psuhoffman

Euro weeklies agree with my hunch. For about a week we get a central pec ridge coinciding with MC forcing. But by the next week the pac pattern is resuming a more Nino look.

1. Does that roll into an eastern ridge though in a Nino with a weak SPV and amplified STJ? That driver has different downstream impacts based on other factors. So long as the pacific ridge extends over the top onto western Canada the energy that crashes into the west should track east not get stuck and amplify out west. 2. that’s likely temporary as the mjo progresses across the MC. So long as it’s only a week or so with cold established ahead of it we can survive and even snow during the period with luck. It’s very possible we do get a temporary period mid January with a bit too much pna trough but when the pattern reloads and the the mjo leaves the MC watch out with a colder profile already established across N America.

While everyone’s discussing the 300 hour GFS GEPS was a noice run

Substantive response

We want the nino to be stronger... given the fact it is in conflict with the pacific base state which will mute the impact of the nino, frankly my bigger worry as we head into the heart of winter is that the nino doesn't have enough influence and we get too much ridging in the central pacific leading to more -PNA than we want in the mid atlantic. That equation can still work further north of course. To get the longwave impacts of a moderate nino we probably need the raw SST anomalies to be in the strong bordering on super nino territory given the mitigating factors around it. The last thing I am worried about wrt a winter fail is that the nino will be too strong.

Those snow maps have looked that way for about a week now. But cape is right the h5 look is what matters. The snow is a product of the long wave pattern not the other way around. But I don’t mind the snow maps as much. Who cares it’s fun so long as we tone it down once there is real threats to focus on.

I generally agree but it’s a slow news day so whatever. Let them have fun. The pattern change is on target. But there’s not much new regarding that and we’re not within range of a discreet threat yet so at least they aren’t distracting us from anything. If they were I’d be calling for cleanup in aisle 6 also.

A monthly ensemble snow mean is always going to skew towards the mean. That cuts both ways. Let’s throw out DCA. BWI averages 6.4”. When it shows 4-5” that’s really bad. Worse than the raw number. When it shows 8-9” that’s really good. You’re never going to see it skewed that far from the mean for a period further than 15 days out. Once a snowy period gets within shorter range then ya you will see those crazy 20” means but never from the 15-40 day mean.

You need rich ass friends in Steamboat Colorado. Choose wiser.

Last time we had a 30 day period with that favorable a long wave pattern but barely any snow was 2021 the excuse was “but it’s a Nina”. If that happens again in a Nino I accept no excuses. It’s time to burn this place down!

Took a peek at the weekly control for fun. How does this 30 day mean lead to this

Looking at the progression of everything I am increasingly worried I will be missing some "fun" when I have to be out of the area from Feb 2-10th.

I don't think this necessarily hurts us much this year since we're kinda MECS/HECS hunting, that's how Nino's work. If we don't get at least one MECS level storm were very unlikely to have an above avg snowfall year. But a thought I've been having watching it take two waves and a week to recover the thermal profile over eastern North America...and having watched this same thing play out several times in recent years...one of the biggest reasons why we've lost a lot of the 3-6/4-8 type storms of years past is that when its warm its so freaking warm, that it takes weeks for the thermal boundary to recover and set the stage for snow...and often in years where a better pattern is transient we waste the whole window.

Been snowing off an on all morning, had a dusting on the ground from last night. 33 degrees now

The offense has become incredibly predictable. It was never complicated, always relied on simply having better players and letting them win their 1 on 1s. Problem is teams have had 2 years now to take away those advantages, double team, crash the box on those QB draws...it's just not working as well anymore. But I still think wasting 5 plays a game on deep balls is a big part of it also. They might not be as prolific as last year still but they would be a lot better if they focused on taking what defenses are giving them and not wasting 5 plays a game forcing a deep pass into double coverage. I am not very impressed with their offensive coaching. Anyone can design a decent offense with the skill players they have...they seem unable to adapt now that teams have come up with ways to limit them. That's pretty bad considering how good the talent is across the board on offense.

Until they are willing to adapt on offense this will continue. There isn't too much they can do about the defense, they were weak up the middle in the back 7 to begin with then injuries made it worse. But on offense they have refused to adapt to a change defenses have made. Ever since AJ and Devonte went off earlier this season teams are playing a lot of 2 high safety and taking away whichever receiver goes deep and in some cases even double teaming them both! And yet they continue to launch deep balls into that double coverage even when someone is wide open underneath. They ended 3 drives last night doing that. Once on 3rd down when they passed up a wide open Devonte for a first down and threw a bomb to a double covered AJ. And twice late in the game when they threw and INT on a first down bomb for no reason. How much of that is on Hurts and how much is coaching I can't say. Obviously its some of both. But their philosophy needs to change, if they keep attempting deep balls when that is exactly what the defense is trying to take away the results will be the same.

Here’s the thing about these warminista trolls….they imply that for us to get any “real” wintery period we first need a -epo/pan that dumps arctic cross polar air into the west and central US which lays down expansive snow cover, then after that we need a -nao to develop and the epo ridge to transition into a pna ridge shifting the cold east and locking it under the nao. Then if we are lucky and that happens as the mjo is slowly progressing into 8/1/2 but not too strongly and not too weak either and it has to stall and spend like a month in phase 8/1 and then we need the Stj to also be active and then if the SPV has a SSW and the tPV couples and with a lot of luck and timing and if no solar flare comes along to ruin it we have a slim chance at snow! Now here’s the thing…going on the last 7 years they’ve been mostly right. Yea we’ve lucked into random snows here and there but we haven’t really had a truly snowy period in there. Nothing like Jan/Feb 1996, Jan 2000, 2003, 2009/10, 2014, Feb/Mar 2015, Jan 2016. Since then the best we can do is mostly one off fluke snows in an otherwise crap pattern. This year is a good test. We finally have favorable pac forcing, along with a favorable qbo and solar. But who knows maybe they’re right and it is THAT hard to get real winter anymore. I doubt it. Even I’m not ready to go there. But if they are right, then it pointless. The things they imply need to happen to get snow…are just ridiculous and not worth tracking if true. But keep in mind Webber is from the Southeast I think which might explain his bias. It is that hard to get snow down there now. They were on the edge of being realistically able to get snow often even 50 years ago. It’s like a unicorn and leprechaun sighting for them mow. Maybe he is just expressing his frustration.

It’s not worth it. You can’t logic someone out of something they didn’t logic themselves into.

Maybe. But maybe 2010 skews our perception. Looking at the 5 best comps 1958 and 2010 the best blocking came in Feb or March. But 1966, 1987 and 2016 the best blocking was in January.

You can contribute anywhere you wish... but over the last 15 years the pattern that lead to every significantly snowy period or MECS+ level event showed up on guidance well past 10 days. Dec 2009, Feb 2010, Jan 2011, Feb 2014, Feb/Mar 2015, Jan 2016, March 2018 (yea that's it, its been that long since we had a legitimately snowy period or a region wide MECS level event) all those periods were being discussed and analyzed when they were 15 days away. Not a single one snuck up on us at like day 5. Maybe the discreet event within those windows did but the pattern that made those storms possible was on guidance way further out. Lately most of our snow has popped up in the medium range, but that is because we've spent 90% of the last 7 years in a horrible crap pattern for snow and the only snow we've had is when we just got really lucky and fluked into it. Yea those won't show up at long ranges. But if we are actually headed for a truly snowy period, as I think we might be, the inception of it should show itself on the long range guidance.

He knows all the pressure points

It's like the bat signal...

This is perception bias. At no point has the GEFS been objectively more accurate than the EPS. Actually, recently there have been some articles implying NCEP is thrilled that recent upgrades have simply made the GFS products more competitive but still clearly in 3rd place. This is by no means a shot at NCEP, they have made significant progress and advancements with their products and they have limitations the ECMWF does not. Yes, there were a few times the EPS showed a better pattern in the long range than the GEFS last winter and it was wrong. But there were also numerous times the GEFS showed a better pattern and was wrong, you just don't remember them because that is the status quo. Additionally most of the times the EPS was wrong it was also in opposition to the GEPS as well...this time the GEPS was in agreement. Finally, last winter the "better looks" also were in conflict with the base state and what we would expect given the enso. This year the better looks are in alignment of what it should look like. In addition to this statement being based on a biased interpretation of reality I also think its not a comparable situation.

I said Deb’s not trolls

The debs got quiet today