H5 pattern similarities

[Alpha5]

Just something that was brought to my attention, and it goes to show the potential this pattern has.

Take a look at the H5 setup for the US on Feb 10, 06 (a few days before NYC got buried with 26.9")

Now take a look at what the latest GFS is showing

[tombo82685]

good find, we just need that h5 low further north...i posted the idiv ens members from the 18z in the gfs, thread worth a look about 4 or 5 bring a coastal or affect the northeast with precip

[earthlight]

The patterns are vaguely similar but there are a several problems here. First of all, the pattern prior to the Feb 2006 event featured a PNA which was roaring at just the right time. Look at the ridge on the west coast of the CONUS in 2006 compared to the current prog. We actually have a huge trough ready to crash into the west coast this time around. Secondly, the upper level low over the northeast is hundreds of miles furhter south on the GFS...over New England as opposed to Eastern Canada (and eventually the classic 50/50 position on Feb 11-12). Finally, the shortwave that was responsible for Feb 12 2006 was robust and strong even upon it's entrance to the CONUS as it came over the top of the PNA ridge. As forecasted right now, the shortwave we're watching is extremely weak in comparison. The general idea of the upper level flow is there, but these are pretty dramatic differences and I don't think the result will be anything near the same.

[Alpha5]

The patterns are vaguely similar but there are a several problems here. First of all, the pattern prior to the Feb 2006 event featured a PNA which was roaring at just the right time. Look at the ridge on the west coast of the CONUS in 2006 compared to the current prog. We actually have a huge trough ready to crash into the west coast this time around. Secondly, the upper level low over the northeast is hundreds of miles furhter south on the GFS...over New England as opposed to Eastern Canada (and eventually the classic 50/50 position on Feb 11-12). Finally, the shortwave that was responsible for Feb 12 2006 was robust and strong even upon it's entrance to the CONUS as it came over the top of the PNA ridge. As forecasted right now, the shortwave we're watching is extremely weak in comparison. The general idea of the upper level flow is there, but these are pretty dramatic differences and I don't think the result will be anything near the same.

Yeah, Im not advocating for another 06 storm rather just pointing out that will a little tweaking of the NAO and consequently ULL over the NE, we could have an ok threat. Again, not advocating a redo of 06

[earthlight]

Yeah, Im not advocating for another 06 storm rather just pointing out that will a little tweaking of the NAO and consequently ULL over the NE, we could have an ok threat. Again, not advocating a redo of 06

Understood, I wasn't trying to imply that you were. Just pointing out the differences, as you pointed out the similarities.

[CooL]

Cool find. Look at that pna in 06' on the west coast, it pumps well up into Canada setting up a prime storm track in the east. The pna this time around isnt nearly as potent but like you said, something good can still happen in this pattern.

[isnice]

Notice how the -NAO was much less prevalent in 2006 than it is now. That is what suppresses the 50/50, which is what suppresses our shortwave.

[SnoSki14]

Feb 06 was almost purely PNA driven and the timing with that shortwave and the transient blocking was perfect. As you can see, once the storm left, the pna broke down, the blocking was gone and the east went through a substantial warm up only a few days after that event.

Right now it's mostly about the blocking, where and how it sets up will determine if we get anything.

[NJwinter23]

The patterns are vaguely similar but there are a several problems here. First of all, the pattern prior to the Feb 2006 event featured a PNA which was roaring at just the right time. Look at the ridge on the west coast of the CONUS in 2006 compared to the current prog. We actually have a huge trough ready to crash into the west coast this time around. Secondly, the upper level low over the northeast is hundreds of miles furhter south on the GFS...over New England as opposed to Eastern Canada (and eventually the classic 50/50 position on Feb 11-12). Finally, the shortwave that was responsible for Feb 12 2006 was robust and strong even upon it's entrance to the CONUS as it came over the top of the PNA ridge. As forecasted right now, the shortwave we're watching is extremely weak in comparison. The general idea of the upper level flow is there, but these are pretty dramatic differences and I don't think the result will be anything near the same.

Yeah, this thread was actually a good example of why this storm on Dec. 5th isn't going to happen with the way the model setup is.

[isnice]

Try this out for size. The CMC out 126 hours compares much better with the Feb. 2006 analog.

[earthlight]

Try this out for size. The CMC out 126 hours compares much better with the Feb. 2006 analog.

Still no dice. The confluence is ridiculously far south compared to Feb 2006 and the PNA ridge just doesn't exist.

[Chris L]

The ULL and blocking scheme is putrid in February 2006.... Its more like February 2010 with the blocking, minus the STJ (El Nino).

[jrodd321]

Just something I found, and it goes to show the potential this pattern has.

Take a look at the H5 setup for the US on Feb 10, 06 (a few days before NYC got buried with 26.9")

Now take a look at what the latest GFS is showing

Great example. Another situation where the models didn't catch onto the storm until like 2 days before it happened.

[isnice]

Still no dice. The confluence is ridiculously far south compared to Feb 2006 and the PNA ridge just doesn't exist.

You've got to be kidding me, right? The PNA ridge is enormous on the CMC. You misread that little dip in the pressure gradients as a mini-trouph. If you follow the outside pressure gradient, you see how enormous that ridge is- exactly like 06'.

[Radders]

Yeah but the CMC shows more of a split flow rather than a robust PNA ridge like 2/2006 doesn't it?

[earthlight]

You've got to be kidding me, right?

My post was in comparison to 2006, and so you're going to compare the CMC's PNA ridge to that?

The 2006 PNA ridge had 570dm heights into Western British Columbia.

The CMC's version of the ridge has the 570dm height contour near San Francisco.

Sorry, no.

[Chris L]

You've got to be kidding me, right? The PNA ridge is enormous on the CMC. You misread that little dip in the pressure gradients as a mini-trouph. If you follow the outside pressure gradient, you see how enormous that ridge is- exactly like 06'.

That is not a classic PNA ridge by any means.

http://www.meteo.psu...122.php#picture

THIS is a classic PNA ridge.

[earthlight]

Here's your imagery if you want a visual.

2006 (Follow the 570 contour all the way into British Columbia)

http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~gadomski/NARR/2006/021100.png

Sorry, but it's just not even close.

[Radders]

Here's your imagery if you want a visual.

2006 (Follow the 570 contour all the way into British Columbia)

http://www.meteo.psu...2006/021100.png

Sorry, but it's just not even close.

That energy diving down over the PNA ridge was absolutely insane!

[Alpha5]

Here's your imagery if you want a visual.

2006 (Follow the 570 contour all the way into British Columbia)

http://www.meteo.psu...2006/021100.png

Sorry, but it's just not even close.

Thats beautiful

Too bad we dont have the PNA on our side, best we can hope for is the displacement of the stupid NAO so the ULL isnt pinned down over the NE

[Chris L]

That energy diving down over the PNA ridge was absolutely insane!

Check January- 22, 23 1987 for even larger PNA ridge.

[earthlight]

That energy diving down over the PNA ridge was absolutely insane!

Yep, that's your storm system, the comparisons to this upcoming event pretty much end with the fact that there's a vortex in Eastern Canada and a semblance of a ridge out west. Here's a few hours later for old times sake...just a sick upper level set up.

http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~gadomski/NARR/2006/021112.png

[earthlight]

Thats beautiful

Crazy things can happen when you have a polar vortex in that position over Southeast Canada. The one being forecast by most guidance right now is just too far south for anything of importance to get up to this latitude. It's a good start, though, hopefully we can trend in the right direction.

[Radders]

Yep, that's your storm system, the comparisons to this upcoming event pretty much end with the fact that there's a vortex in Eastern Canada and a semblance of a ridge out west. Here's a few hours later for old times sake...just a sick upper level set up.

http://www.meteo.psu...2006/021112.png

Yep, agreed. Unrelated, but another favorite of mine is 1/22/05.. Different set up entirely, but a classic miller B bombing into such a cold air mass

http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~gadomski/NARR/2005/012300.png

Would give anything to see this unfold again.

[earthlight]

Yep, agreed. Unrelated, but another favorite of mine is 1/22/05.. Different set up entirely, but a classic miller B bombing into such a cold air mass

http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~gadomski/NARR/2005/012300.png

Would give anything to see this unfold again.

Touche...but I'll raise you to Feb 2003. Probably won't ever see this again in our lifetime, and that's something I don't like to say. But this setup was just absolutely ridiculous in every sense of the word.

http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~gadomski/NARR/2003/021618.png

[Chris L]

Touche...but I'll raise you to Feb 2003. Probably won't ever see this again in our lifetime, and that's something I don't like to say. But this setup was just absolutely ridiculous in every sense of the word.

http://www.meteo.psu...2003/021618.png

I venture to say February 2010 will not be repeated in our lifetimes than February 2003....

[Chris L]

Now this is a supreme 500 mb setup....

http://www.esrl.noaa...mit=Create+Plot

December 14th 1915....

Holds the 24 hour snow record for New Jersey with 32".

[Radders]

Touche...but I'll raise you to Feb 2003. Probably won't ever see this again in our lifetime, and that's something I don't like to say. But this setup was just absolutely ridiculous in every sense of the word.

http://www.meteo.psu...2003/021618.png

Looking at these past setups is making me get antsy with the current pattern, but it does prove that there are many different setups that can generate a truly memorable storm. The one thing these examples all have in common (as you have already pointed out) is that the confluence is way north of what the models are currently depicting for the upcoming period.

[Chris L]

Looking at these past setups is making me get antsy with the current pattern, but it does prove that there are many different setups that can generate a truly memorable storm. The one thing these examples all have in common (as you have already pointed out) is that the confluence is way north of what the models are currently depicting for the upcoming period.

Check the one I just posted above....

[Radders]

Check the one I just posted above....

Absolute bomb! Now that is definition of a closed H5.. I would love to know the pressure of that surface low.