Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    18,661
    Total Members
    25,819
    Most Online
    tmcandrew
    Newest Member
    tmcandrew
    Joined

2026-2027 Super El Nino


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

I remember that well. Everyone thought the EURO was being way too aggressive and had a bad warm bias

 1. The Euro did well with ONI in 2023, one of their best performances. But they also really did have a notable warm bias as was repeatedly shown with actual verifications vs progs over a near 20 year period, a large sample size. I spent lots of time researching and then showing this.

 A bias of any kind doesn’t at all mean that in a minority of cases verifications can’t be good. You know that. Keep in mind the very big too warm misses of 2012, 2014, and 2017 busts, for example. In all 3 cases a moderate El Niño was predicted repeatedly as I just posted. And the Euro has never been too cold by a significant degree. The one or two too cold misses were tiny in size.
 

2. The Euro when averaged out in only actual El Niño seasons had a smaller warm bias than for other seasons, which I’ve also pointed out. However, it still had a small warm bias even for those with some big too warm misses even during Nino seasons.

3. Furthermore, RONI of that season peaked at only high end moderate/low end strong as the Euro doesn’t predict RONI. Currently, RONI is ~0.5C cooler than ONI.

4. Let’s see what actually happens. It could of course end up very strong/super even for RONI as I’m open too all possibilities. It’s way too early for high confidence in any strength. That’s my main point. But remember to subtract ~0.5C for the best RONI prog.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Where are we going for daily H5 charts now that this site is no longer updating?

https://psl.noaa.gov/data/composites/day/

This site is fine for temps and precip.

https://prism.oregonstate.edu/comparisons/anomalies.php

The new Conventional Observation Reanalysis that’s supposed to replace it only has the raw data available (https://nomads.ncep.noaa.gov/pub/data/nccf/com/core/) which is annoying since I haven’t found any custom built code that plots it yet 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LakePaste25 said:

The new Conventional Observation Reanalysis that’s supposed to replace it only has the raw data available (https://nomads.ncep.noaa.gov/pub/data/nccf/com/core/) which is annoying since I haven’t found any custom built code that plots it yet 

I have noticed....so we don't have means to plot H5 beyond March 17, 2026 for now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 The new Cansips has winter anomalies significantly colder in the NE than the SE:

IMG_0064.thumb.png.2d8962fb74de3810ace5d793997ece07.png

 For all of the Ninos peaking at +1.5+, not a single one going back at least to 1895-6 had a colder NE than SE anomaly wise! Not even one!
 
 These are the winters: 2023-4, 2015-6, 2009-10, 2002-3, 1997-8, 1991-2, 1987-8, 1986-7, 1982-3, 1972-3, 1965-6, 1957-8, 1940-1, 1930-1, 1925-6, 1918-9, 1902-3, 1899-00, and 1896-7. That’s 19 winters, a nice sample size suggesting the CANSIPS E US winter temp. anomalies and a strong El Niño prog aren’t at all jibing with history.

 Here is the aggregate of those 19 winters:

IMG_0065.png.c4a508058cbcf90915b0fc06d9dc067f.png
 

Edit: Even going all of the way down to peaks of +1.0 yields the same result, no winter colder in NE than SE. That adds 13 more for a total sample size of 32!

 Here’s the average of the 13 moderates:

IMG_0066.png.a59c03ef2c6610d4b47bb08b040a92b2.png

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, GaWx said:

 The new Cansips has winter anomalies significantly colder in the NE than the SE:

IMG_0064.thumb.png.2d8962fb74de3810ace5d793997ece07.png

 For all of the Ninos peaking at +1.5+, not a single one going back at least to 1895-6 had a colder NE than SE anomaly wise! Not even one!
 
 These are the winters: 2023-4, 2015-6, 2009-10, 2002-3, 1997-8, 1991-2, 1987-8, 1986-7, 1982-3, 1972-3, 1965-6, 1957-8, 1940-1, 1930-1, 1925-6, 1918-9, 1902-3, 1899-00, and 1896-7. That’s 19 winters, a nice sample size suggesting the CANSIPS E US winter temp. anomalies and a strong El Niño prog aren’t at all jibing with history.

 Here is the aggregate of those 19 winters:

IMG_0065.png.c4a508058cbcf90915b0fc06d9dc067f.png
 

Edit: Even going all of the way down to peaks of +1.0 yields the same result, no winter colder in NE than SE. That adds 13 more for a total sample size of 33!

I see it has some split forcing showing up with some lingering convection in the west pacific. Also appears to be more basin-wide. I agree - i think a +TNH outcome like that is probably overkill even if there’s split forcing.

 

IMG_8813.png

IMG_8814.png

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LakePaste25 said:

I see it has some split forcing showing up with some lingering convection in the west pacific. Also appears to be more basin-wide. I agree - i think a +TNH outcome like that is probably overkill even if there’s split forcing.

 

IMG_8813.png

IMG_8814.png

Yea, I could buy some vestige of it remaining, but it's probably overdone.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

It did well last year. I was skeptical it would end up that cold. Interesting to see how it does this year.

I’m looking for it to bust badly assuming El Niño verifies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

What does it look like in the ENSO region?

What Chuck said. It has a healthy strength Nino, probably nearing or exceeding +1.5 ONI. That doesn’t as you know at all jibe with the La Ninaish temperature anomaly pattern it has for the US and Canada. Like I said, I’ve found no +1.0+ Nino winter anything close to the Ninalike configuration Cansips has out of 32 of them! Really weird and why I expect its overall Ninaish US temp. configuration to badly bust if a decent El Niño were to verify.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

Tomorrow we might hit +5c in the subsurface on TAO/Triton. I don't think I've ever seen it so warm. Will have to compare vs analogs. 

I think 1997 might have gotten that warm or close to it in the subsurface at one point 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

Yeah, April 1997 had a really warm subsurface

Image links aren't working. I'll try to upload image later

Yea, 1997 got insanely warm in the subsurface starting in the spring like this one appears to be doing. SSTs ended up peaking in region 3.4 on the weeklies at +2.8C the last week of November, 1997

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way Nino 4 is warming is so interesting. Again, only 2 April's on record had higher than +0.500 monthly for later in year >+1.2 El Nino's (out of 15):

April 1997: +0.59

April 2015: +0.98

We are at +0.511 on April 1. There is so much warm potential energy for things to easily go strong. 

PhillyEaglesfan may not get his Strong Nina for a while. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

The way Nino 4 is warming is so interesting. Again, only 2 April's on record had higher than +0.500 monthly for later in year >+1.2 El Nino's (out of 15):

April 1997: +0.59

April 2015: +0.98

We are at +0.511 on April 1. There is so much warm potential energy for things to easily go strong. 

PhillyEaglesfan may not get his Strong Nina for a while. 

Said it the other day, but I think “high-end” strong is going to be the floor with this event, with super prospects increasing 

@bluewave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Stormchaserchuck1 said:

The way Nino 4 is warming is so interesting. Again, only 2 April's on record had higher than +0.500 monthly for later in year >+1.2 El Nino's (out of 15):

April 1997: +0.59

April 2015: +0.98

We are at +0.511 on April 1. There is so much warm potential energy for things to easily go strong. 

PhillyEaglesfan may not get his Strong Nina for a while. 

I wouldn't be too sure. After the 1997-98 event, a double-year strong la nina followed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...