2026-2027 Record-breaking El Nino

[GaWx]

 What’s odd is the comparison of the record high 10 hPa/60N-90N temps in Oct/Nov on NCEP (top) and NASA (bottom). NCEP looks like it has artifacts caused by algorithmic errors with two nearly vertical peaks that don’t look natural. Thus I’ve decided that the NASA graph is correct, and record high temps are being forecasted at 10 hPa/60-90N after all with 217K ~Nov 8th.

 NCEP Oct/Nov 2 near vertical peaks for old record high temps (black) don’t look natural/look like artifacts and thus this makes it appear nowhere near record high temps are being forecasted (green):

 

 NASA Oct/Nov old record high temps don’t have artifacts and thus new early Nov record high temps are being forecasted (red), which makes sense due to this being the first on record early Nov SSW causing record shattering low 10 hPa/60N winds:

[snowman19]

[bluewave]

19 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

the reality is that ALL THREE of this seasons produced snowfalls of well over a foot on the CP of SNE, and 2/3 had substantial MC contribution, so I think folks need to cool it with the group think philosophy and pry open their minds a bit.

My focus has been on how much warmer each of the months since May have been exceeding the seasonal long range model forecasts and past developing super El Niño events.

We all know with super El Niños is that it only takes one well timed storm with just enough cold to snow to make a late season snowstorm.

1997-1998 was a weaker east based event featuring no MC forcing. We had a very active East Coast storm track. Many lows hugged the East Coast. Several lows also tracked out near the Benchmark.

But the very powerful EPAC vortex and STJ never really allowed high pressure to become established long enough over the Northeast. So places like NYC Metro saw many rainstorms and very little snow through DJF.

It was actually March which delivered the best snow of the season. But March into even early April during the 1990s was much colder and snowier than the 2020s.  March snowfall through the first 6 years of the 2020s is at record lows for any 6 year period on record.

So in order to out some snow points on the board around NYC Metro, we would want to do it before we get into March which has become so much warmer this decade. 

Let’s see what happens. But we would need to get an improvement in the lack of cold high pressure in the Northeast vs 1997-1998 to see better snowfall results. 
 

 

[CoastalWx]

38 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

 

The mean 500 flow isn’t really ridging on the models. However, there is split flow there so there could be some in the means…but also the high heights is a sign of anomalous warmth too.

[EasternLI]

17 hours ago, Typhoon Tip said:

Not directed at you Don, just in general.. 

I wish the scientific ambit would elect to place a "P" on SSW as a suffix, for/if/when an intrusion of warming into the PV/stratospheric pressure coordinates is proven ( crucially ) to be a downward "P"ropagating event.  

There is a life cycle to the SSW --> -AO, that requires some 20 to 30 days to complete.  Whether this is that, or just an intrusion that quickly disappears ... still remains to be seen. 

This needs to be factored into this "suspected" intrusion event and I'm not reading anywhere, in or outside this social media ... like that is in the gears of reasoning.   

First of all, the AO is progged currently at CPC to go ~ -.75 SD over this next week.   There is no antecedent SSW/propagating downward phenomenon prior to that occurring.  Should this 10 mb warm node and any vortex collapse become resonate ( downward radiating through the vortex) .... your looking at the end of November before any AO mode response - when considering the proven total SSW phenology.   

I just suspect that SSW is being blurred in the proper usage of why Sudden Stratospheric Warming was originally identified.  Since there are intrusion events that don't down well, yeah... technically it's a warming in the stratosphere that is/was rather expedient in how it manifested.   But semantically... and really machine wise, if you want an SSW to correlate to winter at mid latitude, it has to go thru 20+ day downward evolution, then the -AO happens. And I still don't see that very convincingly modeled in the GFS.       

What I do see occurring is both aft of present and continuing in the models, a warmer than normal static 70 to 100 hPa level state.  I'm willing to hunch pretty heavily that it's CC related... This looks more like a pan-dimensional aspect than an intrusion - aside from the fact that it's emerging from the bottom up.  As well, it is/has vastly predated(s) the canonical 'disruption season'.    

 

 

Now, I'm not disputing any of that. In fact I value your opinions on these types of things. This just feels like a good opportunity to add to that thought. It's an interesting topic, and some interesting questions. 

 

What is this exactly? It is different.

 

It is of the bottom -> up variety. EURO is showing the same thing. With the temp anomaly pushing up from the bottom. 

 

 

Like you said, this is the opposite of the classical model for these. Which start up high and work it's way down. I've seen a theory floating around on why we might be more prone to that type of thing currently. I don't know how true this could be or not, but it seems like a good time to bring it up. The increased water vapor from the Hunga Tonga volcano several years ago. It's still been cycling through the stratosphere along with the QBO. While it very slowly attempts to dissipate. It is a little interesting that closer to 100mb is a bit drier than higher up. Could this be the reason for the bottom -> up activity? NASA has a great site that keeps track of that, here it is on the following image.

 

 

So, if el nino ultimately is behind this strat event this year? Which I think that is probably likely. If so, is this the type of warming event a steroidal el nino would normally provide minus that eruption? I'm not so sure. Intuitively, it makes sense that something about this could be unfolding differently had that eruption not happened. What that could be, I have no idea. Maybe it wouldn't... It's an interesting question. What are the ramifications of this particular event? We don't have many samples, and maybe not any. Will be interesting to see what models do with it once it's underway.

[snowman19]

36 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

The mean 500 flow isn’t really ridging on the models. However, there is split flow there so there could be some in the means…but also the high heights is a sign of anomalous warmth too.

Strong signal for a warm November too

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mitchnick]

8 hours ago, GaWx said:

Now that the multi-run CFS’ have warmed considerably in the E US for Feb vs how they were a couple of weeks ago, the above Nov Cansips run for Feb is notably colder by ~2F than the latest 3 day CFS for Feb, which is below (even after considering the ~1F colder climo being used by this TT CFS):

The difference between the Cansips and current Cfs2 runs isn't that much really. Precip signatures are very close indicating coastal storms. With Cfs2 running 4x/day, it's far from "done" adjusting one way or the other. For those of us inland (as in you and me), we'll have our shots for sure.