Typhoon Tip

It’s already shallowed out to 1004 mb according to WPC

2010 was unusual for tropospheric fold event occurring along the n arc of the cyclonic envelope. More typically that’s associated with the wrap around stinger - hence the phrase ‘sting jet’ There are a lot of examples but 2005 is a good case study of the more typical sting event

this thing's winding down. 'it'll take another 36 hours of family denial before the plugs pulled but it's done

Still, we're likely to average warmer than normal after Tues .. until that fropa late Friday or whenever that occurs. It's a matter of how much. Right now... 70s ought to do it. The GFS flashed us with several runs the other day promoting a bigger show. All we've really done since then is compress those heights - the ridge exertion is still technically there but yeah, the recent guidance are imposing more polar branch than priors.

yup... I wrote about this stuff in that interim storm/Oct thread but since it's a qualitative on the month overall I'm putting it here: Impressive +PNA index by October 10. Does the PNAP respond ...? In November I'd say we're looking at an early winter trigger with this... Mid October? not so sure. But it hearkens to mind an interesting aspect about our climate recency. Multi-source/ heavily agreed upon +3 SD index and it's showing up on the actualized ensemble mean synoptic layouts, as an unusually deep and pervasive negative anomaly axis N/NE of HA in the Pacific. It's also been been growing in coherence ... This strike me as a primitive telecon outlook/and attempt by the hemisphere to yet again ... snow in October. I gotta say... I saw it snow in October ..almost never in my first three decades living either in southern lower Michigan or SNE. Since ~ 2005? at least half the Octobers, particularly in the last 15 years, have hosted either a snow or a cryo-supporting atmosphere. Snowing in November has increased as well... though the startling earliness of Octobers - in no small part because it'll be snowing with still autumn foliage in the backdrops - is more impressive. 20 years worth ... let's see if we can add another October to the swelling sample size.

Impressive +PNA index by October 10. Does the PNAP respond ...? In November I'd say we're looking at an early winter trigger with this... Mid October? not so sure. Anyway, multi-source/ heavily agreed upon +3 SD and it's showing up on the actualized ensemble means as an unusually deep and convincingly spatially involving negative anomaly N/NE of HA in the Pacific. It's also been been growing in coherence ... probably should put this in the October thread. This strike me as a primitive telecon outlook/and attempt by the hemisphere to yet again ... snow in October. I gotta say... I saw it snow in October ..almost never in my first three decades living either in southern lower Michigan or SNE. Since ~ 2005? at least half the Octobers, particularly in the last 15 years, have hosted either a snow or a cryo-supporting atmosphere. Snowing in November has increased as well... though the startling nature of it is October - in no small part because it'll be snowing with still autumn foliage in the backdrops. 20 years worth ... let's see if we can add another October to the swelling sample size.

what are the sounding/profiles like compared to the near coastal SSTs

I don't even observe much of a digging trough... This was weakly fed really. The heights just cored out from internal processes more so - though 'some 'thing of a trigger aided. But it seemed to go disproportionately deeper relative to what it started out with, after the fact, giving it an allusion of some spontaneity to it. I suggested the other day there's a transitive/non-linear forcing coming from the large scale - by definition ..that's not always exposed to convention observation techniques. Think 'rogue wave' phenomenon as an analogy. Anyway, it may be too early to claim failure on coverage. The guidance blend really has this maximizing tonight, with 988 -ish mb low approaching from the S; with 1030mb high pivoting E over top while that happens... likely lays in a pretty significant llv jet axis and given that low gets to ISP it's probably going to be pretty nasty over E CT/RI/E Mass per the course.

this next Wed - Sat looking increasingly WAR -like in the GFS's recent guidance... 00z, 06z and 12z runs GGEM's sort of coming around. Euro thinks ala carte mid November

I did not lol ... 12z GFS looks even warmer... By that, just less obstructed in general. 570+ DM thickness both Thu and Fri, with 582 non-hydrostatic isohypsis situate NW of ALB ... It's actually looking more more WAR-like

under one of those Texas Panhandle stationary super cells

Does seem like the lower tropospheric foot of the cyclone's currently snipped off the warm front and drifting just by impression of satellite.

You know ...there are certain things the NAM is good at - though they seldom if ever opportune to showcase for this forum. Namely, 'convective initiation' Another thing, I really like looking at the FOUS grid before winter storms. I know it's error and idiosyncratics. I apply those second nature on the fly and find those numerical aspects to be hugely useful for interpolating weather aspects. So it will be missed. I'm not trying to defend it's synoptic horror show ...particularly beyond 48 hours, no. But when this model goes away, there will be no FOUS gridded product from these other models to be acquainted with.

Correct did that at 06 z too. Looks like there's a low out there ~ 995 mb, replete with a bent back warm front and dangling cold boundary, yet the NAM-aramadingdong thinks it's a 985 Cat 1 hurricane.

There's irony this hour ... because while I essentially agree that this was never tropical this, that, nor the other d-drip worthy ...the NAM is actually attempting to perform one of the most rapid conversions to purer tropical core and even RI cycling than has ever been observed or even thought plausible in the Terran physical manifold. LOL

Broadly conceptualizing ... Baroclinic systems expand there influence due to frontal synoptic forcing... and temperature gradient related mechanics. Barotropic tropical systems are by physics drawn to core ... this thing's going for Category 3 intensity with that NAM look there - probably a erroneous solution.

Yeah, the NAM's pretty much going 90th percentile full profile conversion straight to a tropical entity with that solution As such, it's contracting

I understand how this stuff is to be interpreted. I'm looking at the particulars of the synoptic parameters spanning those 4 days. Thu and Fri in particular are much warmer than normal. not -1 ...more like +15 off of the last two consec runs of the GFS operational. 570 thickness would support 87 F even this late in the year by the way. I've seen 82 F as recent as 2020 up here in SNE on November 7-10 (after it Halloween snowed that year) Indian Summer, under 850s around +14C and sun so sloped one's shadows were 30 feet long. We can definitely still get it done.

That seems diametrical to the current operation guidance, CMC/GFS/EURO All three have 564 to 570+ hydrostatic heights, with W to SW/NW off shore components, Wed thru Sat. Now ...this may differ from ens mean/bulk signaling and telecon indexes therefrom, et al... not sure, haven't checked. But, the operational runs are warmer than just mild those 4 days as of these last 00z guidance

I dunno, was there one scheduled? ha It prompted me to look.. I hadn't been paying attention because of this thing in the foreground but Wed thru Sat this next week look pretty mild? Not sure if that will qualify as a torch, per se. There are differing subjective opinions on what that entails ...but recent GFS runs have 570+ dm thickness centered on a week from today. With 564 to 570 Wed, Thu and Sat .. All four days with general W wind. Some frontal entanglement but looks weak with very little actual CAA Fwiw. The Euro's bit more aggressive with a cold front on Friday but still doing so amid a warm anomaly in the ambience doesn't send a very chilly vibe. 570+ before the front, 562 behind with WNW isn't the same as having a high pressure parked N imparting days of chilly ENE like this week.

It's almost like a TUTT on steroids in some ways.

By small amounts ...some more coherent than others, the guidance were too deep/structurally evolved for what is observed at 12z May or may not be indicative of much. We'll see. We may be disappointed in Now-cast ranges. I'm not completely sold on how far above pedestrian inclemency this will be. I think the lunar tides and surface feed-back should be fun either way. Op ed that no one asked for but ... my original impression of this scenario from 2 or 3 days back was that it was dubiously too amplified in the guidance. Two main reasons for suspecting so ... 1, the total S/W wave mechanics feeding into the region were very weak. As far as I can tell that still seems to be the case. At the time this was a bit of a head scratch as to what was driving this ordeal. The best I could surmise was that this was a very (if perhaps unusually so) non-linear in origin. The circulation mode from the eastern Pac across N/A is technically is in a strong, albeit transient, negative PNAP. The polar branch retreated N very quickly, earlier in the week - so fast it left a weakness pearled out from the S Lake through the mid Atlantic.. Similar to a "pinch cut-off" you see in April climo - but it is doing it amid a higher ambient height medium. You realize, the hydrostats are in the mid 560s during this - we've been close to 90 F at the surface with 566 dm thickness before! Yet, it's so raw.. It's bizarre, maybe some tized aspects going on... Anyway, a ridge from James Bay clear to Florida would be geophysically hard to maintain, particularly when the flow around it is not that strong. So the heights inside 'implode' ... My feel on that is that the models were over assessing this ambient, large scaled mass balancing response, as a total forcer. 2, the other reason is much simpler ... guidance et al tend to shed amplitude as they move events from the extended toward the short lead periods. It's really quite a dependable corrective behavior. It's never been abundantly clear why they do this, but I suspect it has something to do with not yet seeing the emergence of noise/offsets/and interferences that will inexorably arise - they only see the system with the most prominent physical signature out in time. If, then, the prominence is the only thing there is, they are maximizing it. Something like this...

A "projector theory" of sorts is probably an easy back into when the "holographism" idea was put forth. Where is the image coming from then ..etc. Different processes in getting there, though. The ontological manifestation of reality in my Sci Fi idea is that every step after the Plank unit communication, creates a new layer of synergism ... with new synergistic foci. This is why birth happens at our level ... one among all actions traceable to the first primal creation. Those then interact, because their progenitor foci also interacted, and on and on... producing new layers with new foci interactions. Incomprehensibly large numbers of synergistic products later ... the naked tree against the gray winter sky looks identical to a higher resolution rendering of a river's complete water basin. And hence ... the "inheritance" I was describing in the earlier missive is exposed, as is reality. hint hint... nothing is truly unique or original. The primitive mind - perhaps - categorizes as a survival tactic, but then is imprisoned for eternity in a perception that the categorization describes reality. The mathematics is reused and repurposing, but it's just describing the relationships of the synergistic field - which means we're certainly species -capable of perceiving that something is going on that connects the stars. So..okay, my idea may bear some semblance to your Loop QT - and in fact, ...I think I saw a 5 minute conjecture on that either in a meme, or on the Science channel with a Sean Carol type - though not him... Can't specifically recall, but I can understand why you think it may be similar.

ah, gotcha Yeah, and I'm also waiting on the NAM's dependable NW bias to kick in, too. we'll see

Surf should be fun. Don't need those ( likely ) hyperbolic ideas of "90 mph" wind gust coming out of some the usual weather pundits to be a substantial ocean risk for the shores. This looks like a 48 hours of sustained 35 mph integrating energy into the tumult. What do the lunar guys say?