Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,608
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Vesuvius
    Newest Member
    Vesuvius
    Joined

January 2015 Pattern Discussion


CapturedNature

Recommended Posts

The GEFS aren't that bad...the EC ensmebles are better, but the GEFS do win sometimes. They beat the EC ensembles for this upcoming week back in the 11-15 range.

 

At any rate, its usually not one pattern verifying vs the other, but some sort of blend.

Maybe tropical forcing favours the GEFS more so than the EC?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I can't help but think that solar has been the turd in the punch bowl this winter, considering so many predictive indices implied a blocky winter.  Yes, it is a weak maximum, but it is a maximum nonetheless.  2009-2010 was the winter of too much blocking...a winter of virtually no sunspot activity.  

 

Has anyone seen a study correlating the AO state to the solar cycle?  I'm too lazy to do it myself...and there is too much football to be watched today...

 

post-837-0-40343200-1420129210_thumb.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help but think that solar has been the turd in the punch bowl this winter, considering so many predictive indices implied a blocky winter.  Yes, it is a weak maximum, but it is a maximum nonetheless.  2009-2010 was the winter of too much blocking...a winter of virtually no sunspot activity.  

 

Has anyone seen a study correlating the AO state to the solar cycle?  I'm too lazy to do it myself...and there is too much football to be watched today...

 

attachicon.gifcomparison_recent_cycles.png

 

I believe it is a big factor....I've noticed the atmosphere seems to respond in a relative way to solar increases...as if the atmosphere almost knows its a maximum relative to recent activity despite the fact on the scale of flareups it might be small.  So small or not the atmosphere reacts the same way it did in 1999 or 1989.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12z GFS turned meh once it entered the northeast. Was the euro better last night?

Does this have any similarities to 1/26/05? The clipper that dropped 6-12" after the blizzard that dropped 20-40".

 

I don't think so. I mean the air is so cold that .1" QPF could be 2-3". But, you can't have tons of dry air either at the surface. Still time though for some improvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The changes in the 6-10 day valid from 01/00z and the 11-15 day valid 27/00z are astounding. The biggest change was on the EC ensemble, but both sets of guidance were pretty bad. Of course you can't say who the "winner" or "loser" is yet, but I guess what I mean is that we may not be done with changes.  The 6-10 day was way colder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There needs to be way more digging, the trough is simply too shallow...its just going to washout when it crosses the terrain...need it to drop down into the MA but right now I don't see that

 

I used the analogy yesterday, when consternation suspected it's demise too .. (heh-heh) that the whole set up was like skipping rocks off the surface of a pond.  Only in this paradigm, the rock is the N stream S/W, and the pond is the seemingly immovable SE ridge.

 

For the general reader...

I really think this last 7 to 10 days of pattern monitoring, and posting ... endlessly and tireless admonishing over this, or bi-polar flights of joy and fantasy over that ...all of it. It's all been a big waste of time-sucking loss. You know that comedic meme-expression, "That's 10 minutes of my life I wish I had back."  People may not realize this, but this pattern has just sucked 10 days of your life away.  You really could have walked away and not been involved for like the last 9 days and you would have missed nothing.  

 

Nothing has changed.  The ridge in the west (as perhaps rooted in the erstwhile negative PNA) has been too far west and still is. Meanwhile, people are blaming it on the NAO, which isn't the problem.  Rossby wave teachings have no say in matters, I guess, but dynamics taught us that you can't sustain a long wave from off the California coast all the way back east to Delaware.  That's why the flow's been split over the Rockies. It's why the the cut-off evolved in the SW all along, and it's why we are then stuck with this obscenely proportion 594dm ridge (In December no less!) off the SE U.S. coast, as well as an inland storm track.  None of which is caused by the NAO domain space.

 

Just understanding this 50,000 foot overview... it's laughable all the hand wringing and rationalizing, and spinning, the delusional hopes of this thing ever going S of our latitude.  My god. Why did the models ever even attempt that when this was still extended times.  Of course the -NAO might and probably would have helped, but I bet dimes to donuts we don't get -NAOs with this sort of Pacific/CONUS construct, and probably for a mathematical reason at that.  

 

The upshot is that nothing lasts forever, so this pattern will eventually go away.  In fact, the CDC teleconnector's already showing that.  Scott mentioned the PNA rising, and it's doing so in pulses ...positive by D10.  The EPO is also going way and becoming neutral.  The implications on the flow mean that we are most likely going to lose the wave breaking over the NW Territories/Alaska, and so cold loading from that high latitude source goes away.  But, that doesn't mean we don't have cold available to serve in regions of cyclogenesis (where ever they may be).  Canada is snow packed with long nights.  Besides, if you want a good snow fall, f this 9F at 4am schit ... you don't need it that harsh.  I'd take an event entrance thermal profile of 34F at the surface, with -9 in the snow growth region of a 30+unit VV signature any day.  You'd be 28F in blowing snow within a couple hours of onset. Marginality is way underrated.  People want these idealized pattern appeals and thus will wait a long, long, long-long, long, long time.

 

But anyway, the neutralized EPO/+PNA out in time means that the ridge wobbling out around 130 W goes bye-bye, and it becomes more likely that a new positive height node evolves over the rough longitude of the Rocky Mountains. Much better for storm chances here in the E -- at least, storm chances that people want. In fact, with such a new design ... you probably DON'T want a negative NAO, at least not one that too strong .. because you would be replacing one suppressed, fast regime with another.

 

You really want the NAO to more neutral/negative as the winter bias.  That way it vacillates around 0, occasionally dipping ... and loading cold at reachable distances, but not drilling cold heights too far S along the EC.  The primary cold loading pattern for N/A is the EPO, though.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tip, the extremely positive NAO teleconnects to a strong SE ridge...so I don't think you can say the NAO isn't a problem...it certainly is part of it IMHO.

 

That said, we've had patterns extremely similar to this produce snow here...not deep coastal lows, but overrunning events...and as we call them on the board SWFEs (southwest flow events).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tip, the extremely positive NAO teleconnects to a strong SE ridge...so I don't think you can say the NAO isn't a problem...it certainly is part of it IMHO.

 

That said, we've had patterns extremely similar to this produce snow here...not deep coastal lows, but overrunning events...and as we call them on the board SWFEs (southwest flow events).

 

That's the mathematics, Will. The teleconnection doesn't describe the forcing, it describes states one is likely to find.

 

The Pac/CONUS construct led the NAO, because the dynamics/dimensions of wave spacing ... you can't have -NAO. 

 

Aside from the fact, that NAO specific teleconnector values, as they stand right now, would mean nothing if the PNA was positive.  

 

Part, sure ... but I still insist it isn't the real problem. The balance of the issue is the -PNA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the mathematics, Will. The teleconnection doesn't describe the forcing, it describes states one is likely to find.

 

The Pac/CONUS construct led the NAO, because the dynamics/dimensions of wave spacing ... you can't have -NAO. 

 

 

You are implying that a -NAO can't occur because of the EPO ridge just off the west coast?

 

I'm not sure I agree. The NAO domain is really large...a -NAO can be in many forms. Whether it's an Iceland block or a Davis Straight back to Hudson Bay block...that's a massive area to space out any wavelengths. What we have is an extremely deep vortex over almost the entire domain that goes right up into the stratosphere...so I think a large part of the positive NAO is independent of the EPO ridge.

 

I do agree with most of your other points though...whether we agree or not on the source of the SE ridge and +NAO, it's certainly an issue for getting shortwaves to deepen over the eastern US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are implying that a -NAO can't occur because of the EPO ridge just off the west coast?

 

I'm not sure I agree. The NAO domain is really large...a -NAO can be in many forms. Whether it's an Iceland block or a Davis Straight back to Hudson Bay block...that's a massive area to space out any wavelengths. What we have is an extremely deep vortex over almost the entire domain that goes right up into the stratosphere...so I think a large part of the positive NAO is independent of the EPO ridge.

 

I do agree with most of your other points though...whether we agree or not on the source of the SE ridge and +NAO, it's certainly an issue for getting shortwaves to deepen over the eastern US.

 

It could also just be a matter of "the chicken or the egg" thing, too.  

 

I mean, there is a teleconnection between the Indian Ocean and the NAO, for cryin' out loud.  And since the only link (that I know of; perhaps someone else has a clue here) between those two regions is transitively via the MJO wave.  

 

Heh, makes some sense.  The MJO has been moving slowly, albeit strongly, through the Maritime sub-continent, which is in the Phase 4 winter death part of the Wheeler diagram.  So in a sense... yeah, doesn't a -NAO fit that?  

 

Having said that, so too does the -PNA, and since the PNA domain is between the MJO and the NAO... 

 

Look, it's probably a moot point because it is all connected?  seriously - it's just a matter of separations and degrees. I think we can agree that the NAO state isn't helping -- I actually put that statement there, myself, a couple days ago Talking to Ray. I just based on my own understanding of the grander scaled system, I don't believe the NAO is majority influence.  Perhaps it's if it is not moot, it is a 60/40 type of PNA/NAO onus.  70/30 ...something. 

 

The ridge too far west aspect, DEFINITELY is not there because of the NAO...and that by wave space mathematics alone, has a trough over Texas, and so the SE ridge is happening as a latent heat result.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, but never say never. Check out how paltry 1969 was right through January......now, we certainty don't want to rely on that, but....

Well another winter (different ENSO but we'll if that's relevant) is 1959-60. The march 1960 blizzard was worth the wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...