I see where you are getting stuck, you are taking analogs too literal. There are only really 2. The mechanics of the situation don't change, it only changes the amplitude. If forcing is west-based, that's +PNA and a stronger +PNA if it's >2.0 in the west (RONI). I'll take a really, really strong +PNA.  You just don't want it to get too close to the west coast, US, which is more tropically east-based

No, I'm not "stuck"....what I do know is there is literal dearth of high latitude blocking when ENSO is exceptionally powerful, and I don't think that's a coincidence. Okay, the sample size is small....but it still is what it is.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

No, I'm not "stuck"....what I do know is there is literal dearth of high latitude blocking when ENSO is exceptionally powerful, and I don't think that's a coincidence. Okay, the sample size is small....but it still is what it is.

El Nino events actually favor 10mb Stratosphere warmings.. which can be -AO

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

El Nino events actually favor 10mb Stratosphere warmings.. which can be -AO

Right....on average.....exceptionally strong events aren't average.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Maybe I'm wrong...but until I see data to the contrary, I will feel as though extremely strong ENSO is hostile for high latitude blocking.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Right....on average.....exceptionally strong events aren't average.

A sample of 50 Strong El Nino's might change your mind?

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

A sample of 50 Strong El Nino's might change your mind?

Exceptionally strong....I don't argue 1.5-2.0 can be favorable. 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Maybe I'm wrong...but until I see data to the contrary, I will feel as though extremely strong ENSO is hostile for high latitude blocking.

The NAO is weakly correlated to ENSO. There is in statistics a point of "random" where X amount of examples if they show something can be deemed as not significant. Then the logic of weak and strong in the same area is different, and it doesn't make sense. It's a shame we have so few data points, but the physics of meteorology and Hadley Cell/mid latitude Cell meeting points support generally cooler conditions in the Eastern US in Strong (>2.0) west-based El Nino's, as long as the eastern ENSO regions aren't going crazy

[Stormchaserchuck1]

3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Exceptionally strong....I don't argue 1.5-2.0 can be favorable. 

The only way I can see that making a difference is if it's spilling over into Nino 3 and 1+2. If Nino 1+2 is +2, instead of +0.5.. because of the physics of that situation support a CONUS ridge

[40/70 Benchmark]

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

That is a composite only a mother could love.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

NAO part of that composite is "other factors", not completely connected to ENSO imo. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

Right....events that strong always have warmth in region 1.2. Okay.....I get that. But that doesn't make me wrong....good luck getting one that doesn't.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Right....events that strong always have warmth in region 1.2. Okay.....I get that. But that doesn't make me wrong....good luck getting one that doesn't.

Yeah basin wide is warmer than west-based, but I'm pointing out that 91-92 Winter warmth was an anomaly in an event with that orientation. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

Like I said, too much warmth.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Like I said, too much warmth.

Too much warmth in the east. 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

The way this played out in the PNA region isn't too far from what a Nino 3.4-based El Nino should do

See how the N. pacific low is directly north of the El Nino

[40/70 Benchmark]

3 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

Too much warmth in the east. 

Yes.

I will grant you that 1991 could have ended up a but better than it did, but there was definitely still a god bit of warmth to the east that raised the probability of the shit outcome that we had.

 

[40/70 Benchmark]

2 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

The way this played out in the PNA region isn't too far from what a Nino 3.4-based El Nino should do

See how the N. pacific low is directly north of the El Nino

Yes, it had some favorable traits.....it was basin-wide, not east based, but if it were a bit weaker we may have been able to prevent that warmth in the east that ultimately sank our battle ship. There was probably some bad luck there, too....so I see what you are saying about being too literal. I probably oversimplified it due to the perfunctory nature of the dialogue to prove a point. I'm more nuanced in the actual analysis.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

11 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Yes.

I will grant you that 1991 could have ended up a but better than it did, but there was definitely still a god bit of warmth to the east that raised the probability of the shit outcome that we had.

I guess.. Not too far from ideal though.  Nino 1+2 is almost cold there v! impressive!

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Yes, it had some favorable traits.....it was basin-wide, not east based, but if it were a bit weaker we may have been able to prevent that warmth in the east that ultimately sank out battle ship. There as probably some bad luck there, too....so I see what you are saying about being too literal. 

By weaker you mean in Nino 1+2 and 3?

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

By weaker you mean in Nino 1+2 and 3?

Goes hand-in-hand...weaker overall would have likely diminished the degree of warmth that leaked east.

[GaWx]

Atlanta, especially airport south through the S burbs, had a major snowstorm in Jan of 1992.

[40/70 Benchmark]

2 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

I guess.. Not too far from ideal though

No, not far, but not ideal....and couldn't catch a break.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Goes hand-in-hand...weaker overall would have likely diminished the degree of warmth that leaked east.

Right. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

35 minutes ago, GaWx said:

Atlanta, especially airport south through the S burbs, had a major snowstorm in Jan of 1992.

Oh in that case, I'd love to relive it and spike my nerf football.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Ray, suppose the orientation doesn't change, you just multiply the anomalies by x1.5.. do you think 09-10 would have been a bad Winter?

[40/70 Benchmark]

26 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

Ray, suppose the orientation doesn't change, you just multiply the anomalies by x1.5.. do you think 09-10 would have been a bad Winter?

Well, it sucked as it was where I am...so not a big leap. Do I think DC would have still had 75" or whatever?

No, I don't.