Winter 2026-2027. Historic Potential

[TSSN+]

All I know is I want to be in one of the first one of these. 
 

“The National Weather Service will implement the use of “Particularly Dangerous Situation” wording in select Blizzard Warnings and Ice Storm Warnings this season. This language will help forecasters alert partners and the public about high-confidence blizzards or ice storms of historic severity. These rare events typically pose exceptional threats by posing imminent danger to life and unprecedented disruptions to emergency services.”

[mitchnick]

1 hour ago, SnowenOutThere said:

This is most likely an ignorant question but do we know if the seasonal models are advertising a permanent low or transient lows in that area?

A low in the mean, so it doesn't guarantee a permanent low.

[mitchnick]

2 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

Past does not necessarily correlate to future outcomes.  But Chuck is 100% right about his observed flaw in the long range guidance.  It wasn't just 2024, they did the same thing in 2019 also, continuously advertising a canonical nino look in the pacific that never actually materialized.  That doesn't mean the same thing happens again, but it would be foolish to stick our heads in the sand bout that fact.  Until we actually see a nino north pac pattern set in I would be skeptical also!  

I disagree with Chuck about the position of the N Pac low being fine if it's east based.  But most won't want to hear this.  He is right that if you run a mean of our biggest snowstorms there is a low just off the Pac NW coast.  The issue is how we get there.  That low isn't typically as strong as a super nino one will be.  Additionally it's usually part of a retrograding pattern and it wasn't there the whole time, the cold for the snowstorm was set up then as the pattern retrogrades a transient low there sets in motion the snowstorm.  That is also why we usually warm up soon after our biggest snowstorms...because a low there floods CONUS with pac puke.  

A permanent low all winter there would NOT be the same as a transient low there following a favorable pattern for cold.  A permanent strong low just off the Pac NW would flood the CONUS with mild pac puke airmass.  

This doesn't mean we can't get a big snowstorm.  There might we windows.  The pac pattern will fluctuate some.  We probably need a favorable AO/NAO and who knows.  But we're going to be fighting some very uphill battles, some of which we have been fighting for the last 10 years.

 

@CAPE you're right it can snow during these hostile underlying issues, but the fact is it has snowed less in the last 10 years than any 10 year period in history!  No one is saying we know how the winter will play out for sure...but when making these seasonal predictions it's about probabilities, and the results under this pacific pdo regime have shown the math favors less snow.  So yes we're rooting for a fluke, but you don't base a seasonal forecast one "maybe we get lucky".  

Thing is, the end of the Eps run from last night has a trough off the west coast retrograding wnw toward the GOA and the Euro weeklies have been, for at least 4 days in a row (could be longer, but I stopped at 4) putting a trough in the GOA and the SE US where the seasonal put them come mid-late November, subject to slight model to model variations. So we still need to wait as I ended my convo with Chuck, but MR is now lining up with seasonal progs, and that's as good as we can get from this point in time.

P.s. It's been discussed some in other forums, but the North Pole ice shield is the largest in 10 or more years. Odd that could happen in this super Niño. 

[Terpeast]

48 minutes ago, TSSN+ said:

All I know is I want to be in one of the first one of these. 
 

“The National Weather Service will implement the use of “Particularly Dangerous Situation” wording in select Blizzard Warnings and Ice Storm Warnings this season. This language will help forecasters alert partners and the public about high-confidence blizzards or ice storms of historic severity. These rare events typically pose exceptional threats by posing imminent danger to life and unprecedented disruptions to emergency services.”

So would I for blizzards.

But from their message, I wonder why they didn’t include flood warnings. I would think that flood warnings would be a top case for that kind of wording.