2026-2027 El Nino

[40/70 Benchmark]

I'd take 82-83 or 23-24 over 2009-2010 any day. I get what you are saying, though...it was flukey that it was that bad here...blocking was so extreme.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

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.

A strong -QBO that season combined with Strong El Nino to give us several Stratosphere warmings, which corresponded with big -NAO events. A stronger El Nino may have actually given us stronger -NAO's (even though it was the most -NAO season on record since the 1800s, during a stronger El Nino). Nino 1+2 is almost cold there, that season. I don't think a max of those anomalies would have been bad at all. Actually, I think I would go higher on total in DC vs lower. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

If 2009 were 2.2 or 2.3 instead of 1.6, I think that would have had a significant impact...yes.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

If 2009 were 2.2 or 2.3 instead of 1.6, I think that would have had a significant impact...yes.

I think this is where meteorological logic differs from analog based opinions. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

A strong -QBO that season combined with Strong El Nino to give us several Stratosphere warmings, which corresponded with big -NAO events. A stronger El Nino may have actually given us stronger -NAO's (even though it was the most -NAO season on record since the 1800s, during a stronger El Nino). Nino 1+2 is almost cold there, that season. I don't think a max of those anomalies would have been bad at all. Actually, I think I would go higher on total in DC vs lower. 

I highly doubt the warmth would have remained that related to the west had it grown that potent. I think going high on snowfall is ridiculous....that was such an anomalous outcome. 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

3 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I highly doubt the warmth would have remained that related to the west had it grown that potent. I think going high on snowfall is ridiculous....that was such an anomalous outcome. 

If you consider it was the most -NAO season on record, and a Stronger Nino STJ, it's not that far fetched. Anyway my point is it's not different things happen if you turn up the heat, it's just bigger same. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

I think this is where meteorological logic differs from analog based opinions. 

I think this is where putting down the calculator and being more pragmatic has some utility.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I think this is where putting down the calculator and being more pragmatic has some utility.

Well you know ENSO's main effect is due north and south of SSTA's, where the Hadley Cell and mid-latitude cell meet right? 

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

If you consider it was the most -NAO season on record, and a Stronger Nino STJ, it's not that far fetched. Anyway my point is it's not different things happen if you turn up the heat, is just bigger same. 

See, I think this is where YOU are being too literal....replay that season 100x, and I'd be willing to bet Baltimore doesn't get consecutive 3' events. This is like saying that some NAO blocking in 2015 would have gotten Boston 120" in month instead of 100". I think that is far too reductive and Linear a thought process. 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

If Nino 1+2 is as cold as 09-10 I don't see how the pattern changes if it's 2.2 or 2.3

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

Well you know ENSO's main effect is due north and south of SSTA's, where the Hadley Cell and mid-latitude cell meet right? 

If you have ever taken the time to read through my stuff, you wouldn't be asking that question. 

The shear anomaly of an occurrence of that magnitude renders it unlikely, regardless.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

See, I think this is where YOU are being too literal....replay that season 100x, and I'd be willing to bet Baltimore doesn't get consecutive 3' events. This is like saying that some NAO blocking in 2015 would have gotten Boston 120" in month instead of 100". I think that is far too reductive and Linear a thought process. 

Nationally, 09-10 was actually drier than most Strong Nino's. I guess at 39N it's not that typical to get several big blizzards but NAO has never been more negative.. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

If Nino 1+2 is as cold as 09-10 I don't see how the pattern changes if it's 2.2 or 2.3

It would't be.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Just now, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

Nationally, 09-10 was actually drier than most Strong Nino's. I guess at 39N it's not that typical to get several big blizzards but NAO has never been more negative.. 

Right. 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

If you have ever taken the time to read through my stuff, you wouldn't be asking that question. 

The shear anomaly of an occurrence of that magnitude renders it unlikely, regardless.

Agree to disagree I guess. I don't think more of the same changes the positions. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

Give a replica season of 1977-1978 and 1995-1996...I'll bet against a Feb 1978 redux and 127.5" of snowfall IMBY.

[Stormchaserchuck1]

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

It would't be.

Well I said if you multiplied anomalies by 1.5x what would it be. That would make Nino 1+2 0.0 to 0.0. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

Agree to disagree I guess. I don't think more of the same changes the positions. 

Sure.....I've been at that point for about an hour.

[40/70 Benchmark]

1 minute ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

Well I said if you multiplied anomalies by 1.5x what would it be. That would make Nino 1+2 0.0 to 0.0. 

You think if March 2015 were as prolific as February 2015, I could have achieved a 65" snowpack?

My position is that we won't see that....if we ever do, feel free to dig me up in 2080 or whatever and brag, if you have your head cryogenically frozen or something.

 

[Stormchaserchuck1]

Just now, 40/70 Benchmark said:

You think if March 2015 were as prolific as February 2015, I could have achieved a 65" snowpack?

My position is that we won't see that....if we ever do, feel free to dig me up in 2080 or whatever and brag, if you have your head cryogenically frozen or something.

 

It's rare to get a strong west-based Nino but 91-92 certainly could have been colder.. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

All joking aside, small sample size or not, the data that we have implies that an El Niño stronger than 2.0 is going to slide east...it's why the strongest events are usually east-based.

[40/70 Benchmark]

3 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

It's rare to get a strong west-based Nino but 91-92 certainly could have been colder.. 

Sure...just like 2009-2010 could have been snowier up here and the Pats could have been undefeated in 2007. But I'm a fan of the scoreboard. 

[raindancewx]

April 1982 and April 1997 were very cold US-wide. CFS has the opposite. If it isn't drunk on its own delusions, you'd say April 2026 looks like a blend of 1963, 2002, 2015, 2019, minus 1982, 1997. Conceptually, the big El Nino following big La Nina with low solar is a very cold winter here. We don't have that combo for this winter. We have high solar, good El Nino following weak La Nina/neutral. It's probably more of a very wet winter here than very cold. 

More likely: 1997 and 1982 already had dominant impacts on the global pattern by April, and the upcoming El Nino does not. April on the CFS looks a lot like winter 2004-2005, if the greatest warmth was fully shifted south.

[40/70 Benchmark]

Yea, I have been saying that I don't see this is an uber-El Nino that will fry the east. Generally agree, though haven't delved deeply into analogs at this early juncture. 2002 is one I speculated on.....just conjecture right now.

[raindancewx]

The El Ninos following two cold ENSOs (not 1 or 3 or more or many neutrals), with high solar are relatively rare -

1968. 1982. 1997. 2009. 2018 each El Nino follows two cold Ensos in a row.

Only 1968, 1982, 1997 are relatively active for solar. PDO is negative in 1968 with AMO negative. Both look likely/possible, we've got the cold flipped C from Iceland to all the way around West Africa.

Stupidly cold in March as a blend but I doubt those three years will work.

 

Conceptually, you have:

2026: -AMO, -PDO, El Nino, High Solar, after two cold ENSOs for this winter. That's like 1968, next closest is 1982/1997/2009/2018.

Anti 2026: +AMO, +PDO, La Nina, Low Solar, after two warm ENSOs for the winter: That's 1995, 2016, 2020

Would look like this in concept - probably not as severe in reality. 

Somewhere between 2023-2024 and the above image is my guess.

[raindancewx]

Actually, 1972 qualifies as well. Followed two cold ENSOs, high solar, negative AMO, negative PDO.

1968 and 1972 are the best matches on the variables - +ENSO, following two -ENSOs, high solar, -AMO, -PDO.