2026-2027 Record-breaking El Nino

[bluewave]

Starting to see +12C subsurface anomalies as Nino 3.4 reaches +3.4 for the first time.

 

 

[mitchnick]

Euro seasonal latest snowfall change this run vs last courtesy Weather Will in the MA forum. No complaints from me!

 

[forkyfork]

closing in on +3.5

 

[so_whats_happening]

Cold pool near -3 and seems to be on the move recently.

[mitchnick]

33 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

closing in on +3.5

 

In light of the Euro seasonal snowfall map with the change from last month, higher the better 

[GaWx]

2 hours ago, bluewave said:

Starting to see +12C subsurface anomalies as Nino 3.4 reaches +3.4 for the first time.

 

 
This is the official RONI version of yours, which takes into account the amount of GW between Ninos (specifically as regards the warming of the global tropical SSTs) and thus gives a better comparison of Nino strength from Nino to Nino: 26 has been record warmest since early Aug and currently is 0.13 warmer than 97, 0.47 warmer than 82, .61 warmer than 15, and 1.47 warmer than 23:

 

 Here’s the new Euro RONI prog: 26-7 remains strongest, even warmer than the rapidly warming late peaking 82-3 although only barely warmer than 83 in Jan:

 

[LakePaste25]

Still waiting on that big Nino 1+2 drop modeled by the CFSv2. Any day now. 

 

[forkyfork]

20 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

In light of the Euro seasonal snowfall map with the change from last month, higher the better 

nobody with any wx skill looks at those maps

[GaWx]

14 minutes ago, LakePaste25 said:

Still waiting on that big Nino 1+2 drop modeled by the CFSv2. Any day now. 

 

The CFS keeps missing too low and thus readjusting Nino 1+2 and Nino 3 higher while doing pretty much the opposite for 3.4 and 4 thus making it more and more E based from the already record E basedness.

[forkyfork]

19 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 
This is the official RONI version of yours, which takes into account the amount of GW between Ninos (specifically as regards the warming of the global tropical SSTs) and thus gives a better comparison of Nino strength from Nino to Nino: 26 has been record warmest since early Aug and currently is 0.13 warmer than 97, 0.47 warmer than 82, .61 warmer than 15, and 1.47 warmer than 23:

 

 Here’s the new Euro RONI prog: 26-7 remains strongest, even warmer than the rapidly warming late peaking 82-3 although only barely warmer than 83 in Jan:

 

is roni going to lower the amount of latent heat that gets released into the climate system and trapped by carbon dioxide? is roni going to keep an eastward displaced north pacific low from flooding the continent with maritime airmasses all winter?

[LakePaste25]

12 minutes ago, GaWx said:

The CFS keeps missing too low and thus readjusting Nino 1+2 and Nino 3 higher while doing pretty much the opposite for 3.4 and 4 thus making it more and more E based from the already record E basedness.

I won’t count chickens before they hatch, but *at least so far* the Euro has been the most correct with how E based it is compared to the others.

[bluewave]

55 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 
This is the official RONI version of yours, which takes into account the amount of GW between Ninos (specifically as regards the warming of the global tropical SSTs) and thus gives a better comparison of Nino strength from Nino to Nino: 26 has been record warmest since early Aug and currently is 0.13 warmer than 97, 0.47 warmer than 82, .61 warmer than 15, and 1.47 warmer than 23:

 

 Here’s the new Euro RONI prog: 26-7 remains strongest, even warmer than the rapidly warming late peaking 82-3 although only barely warmer than 83 in Jan:

 

RONI is not meant to be used for the absolute intensity of this event. It’s more about gradients and storm tracks. With something this historic, it’s the absolute temperatures and water vapor increase that matter which is better reflected by ONI.

 

[GaWx]

 Any comments about what this graph implies?

 Why is prog of ERA5 avg (blue) so much higher than prog of ECMWF mean (black)? Isn’t ERA5 produced by ECMWF? Is ERA5 its own projection model? Any explanation would be appreciated.

[LakePaste25]

14 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 Any comments about what this graph implies?

 Why is prog of ERA5 avg (blue) so much higher than prog of ECMWF mean (black)? Isn’t ERA5 produced by ECMWF? Is ERA5 its own projection model? Any explanation would be appreciated.

ERA5 is not a prognosis, it’s a reanalysis of the daily mean averaged out over several decades (i think it starts 1940 but someone can correct me here). The black is the actual forecast ensemble mean. So it’s currently forecast to go below the historical mean. 

[GaWx]

1 minute ago, LakePaste25 said:

ERA5 is not a prognosis, it’s a reanalysis of the daily mean averaged out over several decades (i think it starts 1940 but someone can correct me here). The black is the actual forecast ensemble mean 

Thanks. But with ERA5 not being a prognosis, why is its blue line going all of the way til 5/1/27?

[GaWx]

54 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 Any comments about what this graph implies?

 Why is prog of ERA5 avg (blue) so much higher than prog of ECMWF mean (black)? Isn’t ERA5 produced by ECMWF? Is ERA5 its own projection model? Any explanation would be appreciated.

 
 Everything Daniel Swain says makes sense. ONI is essentially the sum of ENSO and GW, which is what I’ve been saying and is literally what he says here:

“absolute (ONI) index, which includes climate warming signal…”

 If you want to measure the pure ENSO signal, itself, and compare that to the pure ENSO signal of past events, the recommendation is to use RONI as NOAA suggests in their official RONI table going back to 1950.
 
 I understand that warmer air holds more water vapor and thus allows for increased rainfall. Thus, ONI better measures increased absolute warmth/rainfall since it adds the GW component to the ENSO component.

[LakePaste25]

25 minutes ago, GaWx said:

Thanks. But with ERA5 not being a prognosis, why is its blue line going all of the way til 5/1/27?

it’s giving you the historical ERA 5 reanalysis average up until 5/1/27. You’ll notice all the lines converge together starting between march and april because a) the PV becomes weaker and less variable by the spring and b) models tend to default to climatology very far out. So the ensemble forecast mean (black) will start to closely match the hindcast climate mean (red) and ERA5 mean (blue) between March and April. 

 

Also it’s important to note the red line being lower than the blue line between Dec and March. What that’s telling you is that when the model tried to reconstruct a hindcast of past years, it was forecasting a weaker PV than the actual ERA5 reanalysis. So it’s saying the model has a weak PV bias in its forecasts during the heart of winter. 

[mitchnick]

1 hour ago, forkyfork said:

nobody with any wx skill looks at those maps

Apparently you did. 

[forkyfork]

2 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

Apparently you did. 

did that 20cm shade of apocalyptic blue give you a wx hardon

[forkyfork]

maybe you should get it printed on a teddy bear and cuddle it to sleep every night <3

[Cobalt]

52 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

maybe you should get it printed on a teddy bear and cuddle it to sleep every night <3

why do you still talk like this, you're 40?

[FPizz]

5 minutes ago, Cobalt said:

why do you still talk like this, you're 40?

He has pet rocks, enough said.  He hopes they make pebbles together so that he has more friends to talk to.  

[GaWx]

1 hour ago, LakePaste25 said:

it’s giving you the historical ERA 5 reanalysis average up until 5/1/27. You’ll notice all the lines converge together starting between march and april because a) the PV becomes weaker and less variable by the spring and b) models tend to default to climatology very far out. So the ensemble forecast mean (black) will start to closely match the hindcast climate mean (red) and ERA5 mean (blue) between March and April. 

 

Also it’s important to note the red line being lower than the blue line between Dec and March. What that’s telling you is that when the model tried to reconstruct a hindcast of past years, it was forecasting a weaker PV than the actual ERA5 reanalysis. So it’s saying the model has a weak PV bias in its forecasts during the heart of winter. 

Thanks. So, what does all of this say in regard to the ECMWF’s forecasted weaker than avg SPV in Jan/Feb? Is that a legit signal of a likely weaker than normal SPV then?

[LakePaste25]

5 minutes ago, GaWx said:

Thanks. So, what does all of this say in regard to the ECMWF’s forecasted weaker than avg SPV in Jan/Feb? Is that a legit signal of a likely weaker than normal SPV then?

I think it’s worth tracking, but proceed with caution given the known ECMWF weak PV bias. 

[forkyfork]

16 minutes ago, Cobalt said:

why do you still talk like this, you're 40?

because being patient and logical with snow autists is a waste of time

[GaWx]

 The link below is to the banter thread, which hasn’t had a post since Sept 28th while there have been dozens of near worthless banter posts clogging up this thread with poop since then making it harder for readers to find the much higher quality posts. How does that make sense?

 

[GaWx]

 So did forky, who has special privileges and staff powers for who knows what reason, just remove the Super El Nino banter thread that I posted a link to 30 minutes earlier? Or did he just remove my ability to view it?

 It all of the sudden now shows this when I view the link to the Banter thread that I provided in my prior post:

Sorry, we can't show this content because you do not have permission to see it.

[soadforecasterx]

looks like it got removed all together