Damage In Tolland Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Baseball season is coming up quickly now. Won't have a mud season unless we get alot of rain this month... It'll give us all a chance to get lawns started early. Only 3 positives I see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 But then you go here and the wave looks good. Just weird. http://www.cpc.ncep....clivar_wh.shtml Euro Ens on the CPC site look pretty good with the wave traversing through P8 into P1 (or P9 as Kevin would say). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Euro Ens on the CPC site look pretty good with the wave traversing through P8 into P1 (or P9 as Kevin would say). Totally in odds with its forecast though, something is amiss in all this modeling. Guess we just do the 3-4 day thing but all winter the CMET had the best scores on that octant forecast, well Kevs nuevotant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Euro Ens on the CPC site look pretty good with the wave traversing through P8 into P1 (or P9 as Kevin would say). But why the discrepancy on the Hovmoller? I know those MJO diagrams incorporate different schemes, but that's misleading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
am19psu Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 A post last week on the main board stated the CMET was the best prediction wise all winter, if that is the case, MEH Do you have a link for that? I have a very difficult time believing the Canadian model is the best at forecasting anything, let alone something as difficult as the MJO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Euro ensembles and P8 MJO composite. You can see in the composite there's not much of a PNA correlation from MJO in P8. What's missing in the Euro Ens is the -NAO. In fact it's been replaced by a piece of the PV over Davis Strait. Epic fail. Only in winter 2011-2012.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 And again, the wave analyzed on the EC and the forecast seems weird too, when you look how quickly those blues go to yellows near 160 East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Euro ensembles and P8 MJO composite. You can see in the composite there's not much of a PNA correlation from MJO in P8. What's missing in the Euro Ens is the -NAO. In fact it's been replaced by a piece of the PV over Davis Strait. Epic fail. Only in winter 2011-2012.... I saw that as well, but that still should have more ridging than it shows. This winter....lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mahk_webstah Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Euro Ens on the CPC site look pretty good with the wave traversing through P8 into P1 (or P9 as Kevin would say). I think the only thing to do is to look at what the wave is doing in real time, right now...and scrap any forecast until something looks like it is verifying. Is it in P6 or 7 right now? If so that is where it will be until it moves. No more model forecasts accepted... Lol, so bitter here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nutmegfriar Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Big, big lawn season incoming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
am19psu Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 But why the discrepancy on the Hovmoller? I know those MJO diagrams incorporate different schemes, but that's misleading. This is why I don't like the PS diagrams. You learn so much more from actually looking at the placement of the OLR anomalies than how they map to the RMMs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 This is why I don't like the PS diagrams. You learn so much more from actually looking at the placement of the OLR anomalies than how they map to the RMMs Are there Hovmollers for Euro out there? I've only seen the phase spaces for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
am19psu Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Are there Hovmollers for Euro out there? I've only seen the phase spaces for them. You can get the Hovmollers for all the models here: http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/CLIVAR/ Here is the Euro, specifically: http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/CLIVAR/ECMF-obsfanom-olra.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 This is why I don't like the PS diagrams. You learn so much more from actually looking at the placement of the OLR anomalies than how they map to the RMMs Yeah and they make sense as well. I'll definitely pay attention to those going forward. I never really looked too much other than just for casual purposes since I don't need to, but that's an interesting disconnect. I almost treat those RMM diagrams sort of like MEI. MEI incorporates different variable to gauge ENSO and I always thought the RMM did too, but maybe I'm wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryslot Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Snowless Feb enroute I got a front seat on that bus yesterday, The fat lady is in the room Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
am19psu Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Yeah and they make sense as well. I'll definitely pay attention to those going forward. I never really looked too much other than just for casual purposes since I don't need to, but that's an interesting disconnect. I almost treat those RMM diagrams sort of like MEI. MEI incorporates different variable to gauge ENSO and I always thought the RMM did too, but maybe I'm wrong. RMMs are just the first two principal components that explain most of the variance in the OLR pattern (after removing the ENSO signal). If a particular convective pattern doesn't map exactly to the principal components (like this one with the dual -OLR anomalies), the PS is a total red herring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Torchey Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Baseball season is coming up quickly now. Won't have a mud season unless we get alot of rain this month... It'll give us all a chance to get lawns started early. Only 3 positives I see For shiats and giggles I am putting down some iron in the back yard, want to see if it will green up...........Lets go Yanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 RMMs are just the first two principal components that explain most of the variance in the OLR pattern (after removing the ENSO signal). If a particular convective pattern doesn't map exactly to the principal components (like this one with the dual -OLR anomalies), the PS is a total red herring. Gotcha. Thanks for the explanation. If nothing else, since I can't do any short to medium range forecasting which is my bread and butter...this winter has taught me a few things WRT long range..lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Do you have a link for that? I have a very difficult time believing the Canadian model is the best at forecasting anything, let alone something as difficult as the MJO http://www.daculaweather.com/mjo_phase_forecast_anomaly.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
am19psu Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 http://www.daculawea...ast_anomaly.php Interesting. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, considering what I know about the Canadian model. I'd be interested to know how the anomaly correlations are calculated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tropopause_Fold Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 well minimally this is a good thread. LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 You can get the Hovmollers for all the models here: http://www.cpc.ncep....ink/MJO/CLIVAR/ Here is the Euro, specifically: http://www.cpc.ncep....sfanom-olra.gif Hmmm... it's weird that they seem so different from the phase space diagrams. Roundy's hovmoller looks unimpressive as well. Why the discrepency? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baroclinic Zone Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 well minimally this is a good thread. LOL. I agree. I'm enjoying the wealth of knowledge and info being tossed out this AM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Interesting. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, considering what I know about the Canadian model. I'd be interested to know how the anomaly correlations are calculated. To: Operational Modelling CentresFrom: The CAS/WCRP Working Group on Numerical Experimentation (WGNE) andUS-CLIVAR Madden-Julian Oscillation Working GroupDate: January 2008 (revised May 2009)This letter seeks to gain the involvement of Operational Modelling Centres in an activity to monitor and compare numerical model forecasts of the Madden-Julian oscillation (MJO). The activity is a result of discussions and work of the U.S. Climate Variability and Predictability (CLIVAR) programme’s MJO Working Group . The group is co-sponsored by international CLIVAR, and the activity has the support of the Working Group on Numerical Experimentation (WGNE). The aim of the activity is to generate further interest, expertise, and forecast skill on the intraseasonal time scale, with the MJO being the most dominant mode of variability on this time scale. Advances in computing have led to numerical forecast models, either coupled ocean-atmosphere models or atmosphere-only models, being run out to an increasingly extended range beyond 10 days, thus allowing for the examination of this mode. This letter seeks to obtain the input of a small subset of the data from these forecasts, including ensembles, for the computation of an MJO index that measures its evolving state in real time. The activity is seen as an important step for the further realisation of intraseasonal prediction skill, especially in the tropics. The MJO Working Group has already obtained the participation of several Centres (e.g., NCEP, ECMWF, UKMO, ABOM, CMC) , and wishes to use this letter to formalise the process, encourage further participation, and entrain additional Centres.An important element of this activity is the establishment and use of a common MJO index. Such an index provides for uniform and continued assessments of a given model’s MJO capabilities within each Centre, a comparison of MJO forecast skill between Centres, and a means to easily construct a multi-model ensemble forecast for the MJO. The MJO index chosen for this activity followed from deliberations amongst the MJO Working Group in conjunction with input from a number of Centres. The index follows closely that developed by Wheeler and Hendon (2004; hereafter WH04) . The data input into this index are latitudinally-averaged (15S15N) fields of zonal winds at the 850 hPa and 200 hPa levels, and outgoing longwave radiation (OLR). After some pre-processing, these fields are projected onto a pair of observationally-derived global structures of the MJO, giving a pair of numbers to measure its state each day, called the Real-time Multivariate MJO (RMM) indices. The data contribution sought from each Centre is simply three latitudinally-averaged fields (OLR, zonal winds at 200 and 850 hPa) at a 2.5 resolution for each model forecast day and the model analysis, including that of individual forecast ensemble members if available. We seek the input of the field data itself, rather than the RMM indices, to allow for the standardization of the calculation across all contributing models. Details of the required data, and of the RMM index calculation, are provided in Appendices 1 and 2 respectively.The contributed real-time forecast data is intended to be used for: (a) creation of the RMM indices only, with no further use or dissemination of the longitudinally-dependent fields; ( display on the world-wide-web as a trajectory in the RMM phase space (e.g. see attached Figure 1); © creation of a multi-model ensemble of forecasted RMM values; and (d) for calculation of verification statistics by those in the MJO Working Group . Initially this activity was deemed primarily of research interest, but is now seeing some application in an operational setting for NCEP’s weekly MJO update and Global Tropics Benefits/Hazards Assessment (see http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/ghazards/ghaz.shtml) as well as for the Bureau of Meteorology’s weekly Tropical Climate Note (see http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/tropnote/tropnote.shtml). Further standardizing of the forecasts and their illustration along with systematic verification will further benefit the community and increase the activity’s utility.Further details are provided in the attached Appendices. Questions regarding this activity may be directed to: MJO Working Group:Matthew Wheeler; [email protected] Weickmann; [email protected] Waliser (co-chair); [email protected] Sperber (co-chair); [email protected] WGNE Martin Miller; [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Sort of funny if you look at the GEFS and Euro Ens they certainly disagree at the amount of PNA ridging and when it breaks down. What they do agree on is that the -AO dislodges a piece of the PV toward Davis Strait/Hudson Bay which in essence prevents the -NAO from really developing (or becoming west based). Unfortunately that's not a particularly stormy pattern for us IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Sort of funny if you look at the GEFS and Euro Ens they certainly disagree at the amount of PNA ridging and when it breaks down. What they do agree on is that the -AO dislodges a piece of the PV toward Davis Strait/Hudson Bay which in essence prevents the -NAO from really developing (or becoming west based). Unfortunately that's not a particularly stormy pattern for us IMO. Regardless of everything else, the difference out west is pretty remarkable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT Rain Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Regardless of everything else, the difference out west is pretty remarkable. Indeed. The GEFS aren't exactly great but there is a huge difference out west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Regardless of everything else, the difference out west is pretty remarkable. The GEFS are now alone on the island though, even GGEM has reverted.Ugly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tropopause_Fold Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 i think the pattern is so bad, the 12z NAM just decided to quit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginx snewx Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 mixed signals. model mayhem http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/forecasts/teleconn/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.