January Storm Potentials

[HM]

I also feel as if the mega-strong Niño is the best way to alter what looks like a colder pattern because of -AO/-NAO. Didn't we even have a -AO in 97-98, but most of the cold ended up in Siberia since the tropical Pacific forcing and resultant EPO pattern was so terrible? I seem to remember that 97-98 and 09-10 both had a really strong PV over Siberia, with some of the only below avg temperature anomalies on the globe in that region (esp. in the case of 97-98).

We also didn't have such a strong solar minimum in 1998...

Once again, the point is that the terrestrial factors trumped the strict solar or HT relationship in that winter. The AO/NAO were not all that positive in any of the winters where the variables were against each other and some were hedging toward a very -NAO state. In 97-98, the TNH pattern involved with ENSO simply muted every other signal. When the positive height anomaly is sitting over southern Canada, I don't consider that the same thing, even after CPC calculates it and gets something negative.

Then of course there is 68-69 which was a very -NAO winter and came when there was no solar minimum.

[Analog96]

Once again, the point is that the terrestrial factors trumped the strict solar or HT relationship in that winter. The AO/NAO were not all that positive in any of the winters where the variables were against it each other and some were hedging toward a very -NAO state. In 97-98, the TNH pattern involved with ENSO simply muted every other signal. When the positive height anomaly is sitting over southern Canada, I don't considering that the same thing, even after CPC calculates it and gets something negative.

Then of course there is 68-69 which was a very -NAO winter and came when there was no solar minimum.

How strong was the NAO signal in 1997-98? I am trying to figure some things out, from a correlation standpoint.

[The_Global_Warmer]

shouldn't the sun play a pivotal role in the Earth's weather?

and wouldn't any earth climate indicator change some if the power of the sun changes?

[HM]

How strong was the NAO signal in 1997-98? I am trying to figure some things out, from a correlation standpoint.

It was basically neutral. You can get all the raw numbers yourself from the CPC, which is what I had to do to get you numbers.

Dec was -0.96, Jan was +0.39, Feb was -0.11 and March was +0.87 from the CPC.

El Niños, by their structure, tend to produce a very warm polar height field. It is not all that amazing that the NAO was this low in 97-98 or in any El Niño. But the clients in America don't give a crap about you explaining that when the entire country is blazing and the NAO doesn't seem to matter. Early winter Greenland blocking did develop in 1997-98 because of the HT effect, but it didn't seem to matter. December 1998 and December 2009 were quite opposite looking in the end. Then of course, 1968 had a -NAO December, too with a much more active sun. However, the QBO and El Niño combination was there for early blocking.

My rants in this thread aren't to say something is more powerful than another. It is just to say, sometimes a factor's weight can change depending upon the whole picture.

[HM]

shouldn't the sun play a pivotal role in the Earth's weather?

and wouldn't any earth climate indicator change some if the power of the sun changes?

The sun is just about the most important variable for why we have weather...last I checked.

[Snow Wizard]

Once again, the point is that the terrestrial factors trumped the strict solar or HT relationship in that winter. The AO/NAO were not all that positive in any of the winters where the variables were against each other and some were hedging toward a very -NAO state. In 97-98, the TNH pattern involved with ENSO simply muted every other signal. When the positive height anomaly is sitting over southern Canada, I don't consider that the same thing, even after CPC calculates it and gets something negative.

Then of course there is 68-69 which was a very -NAO winter and came when there was no solar minimum.

Funny you should mention 1968-69. I was just going to ask you about that winter. Extreme negative NAO, El Nino, and the Pacific NW got pounded by brutal cold and snow. How did that happen?

[HM]

Funny you should mention 1968-69. I was just going to ask you about that winter. Extreme negative NAO, El Nino, and the Pacific NW got pounded by brutal cold and snow. How did that happen?

There were some La Niña characteristics to that event. The combination of the deep/classic GOA cold pool / -PDO and the constant -dAAM/dt surges (only good positive surge was mid Dec) focused the low anomaly toward western North America. Then add in the El Niño / -NAO combination and most of E/C Canada was above normal. This just forced the trough over the western USA. Regardless of what the trans-niño index says or what the individual indices were, the forcing was located well east away from the Dateline. The forcing was acting like a major east-based event which focused the low anomaly well east of normal.

So, between the strong -PDO, -dAAM/dt surges, -NAO and east-based forcing, the Pacific NW rocked it.

[Harry]

Once again, the point is that the terrestrial factors trumped the strict solar or HT relationship in that winter. The AO/NAO were not all that positive in any of the winters where the variables were against each other and some were hedging toward a very -NAO state. In 97-98, the TNH pattern involved with ENSO simply muted every other signal. When the positive height anomaly is sitting over southern Canada, I don't consider that the same thing, even after CPC calculates it and gets something negative.

Then of course there is 68-69 which was a very -NAO winter and came when there was no solar minimum.

I think one of the major differences is that min was so very short lived and thus lesser effects on the climate. So yeah it was most likely much easier to trump the solar signal. To use 96-97/97-98 as a comparison i don't think is such a great idea and thus a bad example. But that's me.

[HM]

I think one of the major differences is that min was so very short lived and thus lesser effects on the climate. So yeah it was most likely much easier to trump the solar signal. To use 96-97/97-98 as a comparison i don't think is such a great idea and thus a bad example. But that's me.

I'm not sure why this is a difficult concept. All I am saying with these statements is that you can trump any signal. That's it...I wasn't making any other claims. As Brian said, sometimes you can get excited by something that has been working and run with it too long. It will ultimately burn you.

These posts weren't meant to say anything else. I think you know my intentions and I think you are well aware of my thoughts on how powerful the sun is...I'm just warning that sometimes a good run of a strong signal will burn...and no pun intended with that.

If you guys look at the solar wind, which has been a proposed proxy by many, for 97-98, it actually dipped quite low. Yeah nothing is as low as this period but it dipped pretty down there. The point is that you can't make linear connections all the time because it may not work next time.

[Ginx snewx]

I don't know any long ranger who thought we were not headed for longer term -NAO state. Any who thought this probably should find something else to do, as that has been very clear with or without solar. There is much, much more to LR forecasting though than "low solar = blocking". Where is the blocking located? How will other factors modulate the blocking? Will these other factors be able to overpower the solar signal? Many, many questions that solar alone cannot and will never be able to explain. There is no way around it, but go ahead and think otherwise if you are inclined to do so.

Oh no Brian I agree with you very much so. I am speaking with specificity about this year. Many many Mets underestimated the depth of cold in the country, the abundance of precip and the sustaining power of a - AO regime. Computer seasonal models like the Euro were amazingly bad, our understanding of the connectivity of all of the variables is just scratching the surface. My only point was persistence of the depth of solar minimum led ME to believe this winter,that the suns output would be the major driver over all other indices. So far so good.

[NJwinter23]

I'm not sure why this is a difficult concept. All I am saying with these statements is that you can trump any signal. That's it...I wasn't making any other claims. As Brian said, sometimes you can get excited by something that has been working and run with it too long. It will ultimately burn you.

These posts weren't meant to say anything else. I think you know my intentions and I think you are well aware of my thoughts on how powerful the sun is...I'm just warning that sometimes a good run of a strong signal will burn...and no pun intended with that.

If you guys look at the solar wind, which has been a proposed proxy by many, for 97-98, it actually dipped quite low. Yeah nothing is as low as this period but it dipped pretty down there. The point is that you can't make linear connections all the time because it may not work next time.

Great thread. Would you say that there is a lag effect with when the solar min period begins/peaks and when it can possibly have an effect on the AO/NAO or weather pattern in general? Or that maybe it isn't the magnitude of the solar min that is most important as much as it is the length in time of that min? If so could that have also played into the 97-98 disaster of a winter that I hate talking about lol?

[SnowGoose69]

Great thread. Would you say that there is a lag effect with when the solar min period begins/peaks and when it can possibly have an effect on the AO/NAO or weather pattern in general? Or that maybe it isn't the magnitude of the solar min that is most important as much as it is the length in time of that min? If so could that have also played into the 97-98 disaster of a winter that I hate talking about lol?

97-98 and 09-10 were similar in the aspect of how active the storm track was....if you look back at the 97-98 storm tracks you would probably be shocked to see how many storms took ideal tracks for snow along I-95 but the cold air was as absent as is physically possible in the winter months...some events I could not find any sub zero 850s anywhere in the lower 48.....09-10 was about 5 degrees colder at 850mb every event outside of 12/19 which was the coldest event overall probably the entire winter at 850...really the only event that came close to fitting the KU 850 temp range.

[Typhoon Tip]

It was basically neutral. You can get all the raw numbers yourself from the CPC, which is what I had to do to get you numbers.

Dec was -0.96, Jan was +0.39, Feb was -0.11 and March was +0.87 from the CPC.

El Niños, by their structure, tend to produce a very warm polar height field. It is not all that amazing that the NAO was this low in 97-98 or in any El Niño. But the clients in America don't give a crap about you explaining that when the entire country is blazing and the NAO doesn't seem to matter. Early winter Greenland blocking did develop in 1997-98 because of the HT effect, but it didn't seem to matter. December 1998 and December 2009 were quite opposite looking in the end. Then of course, 1968 had a -NAO December, too with a much more active sun. However, the QBO and El Niño combination was there for early blocking.

My rants in this thread aren't to say something is more powerful than another. It is just to say, sometimes a factor's weight can change depending upon the whole picture.

Curious: How is this conclusion is come by (bold)? The AO and NAO correlations I've seen are actually negative for all for NINO districts for January and February. They are ~ +0.05 for December, which is actually indistinguishable from incoherency. Now granted, ~ -0.2 as in any solid-state physical study is by nature of statistical inference a weak correlation, but...sufficed it is to say, considering we are dealing with the stochastics of an inherently non solid state chaos-prone atmosphere that tends to offer some confidence that there is something to those results. I wouldn't go into brain surgery with an instrument that has a correlation coefficients for success that is +2, no... lol

Anyway, that aside, RE the storm in play: I do not normally post out here in the generalized forum but I have also been discussing this event with some interested in one of New England sub forum. The gist was:

I just reviewed the other data sources. There certainly is a decent signal coming from the CPC and now the CDC (they finally updated there products), for another interval of cyclogen around the eastern U.S. during the D7-10.

The Euro as most are aware has some teasers leading, but then an impressive Miller A bomb that stem wounds seaward. That system would probably have a shot at being a super freak regardless of where it goes...

The Canadian wants to do something closer to the 7th, with weird hyper jet max swinging around an impressive -3 or -4SD SPV - eh, that's harder to swallow. The latter ECM uses a Pac injection through the western quasi-PNAP ridge closer to the 10D. I suppose the period in question should see a relaxed or relaxing mid-level velocity over the deep south and FL because the NAO is rising (as also signaled by the west retrograde as discussed), and that offers better digging potential as whole, so neither idea cannot be discounted entirely.

The deterministic GFS has no clue at the moment, but seeing as a half the ensemble members at least hinting at the ECM-like solution that usually means a system lurks in the genetics of the pattern ...just waiting for some trigger to bring it physically presented.

Eh, it's obviously kind of absurd to discuss specific model presentations for an event 7 to 10 days out, but I am a big time believer in the usefulness of pattern recognition/detection, as many of my longer more explained discussions have demonstrated in the past I hope. I like the heavily clustered 21 member GFS PNA +.25SD spike over neutral during a fast flow regime, particularly when the NAO is rising. This is very similar, btw, to that which led the last historic deal.

[stormtracker]

The GFS is ridiculous. Last night, it tried by moving the sw out...now its cutting it off. Every other run its markedly different with this feature.

[Amped]

The GFS is ridiculous. Last night, it tried by moving the sw out...now its cutting it off. Every other run its markedly different with this feature.

It drops the Polar vortex on top of us unfortunately, squashing any chance of a strong Noreaster. You can ignore whats going on upstream when this happens.

[Ji]

The GFS is ridiculous. Last night, it tried by moving the sw out...now its cutting it off. Every other run its markedly different with this feature.

That's our money in the bank ull baby

[Ji]

Gfs shows endless cold air. La Nina baby

[Rainshadow]

Cool find uncle. As far as solar goes, it looks like this year was on the descending stage. The min wasn't until August 1913. I remember a few summers ago, 1912 became an awesome analog for the solar levels and volcanism. It nailed the cold Midwest.

HM,

As a climo FYI December 1909 the largest single (mdt/stg) nina snowfall event in PHL at 21".

[Analog96]

It was basically neutral. You can get all the raw numbers yourself from the CPC, which is what I had to do to get you numbers.

Dec was -0.96, Jan was +0.39, Feb was -0.11 and March was +0.87 from the CPC.

El Niños, by their structure, tend to produce a very warm polar height field. It is not all that amazing that the NAO was this low in 97-98 or in any El Niño. But the clients in America don't give a crap about you explaining that when the entire country is blazing and the NAO doesn't seem to matter. Early winter Greenland blocking did develop in 1997-98 because of the HT effect, but it didn't seem to matter. December 1998 and December 2009 were quite opposite looking in the end. Then of course, 1968 had a -NAO December, too with a much more active sun. However, the QBO and El Niño combination was there for early blocking.

My rants in this thread aren't to say something is more powerful than another. It is just to say, sometimes a factor's weight can change depending upon the whole picture.

Good, so if the NAO signal was neutral, that basically proves what I thought to be true all along. IF the NAO signal is neutral in a strong ENSO, the ENSO will overwhelm the pattern. However, this year and last, we see what a strong NAO will do to an ENSO, at least along the US East Coast.

[Rainshadow]

I don't know any long ranger who thought we were not headed for longer term -NAO state. Any who thought this probably should find something else to do, as that has been very clear with or without solar. There is much, much more to LR forecasting though than "low solar = blocking". Where is the blocking located? How will other factors modulate the blocking? Will these other factors be able to overpower the solar signal? Many, many questions that solar alone cannot and will never be able to explain. There is no way around it, but go ahead and think otherwise if you are inclined to do so.

Well stated Brian.

Happy New Year eveybody!

[varicweather]

Yea Ji, the mean 500mb high at 0z for the gfs and ECMWF both show a lot of blocking ending around 1/09/11 with what looks like cross polar flow.

The 1060mb high east of Alaska looks to contain frigid, vodka cold air; the 850mb temp. maps are impressive too with the cold. How far South

does the cold get? We shall see.

http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~gadomski/ECMWF_0z/hgtcomp.html

[VAwxman]

Oh no Brian I agree with you very much so. I am speaking with specificity about this year. Many many Mets underestimated the depth of cold in the country, the abundance of precip and the sustaining power of a - AO regime. Computer seasonal models like the Euro were amazingly bad, our understanding of the connectivity of all of the variables is just scratching the surface. My only point was persistence of the depth of solar minimum led ME to believe this winter,that the suns output would be the major driver over all other indices. So far so good.

Ahh ok I gotcha now. Yeah so far, so good in that department, no doubt. I was originally skeptical that the low solar would have this kind of impact, but have been proven wrong.

[JBG]

Hopefully until May... 2100 that is!

How about blocking December - March, zonal rest of time?

[okie333]

How about blocking October - April, zonal rest of time?

Fine.

[Isopycnic]

DT's comments.

[NJwinter23]

97-98 and 09-10 were similar in the aspect of how active the storm track was....if you look back at the 97-98 storm tracks you would probably be shocked to see how many storms took ideal tracks for snow along I-95 but the cold air was as absent as is physically possible in the winter months...some events I could not find any sub zero 850s anywhere in the lower 48.....09-10 was about 5 degrees colder at 850mb every event outside of 12/19 which was the coldest event overall probably the entire winter at 850...really the only event that came close to fitting the KU 850 temp range.

Yea I see what you're saying. I went through NARR for that winter and recall a few storms just like that...

http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~gadomski/NARR/1998/us0128.php

This storm is almost comical in the heart of winter. Yes a High started offshore and all, but towards the end of that day with 996 ideally offshore and no subzero 850s anywhere.

[ORH_wxman]

Yea I see what you're saying. I went through NARR for that winter and recall a few storms just like that...

http://www.meteo.psu...1998/us0128.php

This storm is almost comical in the heart of winter. Yes a High started offshore and all, but towards the end of that day with 996 ideally offshore and no subzero 850s anywhere.

That was a big storm for the Apps. I think Beckley WV got 40"+ out of that one. Lack of cold ruined it for lower elevations.

[NJwinter23]

That was a big storm for the Apps. I think Beckley WV got 40"+ out of that one. Lack of cold ruined it for lower elevations.

Very true, there was that pocket of 0C right over the Apps. Interesting storm in the heart of winter, though I try to blackout any memories from this winter.

[Huffwx]

Very true, there was that pocket of 0C right over the Apps. Interesting storm in the heart of winter, though I try to blackout any memories from this winter.

We started as snow in Lyhcburg, had 2 inches and changed to rain. Roanoke had about six and changed to rain-- I only had a weather radio and heard reports of 6 inches in Grayson county and headed west. JUST sw of Roanoke it got so bad I was foreced to stop with wrecks like crazy. I was in Shawsville (Just east of Blacksburg). Had maybe 16 inches total, but it was like this-- 8 inches, change to rain-- 3 inches back to rain. 2 inches back to rain-- 3 inches. In the end it was a sloppy 10 inches on the ground. In the morning, the R/S shot east again in LYH and they had some snow then back to rain as it ended.

[NJwinter23]

We started as snow in Lyhcburg, had 2 inches and changed to rain. Roanoke had about six and changed to rain-- I only had a weather radio and heard reports of 6 inches in Grayson county and headed west. JUST sw of Roanoke it got so bad I was foreced to stop with wrecks like crazy. I was in Shawsville (Just east of Blacksburg). Had maybe 16 inches total, but it was like this-- 8 inches, change to rain-- 3 inches back to rain. 2 inches back to rain-- 3 inches. In the end it was a sloppy 10 inches on the ground. In the morning, the R/S shot east again in LYH and they had some snow then back to rain as it ended.

Sounds like the dynamic cooling storm from hell