RCNYILWX Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Morch Redux? We'll see where the CFS is at this February for March, because here's what it had for March in February 2012: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Morch Redux? We'll see where the CFS is at this February for March, because here's what it had for March in February 2012: The key difference is that this year would favor a Western trough, verbatim that looks like an active severe weather setup vs last winter where it was basically over the top warm everywhere including Western US and Canada starting in February last winter, where as this winter I don't see Canada being above normal all February. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCNYILWX Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 The key difference is that this year would favor a Western trough, verbatim that looks like an active severe weather setup vs last winter where it was basically over the top warm everywhere including Western US and Canada starting in February last winter, where as this winter I don't see Canada being above normal all February. Agreed, and it also shows up in the precip anomalies for March, with a fairly significant wet signal over the subforum area. The latest daily run of the CFS for February actually came in cold for everywhere but for Hudson Bay and east and southeast, after featuring a warm signal over the west and up to Alaska for several days. The forecast height anomalies are pointing to a strong signal for a -NAO in February, which wouldn't support above normal in Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Agreed, and it also shows up in the precip anomalies for March, with a fairly significant wet signal over the subforum area. The latest daily run of the CFS for February actually came in cold for everywhere but for Hudson Bay and east and southeast, after featuring a warm signal over the west and up to Alaska for several days. The forecast height anomalies are pointing to a strong signal for a -NAO in February, which wouldn't support above normal in Canada. I certainly like and agree with a lot of what the CFS is pumping out for the next 2 months, it could be a quick flip from wintry to severe going into spring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Good stuff guys, yeah that set of graphics definitely raises some eyebrows, that setup + above normal precip = trouble usually (barring an immovable Central US ridge which will likely be much harder to get with Feb being the way it is progged currently vs. last year). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCNYILWX Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 Good stuff guys, yeah that set of graphics definitely raises some eyebrows, that setup + above normal precip = trouble usually (barring an immovable Central US ridge which will likely be much harder to get with Feb being the way it is progged currently vs. last year). Even the temp anomaly and height anomaly plots for April are hinting at troughing to the west and ridging to the east, although there's not much of a precip signal. Another thing is, while severe weather could be the byproduct of an active pattern, on the positive side, it would also mean much more rain than last spring to make a dent in the drought heading into summer. I'm personally cheering for the CFS to be right w.r.t. March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyhb Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Not a big fan of the new CPC monthlies, which show a drier than normal Gulf Coast, through March, April and May, with the above average precip focused quite far north...that type of pattern screams moisture advection problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.