January 2017 Discussion & Observations

[donsutherland1]

24 minutes ago, bluewave said:

17.7% of the earth has been running above normal for 12 months or more. Our last below normal month was June 2015.

 

 

 

 

That's an amazing statistic.

[Allsnow]

This site always thought Jan 5-10 held some promise. After that the pattern goes to crap and we go above normal. This site is very level headed and not calling for January 85 coast to coast cold 

[danstorm]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

17.7% of the earth has been running above normal for 12 months or more. Our last below normal month was June 2015.

 

 

 

 

I assume that global average should read 8.7 months (not 8.7%) - that is truly remarkable.  

[donsutherland1]

22 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

This site always thought Jan 5-10 held some promise. After that the pattern goes to crap and we go above normal. This site is very level headed and not calling for January 85 coast to coast cold 

The weekend has more promise than Thursday night-Friday. The GFS ensembles now show a mini-spike in the PNA.

[bluewave]

1 hour ago, donsutherland1 said:

That's an amazing statistic.

It seems like we need a very impressive blocking pattern especially during the cold season to achieve a below normal temperature month.

Without a strong blocking pattern in the EPO/PNA, Polar, or AO/NAO regions... the default position is milder than normal.

[bluewave]

33 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

This site always thought Jan 5-10 held some promise. After that the pattern goes to crap and we go above normal. This site is very level headed and not calling for January 85 coast to coast cold 

We were ahead of the curve and the natural gas market had to play catch-up.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/natural-gas-futures-drop-nearly-11-oil-marks-2-week-low-2017-01-03

Natural-gas futures dropped Tuesday, with forecasts for warmer weather dragging prices down by nearly 11% to mark their largest one-day percentage decline since February 2014, according to FactSet data.

 

[PB GFI]

29 minutes ago, Allsnow said:

This site always thought Jan 5-10 held some promise. After that the pattern goes to crap and we go above normal. This site is very level headed and not calling for January 85 coast to coast cold 

No poster in here called for 85 .

 

Go look at the Day 1 thru 5 2 M anomalies days 1 thru 5 and see if thats not coast to coast cold .

 

Page 1 coast to coast cold Jan 5 thru 12 , it will b just that the 5th thru the 10 th and the 11th and 12th will bust cold here with 6 to 12 inches on the ground.

 

After that new H comes down day 10 in the MW and days 11 and 12 are BN

 

You dont know what youre looking at .

The 500 mb ensembles are not seeing the snowcover and now Jan 5 thru 12 are BN so should the 14th and 15th .

Where is the torch  starting on the 10th ? 

[PB GFI]

4 minutes ago, bluewave said:

We were ahead of the curve and the natural gas market had to play catch-up.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/natural-gas-futures-drop-nearly-11-oil-marks-2-week-low-2017-01-03

Natural-gas futures dropped Tuesday, with forecasts for warmer weather dragging prices down by nearly 11% to mark their largest one-day percentage decline since February 2014, according to FactSet data.

 

 

Cattle , and they will cover as by day 14 15 the PNA goes POS and theres a trough at 5k feet digging thru the lakes.

We killed UNG so far yr.  3x so far .

[nzucker]

10 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

If I said it was going to be a cold week then Monday was -20 but the rest of the week everyday was +4 even though the mean for the week is cold anyone you ask on the street would say I busted because 4/5 days were warm. My point is ground truth and how we perceive the weather is way more important then data and soil scores. Data can lie if you know how to manipulate it. Calling the snow threats two separate windows is also Kinda lame for two waves along a front a day apart. It's basically a 3 day window for snow. Anyone reading your initial forecast was given the perception of a much different period. 

This was more my point. PB implied we'd see a very favorable pattern Jan 5-20 and went against those like Isotherm and Bluewave that insisted on a short-lived shot of cold and snow. On balance, it seems like Isotherm and Bluewace will be more correct, though the verification looks to be somewhat of a compromise.

[PB GFI]

1 hour ago, nzucker said:

This was more my point. PB implied we'd see a very favorable pattern Jan 5-20 and went against those like Isotherm and Bluewave that insisted on a short-lived shot of cold and snow. On balance, it seems like Isotherm and Bluewace will be more correct, though the verification looks to be somewhat of a compromise.

 

THE CALLS OF 4 DAYS ARE DEAD . 

 

2 SNOWSTORMS WHICH NO ONE SAW . I AM AN SNOW

NOW TEMPS 

 

Day 1 

Day 2

Day 3 

 

Day 4

 

Day 5 

 

Day 6 

 

 

BY THIS TIME THERE MAY BE A FOOT OF SNOW ON THE GROUND ON THE COASTAL PLAIN . 

 

So day 7/8 will bust COLD So Jan 11- 12 

 

Day 9/10 Like I said / split the period  Jan 13- 14 AN 

DAY 10 NEW HIGH RIGHT WHERE I SAID IT WOULD BE 

 

 

 

SO DAY 12 13 ARE BN  WHICH IS Jan 15 /16 BN 

 

NOW OUT TO  JAN 18 JAN 19 THAT IS  COLD 

 

 

NOW HOW ABOUT THE AN SNOW CALL ? 

WAVE 1  USE 15 TO 1 RATRIOS 

2- 4 ON THE COAST 

 

 

WAVE 2 WHICH CAME  W 400 MILES IN 24 HOURS 

BIGGER THREAT . 

 

WHERE IS THE NO SNOW / TORCH ?

WHERE IS THE ONLY 4 DAYS OF COLD HERE ? 

 

YOU GUYS ONLY LOOK AT A 500 , SEE ORANGE AND NEVER USE ANY METEOROLOGY  SNOWCOVER/ - EPO - WPO INDUCED HP BUST THE CALLS OF IN THEN OUT INTO A TORCH . 

[Morris]

You are really calling for a foot of snow on the ground, Paul?

[ILoveWinter]

Interesting discussion as always, great to learn from so many knowledgeable posters. One comment I have is that there are now 3 discussions taking place about either the Thurs/Fri storm or Sat storm: 1)This thread, 2) the model discussion thread and 3) the Thurs/Fri discussion thread.  Its a bit too much if you ask me.

[PB GFI]

8 minutes ago, Morris said:

You are really calling for a foot of snow on the ground, Paul?

 

Both of these waves are Arctic waves , they will favor the coast . So from CNJ onto LI the possibility of 6 to 12 between both exist 

 

Wave 1 - you have to use 15 to 1 - 3 to 5 is poss .Wave 2 has a bigger ceiling .

If there is 6 to 12 day 7 /8 2 M temps will bust cold . 

 

[uofmiami]

I'll be lucky if I have over 4" on the ground by the end of this weekend.  I don't see 12" of snow at all around here.  It's all potential but reality will be much less.

[PB GFI]

15 minutes ago, uofmiami said:

I'll be lucky if I have over 4" on the ground by the end of this weekend.

ok, best of luck to ya 

It`s not like 3 to 5 with wave 1 is not modeled .

 

Only 10 to 1 only here . 

 

 

[donsutherland1]

24 minutes ago, PB GFI said:

 

THE CALLS OF 4 DAYS ARE DEAD . 

 

2 SNOWSTORMS WHICH NO ONE SAW . I AM AN SNOWFALL . 

NOW TEMPS 

 

Day 1 

Day 2

Day 3 

 

Day 4

 

Day 5 

 

Day 6 

 

 

BY THIS TIME THERE`S A FOOT OF SNOW ON THE GROUND 

 

So day 7/8 will bust COLD So Jan 11- 12 

 

Day 9/10 Like I said / split the period  Jan 13- 14 AN 

DAY 10 NEW HIGH RIGHT WHERE I SAID IT WOULD BE 

 

 

 

SO DAY 12 13 ARE BN  WHICH IS Jan 15 /16 BN 

 

NOW OUT TO  JAN 18 JAN 19 THAT IS  COLD 

 

 

NOW HOW ABOUT THE AN SNOW CALL ? 

WAVE 1  USE 15 TO 1 RATRIOS 

2- 4 ON THE COAST 

 

 

WAVE 2 WHICH CAME  W 400 MILES IN 24 HOURS 

BIGGER THREAT . 

 

WHERE IS THE NO SNOW / TORCH ?

WHERE IS THE ONLY 4 DAYS OF COLD HERE ? 

 

YOU GUYS ONLY LOOK AT A 500 , SEE ORANGE AND NEVER USE ANY METEOROLOGY  SNOWCOVER/ - EPO - WPO INDUCED HP BUST THE CALLS OF IN THEN OUT INTO A TORCH . 

You've done a terrific job so far. I agree concerning the second system.

[PB GFI]

14 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

You've done a terrific job so far. I agree concerning the second system.

 

 

Thank you VM Don .

 

Wave 2 needs a 100 - 150 move W and it crosses the BM .

The US models may have the ridge axis too far E , we will see . There is some real upside when a wet Miller A comes out just as the PNA spikes .  We just need the arctic wave to sit over the Gulf stream and not get dragged E .

 

As far as the pattern which I originally posted on DEC 27 , I am using more meteorology than the 500 mb guidance alone . -EPO/-WPOs like to press HP through Montana ish and not into Washington state . So the EPS error pattern which dumps the trough in the L/R misses the renegade Highs that always show up and break through the heights in the lakes .

So the period tacks on 2- 3 days at a time until it totally breaks down . 

 

The next miss by some will be that day 14/15 at 500 over the CONUS . Look at where the highest heights are headed . The PNA is rising by the 18th / 19th . 

The highest  850 anomalies are working their way back NW and we may in fact find ourselves in a retrogression pattern in the means so the trough just develops under the ridge  . Day 14/ 15 has a low height ridge in the E but take a look at the 5k foot temps and direction .

So there is softening in that ridge .  It is Jan and many people don`t realize you can snow in a poor height hostile 500 if you only shorten the wavelengths . 

 

[WEATHERBUFF]

1 hour ago, bluewave said:

It seems like we need a very impressive blocking pattern especially during the cold season to achieve a below normal temperature month.

Without a strong blocking pattern in the EPO/PNA, Polar, or AO/NAO regions... the default position is milder than normal.

Which proves when things are normal not extreme blocking that is, temps are above normal, which seems in reality to be the new normal.

[psuhoffman]

4 hours ago, PB GFI said:

 

Wait wait Lame ? Picking out a 10 day  AN snow period from 7 days ago is lame ? 

Some of you wonder why there are only 3 good posters on this board .

Keep listeng to stuff like this , it will put you ahead of the curve 

 

You dont know what you are talking about , go look at the day 10 Euro with another cold H drilling in where I said it would come through  , so  NOW day 11 and 12 are BN.

Then go look at the actual day 14/15 EPS 850s and see the trough is back as the PNA goes POS.

There are 2 snowstorms forecast over the next 5 days .

Wave 1 12k/4kNAM , try  .3 to .5 ar 15 to 1 ratios /

And Wave on the  2 EPS  . The snow threat was seen because of how the guidance was buckling the jet on both sides of the Continent with a NEG PNA.

So you would eject SWs under the block , that was not seen here by many  here in late Dec when I posted.

These threats have been talked about away for over 8 days away / you will not find that here with posts like yours .

The way cold periods work is you get 5 to 6 days of BN 3 days AN then 3 to 4 BN.

I posted a cutter splits the period / they usually do .

Then you score the forecast period.

Theres usually 1 cutter that splits the pattern , the problem with some of you is you didnt see whats comig for day 11 12 etc and have been posting it was over on the 10th.

 

 

Splitting one threat windows into two to give the illusion there were more chances is lame.  Yes there are two short waves but they are riding along an arctic boundary as it swings though only one day apart. It's one event. If they hit they probably won't even be counted separately. The two waves in PD2 were counted as one storm, at least by our local nws here. Even if two events it's one threat window. Basically a 36 hour window as the arctic front stalls and moves through for waves to ride along it. Calling that two threats is lame imo but you do what you want. I am in the same boat as you, made a similar forecast, but I am admitting I was wrong. When I said I expected a pattern change to a colder snowier one for early to mid January I realize what impression that gives, and it's not a 6 day transient cold with a two day opportunity for snow. And if that one shot fails saying we were unlucky is lame because it usually takes several chances to score. Having only one shot before things break down is a losing bet. Maybe NYC gets lucky but I'm not going to claim I was right off luck and spinning numbers.

As for the rest I have seen the EPS  I can't post since it's copyright protected but it's warm day 1 then cold day 2 to 6, then warm day 7 to 15  no it's not cold day 11-12.  Gefs lingers the cold to day 7 then runs the table warm.  So euro says the cold is 5 days  gfs 6 days.  Using 5 day means that include  a cold start that skews the whole period in order to make a 5-6 day cold seem like 10 days is lame Imo.  Could the guidance all be wrong and a high sneaks in and we get a couple days of cold sure, but it seems unlikely given guidance we have little support for it.  If it happens great but even if it did I feel a 5 day cold then another 2 day chilly transient shot doesn't live up to my or your tone of our original statement.  

 I have little patience for a framework argument when it comes to forecasting. It's why I don't follow JB anymore. You have to put up with 10 minutes of him whining and morning about this and that and why we should think about it this way or that chart shows he was right to get 30 seconds of an actual forecast that's useful.  You started being hostile towards those that questioned your forecast. You need tougher skin then that in this business. Furthermore you and I made pretty similar calls and I consider mine a failure because the sensible weather is not going to match the expectations my words gave people. You seem to want to hide behind selective data and stats and ignore the perception and reality gap between your forecast and what people will experience.  That's your choice. I made my case and laid out the evidence for my opinions. You are free to believe what you want. 

[PB GFI]

Long post above of what you and the EPS miss .

 

Did not watch JB this AM 

 

My Dec 5- 20 call was spot on / verified by the data . 

 

Jan 5- 20 calls are on the first 10 pages and explained above .

 

Don`t lump my calls in with yours .

 

Verification doesn`t depend on perception / it is solved by real data . 

[psuhoffman]

1 hour ago, nzucker said:

This was more my point. PB implied we'd see a very favorable pattern Jan 5-20 and went against those like Isotherm and Bluewave that insisted on a short-lived shot of cold and snow. On balance, it seems like Isotherm and Bluewace will be more correct, though the verification looks to be somewhat of a compromise.

I'm with you. I made a similar call and I'm admitting defeat. But he seems to want to play the spin game. 

[psuhoffman]

2 minutes ago, PB GFI said:

Long post above of what you and the EPS miss .

 

Did not watch JB this AM 

 

My Dec 5- 20 call was spot on / verified by the data . 

 

Jan 5- 20 calls are on the first 10 pages and explained above .

 

Don`t lump my calls in with yours .

 

Verification doesn`t depend on perception / it is solved by real data . 

Your data selection is biased. Your trying to verify a 15 day call for cold on a 5-6 day cold shot using selection bias and skewing a longer period cold by lumping several slightly above days in with a couple much below. 

The rest of your points have nothing to do with the discussion. 

[PB GFI]

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

Your data selection is biased. Your trying to verify a 15 day call for cold on a 5-6 day cold shot using selection bias and skewing a longer period cold by lumping several slightly above days in with a couple much below. 

The rest of your points have nothing to do with the discussion. 

 

There is 8 to 10 days of BN explained  there . 

 

LOL 

[PB GFI]

CNJ / LI 

3 x 15 to 1 

 

Yeh 3 to 5 there is poss 

 

[PB GFI]

3 minutes ago, wthrmn654 said:

Here's an idea everyone, let's move on before we upset rjay or bx! It is what it is... long range stuff hard to nail down and pb has done fairly well! We're not in highschool anymore! Your all bullying each other.

 

My call for u 6 to 12 inches between both systems .  You are in a good spot 

[Brian5671]

Just now, PB GFI said:

 

My call for u 6 to 12 inches between both systems .  You are in a good spot 

decent bet there.  it's possible some areas could get more out of the 1st system than the 2nd system.

[PB GFI]

Please keep this in mid WAVE 1 -

 

A 48 hour change .

It is what this model does .

 

 

 

[danstorm]

17 minutes ago, PB GFI said:

Long post above of what you and the EPS miss .

 

Did not watch JB this AM 

 

My Dec 5- 20 call was spot on / verified by the data . 

 

Jan 5- 20 calls are on the first 10 pages and explained above .

 

Don`t lump my calls in with yours .

 

Verification doesn`t depend on perception / it is solved by real data . 

I think people are turned off by your obsession with being right and seemingly hostile attitude towards those who disagree.

 

[PB GFI]

6 minutes ago, danstorm said:

I think people are turned off by your obsession with being right and seemingly hostile attitude towards those who disagree.

 

 

I am not a hand holder Dan . When I am right I will tell you and when I bust I write I busted . 

There is an ignore button if those don`t wish to see the work and ideas they can use it .

 

It is why I post away and loved . 

[uncle W]

...this set up reminds me of early February 1974...We had a few waves that waved goodbye and one that waved hello...Feb. 8th, 1974 was a surprise when a low which was forecast to go OTS tracked a little closer than progged and NYC picked up 6" of powder...