October Comes Early: Late September Multi-Hazard Hybrid Storm

[Damage In Tolland]

Here it comes . Keep ramping her up . Can see that dead zone in E Ma up into S NH in lowland downslope 

[vortex95]

Concerning the E Coast storm development and possible ST development...

I wanted to share my thoughts and throw this out there for food for thought. @weatherwiz, has the below crossed you mind?  @ineedsnow will be like "BRING IT ON!" as to subtropical development.  @CoastalWxwill just be "MEH" b/c it makes zero difference in Weymouth! 

Sometimes in forecast meteorology you have to think proactively in the abstract at times for those potential outlier events, otherwise you can get "caught behind the 8-ball," playing catch-up and making excuses.  This current E Coast storm situation reminds me a bit of Sandy's situation, except reversed!  A non-tropical low possibly becoming ST near the E Coast and how can it be handled.

I know of no cases where an ET low warm secluded and became a ST storm near the Mid-Atlantic or New England coast.  Yes, the Perfect Storm in 1991 did this, and so did the Oct 2021 biggie (Wanda later), but those TCs formed way E out to sea after the local ET storm impacts had gone.  Not the same when you have ongoing ET low impacts on land, and then the low transitions to a ST storm and gets a name!

I may be reaching a bit here, but I think this particular storm situation warrants some added attention.

ECMWF and UKMET suggest ST transition is possible off the Mid-Atlantic or New England coast.  Clear warm core to 500 and SSTs easily are in range.  Phase diagrams show a fairly good symmetric warm core.

NHC does not even mention it on their 7-day TWO?  I find this a bit odd.  Many, many times they will put in something even if the slightest chance of ST development for systems like this.  Just b/c it is close to the coast and may cause confusing in messaging is irrelevant to the met science!   It is what it is.  You can't pick and choose.  Yes, I know it's not so simple as to how things work overall, but that does not make me wrong in this context.

In this age of social media, do you want ppl calling you out as to "this thing is clearly ST, and yet nothing from NHC".  Not good PR.   It is even more precarious in this case.  Why?, I can not recall a nor'easter this strong for the E Coast in Sep, so SSTs are near climo peak, and they are 2-4 C  above avg S of New England.  Extraordinary/outlier patterns can lead to extraordinary/outlier events, and we have the knowledge/skill to fcst such much better now, and so should use it.

I've seen NHC highlight baroclinic systems in the subtropical EPAC that have no chance of development and give it 0/0, and also in the Atlantic many times, so again, don't tell me there is not anything here to outlook.  If anything, it is more important due to proximity to the coast.

Thoughts?

[vortex95]

On 9/22/2026 at 3:09 PM, ineedsnow said:

just once I want a storm like this shooting up the coast

No you don't! 

[vortex95]

On 9/22/2026 at 6:39 PM, Damage In Tolland said:

A real tempest is about to envelop the region. The type not seen in many many years. 

Partially correct.  Nothing like this in Sep for a Nor'easter!

[Damage In Tolland]

Just now, vortex95 said:

Partially correct.  Nothing like this in Sep for a Nor'easter!

What are your thoughts in terms of winds interior and coast ? 

[CoastalWx]

28 minutes ago, Damage In Tolland said:

Here it comes . Keep ramping her up . Can see that dead zone in E Ma up into S NH in lowland downslope 

Clown maps 

[vortex95]

On 9/22/2026 at 7:15 PM, Damage In Tolland said:

There’s a fair amount of folks here who have no idea what the potential is with this. Vort95 nailed it . Glad we recognized and jumped on board early and often. 

Extraordinary/outlier patterns often yield extraordinary/outlier events.  This is one of them from a climo standpoint -- this kind of strong Nor'easter in Sep.  Also, I have to wonder about the winds and mixing, given the near climo peak of SSTs and SSTs 2-4 C above avg S and SE of the region.  If it ends up more unstable, the winds mixing down could be something else.  Coast only or inland as well?  And as we saw w/ the Oct 2021 event, those lows that loop back a bit to the NW when a big high is present to the NW, that can do some pretty wild things w/ the winds.

Also, will the low deepen as a hybrid and get stronger than fcst?
 

[Torch Tiger]

 

[Torch Tiger]

[CoastalWx]

Not IBM anymore and that model isn’t that good. 

[CoastalWx]

18 minutes ago, vortex95 said:

Extraordinary/outlier patterns often yield extraordinary/outlier events.  This is one of them from a climo standpoint -- this kind of strong Nor'easter in Sep.  Also, I have to wonder about the winds and mixing, given the near climo peak of SSTs and SSTs 2-4 C above avg S and SE of the region.  If it ends up more unstable, the winds mixing down could be something else.  Coast only or inland as well?  And as we saw w/ the Oct 2021 event, those lows that loop back a bit to the NW when a big high is present to the NW, that can do some pretty wild things w/ the winds.

Also, will the low deepen as a hybrid and get stronger than fcst?
 

This will be nothing like October 2021. That was moving west and then west-southwest with the best gradient overhead. It had like 70kts+ at 950 overhead. Pretty good inversion above 925mb here with 61F SSTs. 

[WxWatcher007]

38 minutes ago, vortex95 said:

Concerning the E Coast storm development and possible ST development...

I wanted to share my thoughts and throw this out there for food for thought. @weatherwiz, has the below crossed you mind?  @ineedsnow will be like "BRING IT ON!" as to subtropical development.  @CoastalWxwill just be "MEH" b/c it makes zero difference in Weymouth! 

Sometimes in forecast meteorology you have to think proactively in the abstract at times for those potential outlier events, otherwise you can get "caught behind the 8-ball," playing catch-up and making excuses.  This current E Coast storm situation reminds me a bit of Sandy's situation, except reversed!  A non-tropical low possibly becoming ST near the E Coast and how can it be handled.

I know of no cases where an ET low warm secluded and became a ST storm near the Mid-Atlantic or New England coast.  Yes, the Perfect Storm in 1991 did this, and so did the Oct 2021 biggie (Wanda later), but those TCs formed way E out to sea after the local ET storm impacts had gone.  Not the same when you have ongoing ET low impacts on land, and then the low transitions to a ST storm and gets a name!

I may be reaching a bit here, but I think this particular storm situation warrants some added attention.

ECMWF and UKMET suggest ST transition is possible off the Mid-Atlantic or New England coast.  Clear warm core to 500 and SSTs easily are in range.  Phase diagrams show a fairly good symmetric warm core.

NHC does not even mention it on their 7-day TWO?  I find this a bit odd.  Many, many times they will put in something even if the slightest chance of ST development for systems like this.  Just b/c it is close to the coast and may cause confusing in messaging is irrelevant to the met science!   It is what it is.  You can't pick and choose.  Yes, I know it's not so simple as to how things work overall, but that does not make me wrong in this context.

In this age of social media, do you want ppl calling you out as to "this thing is clearly ST, and yet nothing from NHC".  Not good PR.   It is even more precarious in this case.  Why?, I can not recall a nor'easter this strong for the E Coast in Sep, so SSTs are near climo peak, and they are 2-4 C  above avg S of New England.  Extraordinary/outlier patterns can lead to extraordinary/outlier events, and we have the knowledge/skill to fcst such much better now, and so should use it.

I've seen NHC highlight baroclinic systems in the subtropical EPAC that have no chance of development and give it 0/0, and also in the Atlantic many times, so again, don't tell me there is not anything here to outlook.  If anything, it is more important due to proximity to the coast.

Thoughts?

I've been a longtime defender of NHC decisions on most of their designations, but in recent years (perhaps since Sandy?) I think they've been a little slower or hesitant when it comes to designating anything north of the Carolinas when it's not a slam dunk case. I provided a couple of examples a day or two ago. I can't say for sure, and I definitely do not make this statement to challenge the integrity of the great people working there, but I've seen public facing organizations generally hold a more conservative approach when it comes to making calls that could minimize credibility. 

We see here in this thread people that follow wx closely minimizing this, and the general public for better or worse will fall into the camp of this is the most dangerous thing ever or it's really no big deal. The NHC is in a lose-lose in public perception. Even a TWO mention ramps up the hype machine and everything that comes with it, and if it falls short of expectations in either direction people may be less likely to care about what the NHC says in the future. 

Hopefully I'm wrong, but its harder for the meteorology to stand alone in this era of social media and hype. Just look at the clowns posing the Sandy 2.0 stuff on Twitter and people sharing 925mb wind plots like we're a few thousand feet higher up. There's a lot of social science and understanding the psychology of the general public that needs to be considered to get people to act appropriately. It is what it is. 

[vortex95]

2 minutes ago, Torch Tiger said:

 

Leave it to this person to post the most extreme model solution.  This guy is among the worst hype-masters out there. 

No quantifying uncertainty, just stating gusts to 90 mph as if it is a done deal ("will batter").  Deplorable and irresponsible.

And this shows a much greater risk to the Mid-Atlantic than the NEUS.  That's not what most models are showing.  This is non-trivial difference and only serves to confuses the public and authorities more.

" 'Our' IBM GRAF model?"  What's this possessive nonsense?  As if to portray it's his TV station's exclusive? Many TV stations used the GRAF.  Disingenuous and arrogant.

[vortex95]

5 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Not IBM anymore and that model isn’t that good. 

I was just thinking of that!  It's The Weather Company's model now, correct?  IBM sold them off years ago.  So that guy can't even get his terminology right.  Sloppy!

I recall the GRAF model being pushed when it shows Dorian in 2019 hitting FL.  How did that work out? 

[CoastalWx]

9 minutes ago, vortex95 said:

I was just thinking of that!  It's The Weather Company's model now, correct?  IBM sold them off years ago.  So that guy can't even get his terminology right.  Sloppy!

I recall the GRAF model being pushed when it shows Dorian in 2019 hitting FL.  How did that work out? 

I’d say it’s more designed for mesoscale stuff like convection. It’s better for that, just meant not good for this stuff. Like showing 3K NAM for tropicals.

[Ginx snewx]

4 hours ago, WinterWolf said:

Hammer just said no real significant impacts for CT the way it looks now. Nothing major. 

Hammer forgets the far eastern part of the state every big storm that misses HFD

[Ginx snewx]

2 hours ago, FXWX said:

What is the general list of parameters available from weathernext3?

I have some data on my page. No graphics 

[vortex95]

4 minutes ago, WxWatcher007 said:

I've been a longtime defender of NHC decisions on most of their designations, but in recent years (perhaps since Sandy?) I think they've been a little slower or hesitant when it comes to designating anything north of the Carolinas when it's not a slam dunk case. I provided a couple of examples a day or two ago. I can't say for sure, and I definitely do not make this statement to challenge the integrity of the great people working there, but I've seen public facing organizations generally hold a more conservative approach when it comes to making calls that could minimize credibility. 

We see here in this thread people that follow wx closely minimizing this, and the general public for better or worse will fall into the camp of this is the most dangerous thing ever or it's really no big deal. The NHC is in a lose-lose in public perception. Even a TWO mention ramps up the hype machine and everything that comes with it, and if it falls short of expectations in either direction people may be less likely to care about what the NHC says in the future. 

Hopefully I'm wrong, but its harder for the meteorology to stand alone in this era of social media and hype. Just look at the clowns posing the Sandy 2.0 stuff on Twitter and people sharing 925mb wind plots like we're a few thousand feet higher up. There's a lot of social science and understanding the psychology of the general public that needs to be considered to get people to act appropriately. It is what it is. 

You wrote:
There's a lot of social science and understanding the psychology of the general public that needs to be considered to get people to act appropriately. It is what it is. 

The problem here is that it has been adopted "more is better."  No, it is not.  Ever hear of the boy who cried wolf?  There comes a point of diminishing returns, and that is in form of apathy and the public having no way to scale or quantify any wx events, it is always "catastrophic" or "extremely dangerous."  Run-of-the-mill storms, and you'd think the world was ending.  Yes, social media does this but over time, I have see Federal agencies adopt this wording as well.  It may be it is what is, but that does not mean it is right or beneficial.

On the more specific musing for the upcoming storm...

My issue is that they (NHC) are letting non-wx/science issues compromise the hard met science.

And my criticism does not mean I do not respect NHC.  I do.  But you can show respect and still criticize or point out issues. The problem is that sometimes they or any agency will get all bent out of shape and defend/deflect to the end when ppl bring up valid points and issues.

Recall the push-back from the NWS when ppl were upset and calling out the lack of a TOR for Springfield MA in 2011?  10 minutes late.  Yes, I know the issues as it was discussed on this group, but my biggest issue is how they handled it w/ snark and some could say plain vitriol.  Don't insult our intelligence, it was messed up big time for number of reasons, so fess up and take responsibility.

Getting back to NHC, some years ago, I was told by a Lead Met at a NEUS WFO, NHC does not handle TCs outside the tropics and subtropics well, not when it comes to risk and watches/warnings.  You can't treat a TC at mid-latitudes like farther S.  Asymmetries, accelerations and baroclinic effects make them much more variable than in the tropics.  I recall one event from 2009 or 2010 (HU Bill or Earl).  They had TS warnings as far W as BDR.  This was for a TC that clearly was going to stay E of Cape Cod.  So w/ such warnings up that far W, the probability of *sustained* TS winds (not gusts) is extremely low.  And we know for many TC recurving offshore, the winds on the W side are significantly reduced due to the asymmetrical wind field and the storm's forward acceleration.

Putting up such warnings is non-trivlal, it has huge business and commerce impacts.  TC forecasting and modelling has immensely advanced in the last 30 yr alone, yet I do not see us taking full advantages of that for watches/warnings.  It's still overdone often.  Not every TC situation is the same, so you can not apply general standardized rules as if it is "one-size fits all."

What may occur for this upcoming storm may be something we have not seen before (STS develop from a ET low near the NEUS coast) and I would say it is not a very low probability event.  What, do you just ignore that completely b/c you are worried about this or that?  Forget social media, and just do you job and stick to the met science.
 

[vortex95]

24 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

I’d say it’s more designed for mesoscale stuff like convection. It’s better for that, just meant not good for this stuff. Like showing 3K NAM for tropicals.

And we know how the 3 km NAM handles tropicals.  I recall in the late 2010s, it shows a 860 mb system in the Gulf, and it ended up a min HU (barely).

And goes to show how ignorant or disingenuous some are on social media.  They either have no clue of model limitations or know all to well, but show an extreme model solution anyway b/c it gets clicks/likes.

[LSC97wxnut]

NAM and all, but maybe not a complete washout for parts of SNE?

[vortex95]

7 hours ago, FXWX said:

You took the words right out of my mouth...  I was going to post the exact thing several times over the past couple of days, but said screw it...  Folks were more excited about cheering on STEIN than enjoying a complex evolution of a potent Nor'easter.  The constant "meh" stuff has gotten beyond old... To be successful on this board all you need to do is type any of the 3 words / terms; torch, Stein or meh...

You wrote:
"The constant "meh" stuff has gotten beyond old"

Re: @CoastalWx  LOL!

I agree 100% w/ @FXWX.  Signal to noise ratio needs to be kept in check.  Not saying you can't have levity or snarky posts, just don't let it get out of control.

Sometimes I think an upcoming wx event causes more anxiety and nervousness than anything. I admit, I get a bit anxious when a big event is coming up, and you know what that is often?, trying to keep up w/ it all!  I don't want to fall behind!  And you have be careful b/c it consumes SO much time, and it flies by.  It's just information overload these days, and it is a big challenge.

So I welcome a quiet stretch every so often (even "BORING" Scott!).
 

[vortex95]

7 hours ago, Great Snow 1717 said:

...and all of the warfare over something they have no control over....

If 1938 occurred again, the biggest issue would be WITHDRAWAL b/c no power and thus no access to AmrWx!  Even when you got power back (a month later for many), don't expect Internet back nearly as "fast!"  And even when it comes back, it likely will be ridiculously slow for many for awhile.  56k Telebit modem anyone?

[weathafella]

18 minutes ago, LSC97wxnut said:

NAM and all, but maybe not a complete washout for parts of SNE?

It’s on deck circle replacement is quite different 

[vortex95]

1 hour ago, CoastalWx said:

This will be nothing like October 2021. That was moving west and then west-southwest with the best gradient overhead. It had like 70kts+ at 950 overhead. Pretty good inversion above 925mb here with 61F SSTs. 

When dealing w/ outlier events, you need to think outside the box!  Odds often are more surprises than usual, so be careful about absolutisms like "this will be nothing like."

I brought up Oct 2021 b/c it looped back toward the coast.  This storm will likely do the same.  That does not mean G113mph on Cape Cod, but such movement for a nor'easter is not typical, so I say again, be careful! 

Want to know another storm (actually hurricane once reanalyzed) that looped back in and resulted in winds way higher than fcst?  Dec 23, 1994.  I'm sure a 15 y.o. Scott was taken aback by that in GHG!

[WinterWolf]

2 minutes ago, vortex95 said:

When dealing w/ outlier events, you need to think outside the box!   Odds how more surprises than usual, so be careful about absolutism like "this will be nothing like."

I brought up Oct 2021 b/c it looped back toward the coast.  This storm will likely do the same.  That does not mean G113mph on Cape Cod, but such movement for a nor'easter is not typical, so I say again, be careful! 

He loves absolutism….and it’s backfired on him more than once. 

[WxWatcher007]

16 minutes ago, vortex95 said:

You wrote:
There's a lot of social science and understanding the psychology of the general public that needs to be considered to get people to act appropriately. It is what it is. 

The problem here is that it has been adopted "more is better."  No, it is not.  Ever hear of the boy who cried wolf?  There comes a point of diminishing returns, and that is in form of apathy and the public having no way to scale or quantify any wx events, it is always "catastrophic" or "extremely dangerous."  Run-of-the-mill storms, and you'd think the world was ending.  Yes, social media does this but over time, I have see Federal agencies adopt this wording as well.  It may be it is what is, but that does not mean it is right or beneficial.

On the more specific musing for the upcoming storm...

My issue is that they (NHC) are letting non-wx/science issues compromise the hard met science.

And my criticism does not mean I do not respect NHC.  I do.  But you can show respect and still criticize or point out issues. The problem is that sometimes they or any agency will get all bent out of shape and defend/deflect to the end when ppl bring up valid points and issues.

Recall the push-back from the NWS when ppl were upset and calling out the lack of a TOR for Springfield MA in 2011?  10 minutes late.  Yes, I know the issues as it was discussed on this group, but my biggest issue is how they handled it w/ snark and some could say plain vitriol.  Don't insult our intelligence, it was messed up big time for number of reasons, so fess up and take responsibility.

Getting back to NHC, some years ago, I was told by a Lead Met at a NEUS WFO, NHC does not handle TCs outside the tropics and subtropics well, not when it comes to risk and watches/warnings.  You can't treat a TC at mid-latitudes like farther S.  Asymmetries, accelerations and baroclinic effects make them much more variable than in the tropics.  I recall one event from 2009 or 2010 (HU Bill or Earl).  They had TS warnings as far W as BDR.  This was for a TC that clearly was going to stay E of Cape Cod.  So w/ such warnings up that far W, the probability of *sustained* TS winds (not gusts) is extremely low.  And we know for many TC recurving offshore, the winds on the W side are significantly reduced due to the asymmetrical wind field and the storm's forward acceleration.

Putting up such warnings is non-trivlal, it has huge business and commerce impacts.  TC forecasting and modelling has immensely advanced in the last 30 yr alone, yet I do not see us taking full advantages of that for watches/warnings.  It's still overdone often.  Not every TC situation is the same, so you can not apply general standardized rules as if it is "one-size fits all."

What may occur for this upcoming storm may be something we have not seen before (STS develop from a ET low near the NEUS coast) and I would say it is not a very low probability event.  What, do you just ignore that completely b/c you are worried about this or that?  Forget social media, and just do you job and stick to the met science.
 

I agree. That's why I think it's important to let the science do the speaking. I'm no met obviously, but I still think it's possible to communicate meteorology in a way that doesn't add all the extra nonsense that pushes people from being effectively informed in the first place. But I think the lack of any mention by the NHC is a pretty significant tell at this stage. Maybe we get some late acknowledgement from them as the system is developing, but I'm not counting on it. 

Back to the system...even though it's shallow, if anything the GFS and Euro are more aligned on this being warm core than they were a few days ago. 

We don't get these often, and I'd argue that it's not insignificant if we see this really consolidate as it's crossing the Gulf Stream and organizing on Friday. 

If this takes longer to pull together it's weaker and more strung out and more mundane...but we don't see this signal often. 

 

[NW_of_GYX]

Howdy friends, is my flight home into PWM getting canceled Sunday afternoon or na?