January Medium/Long Range Discussion Part 2

[mitchnick]

2 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

NDJ is likely to be around -.7, and considering current and projected SST's DJF is likely to be around -.4 and JFM could go totally neutral.  So it may come in at the absolute bottom threshold of official nina status but using that to explain our lack of snowfall ignores all the much more significant nina's where we did much better.   I think once you start looking at moderate to strong Nina's there are some pretty strong correlations with low snowfall but the correlation with a weak nina is pretty weak and then add in this one is barely on the borderline of even being officially a Nina and I just don't see it as a driving force.  Its certainly not helping up at all, but its not the kind of dominant factor that can override all else.  If we got some help in other places the current almost totally neutral enso SST's wouldn't be a problem IMO.

All these years had equal or colder enso events yet ended up as a pretty good year snowfall wise, at least much better then we are currently doing.  

2006: 19.6"

2000: 26.1

1996: 62.5"

1974: 17.1"

1968: 23.4"

1965: 18.6"

1956: 19"

Just may be the La Nada is our nemesis, but either way, we suck generally at Nina's. lol

[psuhoffman]

6 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

That's probably accurate. If you look at the link I had of Ninos/Ninas, you can see that the La Nada's really stunk for us. This year will barely make a weak Nina, so the fact that it is behaving more like a La Nada makes sense.

Now somebody may find an exception, but I'm talking odds favor not much snow in the La Nada's.

Yea la nada's typically feature more "variability" in patterns, in other words hard to predict (like this year) and are skewed sucking more then people think.  But my theory on that is because like I said our base state is sucking.  With the right tropical forcing we can promote a good pattern.  But absent any tropical forcing of any significance we are left hoping all the other factors just randomly line up the right way and since more combinations end bad then good that's a losing bet.  

[psuhoffman]

3 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

Just may be the La Nada is our nemesis, but either way, we suck generally at Nina's. lol

strong nina's yes, there has been none that ended well.  Actually if you take out weak to moderate nino's our snow climo would get REALLY UGLY.  Absent the help we get from the tropical forcing in such events we really are behind the 8 ball in trying to win the lottery and get all the other factors to line up right.  Add in unfavorable tropical forcing like in a stronger nina and its just about impossible.  This weak nina or nada isnt really a problem IMO by itself, but the "problem" is it does absolutely NOTHING to help and so we are left needing some magical combination of other factors to line up the right way when more of those combinations are not good.  

[psuhoffman]

If you want to be lazy and just forecast above average snow in every nino and below average snow any other year you will be right about 80% of the time.  

[BTRWx]

6 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

If you want to be lazy and just forecast above average snow in every nino and below average snow any other year you will be right about 80% of the time.  

Are you sure about that?

My data shows near 50/50 frequency imby http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/ENSO/composites/EC_ENS_index.shtml

[Bob Chill]

All pattern talk aside, this year is behaving like many of the other years where snow was underwhelming. Even moreso than other sub-par winters. We've really only had 3 brief periods where we've even had a chance. I do believe that we will have some additional periods where we do have a chance. I've pretty much conceded that after all is said and done, most of us will pretty much just want to forget this one. 

[psuhoffman]

3 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

Are you sure about that?

My data shows near 50/50 frequency imby http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/ENSO/composites/EC_ENS_index.shtml

wow those things suck, and your dataset only includes 11 years, there were other weak Nino events not included, I guess that only looks at moderate and strong ones.  

[BTRWx]

2 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

All pattern talk aside, this year is behaving like many of the other years where snow was underwhelming. Even moreso than other sub-par winters. We've really only had 3 brief periods where we've even had a chance. I do believe that we will have some additional periods where we do have a chance. I've pretty much conceded that after all is said and done, most of us will pretty much just want to forget this one. 

Isn't that also true for some of he great ones? 

[psuhoffman]

2 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

All pattern talk aside, this year is behaving like many of the other years where snow was underwhelming. Even moreso than other sub-par winters. We've really only had 3 brief periods where we've even had a chance. I do believe that we will have some additional periods where we do have a chance. I've pretty much conceded that after all is said and done, most of us will pretty much just want to forget this one. 

I think its highly likely we finish below climo.  What is yet to be determined is if its going to be one of the more typical 8-16" type years that suck but aren't talked about years later as OMG that was so awful, or a 2002/2012 type suck.  

[BTRWx]

4 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

wow those things suck, and your dataset only includes 11 years, there were other weak Nino events not included, I guess that only looks at moderate and strong ones.  

just as many weaklings as +moderates, but the stronger years would increase the signal if anything http://ggweather.com/enso/oni.htm

eta: I wish I could say that.

[psuhoffman]

8 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

Are you sure about that?

My data shows near 50/50 frequency imby http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/ENSO/composites/EC_ENS_index.shtml

1954, 64, 70, 78, 2015 and 2016 are all not included in that set.  They were all above avg nino years.  That skews the results some.  Not sure why it did not include weak nino's.  

[SnowGoose69]

4 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I think its highly likely we finish below climo.  What is yet to be determined is if its going to be one of the more typical 8-16" type years that suck but aren't talked about years later as OMG that was so awful, or a 2002/2012 type suck.  

This year does not even come close to those because places in NNE, parts of NY/PA and the Lakes are doing okay.  Those years the entire country was basically shutout.  This is more like a 96-97 or 92-93 where some places did miserably but many areas of the nation had a snowy cold winter

[psuhoffman]

1 minute ago, BTRWx said:

Nina years have higher snow frequency from that data. lmao! http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/ENSO/composites/EC_LNS_index.shtml

The anomalies on the left show how the enso event impacts average snowfall.  The frequencies on the right show how likely it is that the nina has that actual impact.  So the nino chart showed that it increased the snow mean but it was only a 50/50 correlation year to year.  In other words some HUGE nino years skewed the numbers high.  THe nina chart shows it lowers mean snowfall and the chances the nina affects the year is higher also.  

[Bob Chill]

5 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

Isn't that also true for some of he great ones? 

No. All of the great ones had productive spells at least one month during NDJ.  

[psuhoffman]

1 minute ago, Bob Chill said:

No. All of the great ones had productive spells at least one month during NDJ.  

1960 is mad at you right now

[BTRWx]

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

The anomalies on the left show how the enso event impacts average snowfall.  The frequencies on the right show how likely it is that the nina has that actual impact.  So the nino chart showed that it increased the snow mean but it was only a 50/50 correlation year to year.  In other words some HUGE nino years skewed the numbers high.  THe nina chart shows it lowers mean snowfall and the chances the nina affects the year is higher also.  

I caught that at the last minute.

[psuhoffman]

3 minutes ago, SnowGoose69 said:

This year does not even come close to those because places in NNE, parts of NY/PA and the Lakes are doing okay.  Those years the entire country was basically shutout.  This is more like a 96-97 or 92-93 where some places did miserably but many areas of the nation had a snowy cold winter

I tend to agree with you, but man that is going to be a tough sell in this forum right now to a bunch of people who are still waiting for their first real snow.  

[BTRWx]

Just now, psuhoffman said:

I tend to agree with you, but man that is going to be a tough sell in this forum right now to a bunch of people who are still waiting for their first real snow.  

I'm loving it!

[Bob Chill]

4 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

1960 is mad at you right now

I tossed 1960. It had a raging -AO JFM. What this year is teaching us is to not be dumb and think we can keep pulling off +AO +climo snow. 

[psuhoffman]

1 minute ago, Bob Chill said:

I tossed 1960. It had a raging -AO JFM. What this year is teaching us is to not be dumb and think we can keep pulling off +AO +climo snow. 

Yea we need to break this +AO thing we have been stuck on for a while thats for sure

[BTRWx]

2 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

I tossed 1960. It had a raging -AO JFM. What this year is teaching us is to not be dumb and think we can keep pulling off +AO +climo snow. 

What about the epo?

eta: assuming models verify

[Bob Chill]

It's not bad luck this year. It's been a terrible NH pattern for MA snow since D1 of met winter. 

Go SAI!!

 

 

[psuhoffman]

Just now, Bob Chill said:

It's not bad luck this year. It's been a terrible NH pattern for MA snow since D1 of met winter. 

Go SAI!!

 

 

I dont think its all luck, the pattern has been wrong about 80% of the time, but we had a couple windows and bad luck didnt help during those.  So a little of both but I blame the pattern way more then luck overall.  My luck rant is just that any one location, looking at such a short period as a couple months, specific snowfall has too much luck involved to be used as a good determinate for analog selection as a sole factor.  

[BTRWx]

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

I dont think its all luck, the pattern has been wrong about 80% of the time, but we had a couple windows and bad luck didnt help during those.  So a little of both but I blame the pattern way more then luck overall.  My luck rant is just that any one location, looking at such a short period as a couple months, specific snowfall has too much luck involved to be used as a good determinate for analog selection as a sole factor.  

The way the season has gone so far, I think someone should be able to come up with a good near-analog.

[Bob Chill]

6 minutes ago, BTRWx said:

What about the epo?

eta: assuming models verify

A -EPO definitely helps but what happened in 13/14-14/15 is not the norm and unlikely to repeat. Think 94-95. That had a ridiculous -EPO but the AO/NAO sucked and so did our snowfall. Ice was off the charts though. 

Assuming we never get any AO/NAO help, an occasional -epo isn't going to do it. WnWxluvr likes the argument that we don't need blocking to get snow  because look what recently happened. And I agree with that argument only in the sense that other factors can overwhelm but only in a minority of cases. We are currently in the middle of our 4th consecutive +AO/NAO winter. We beat the odds three times in a row and that's freekin great. But keep getting +AO/NAO winters and we will end up on the losing side the majority of the time. It's hard to refute that evidence. It's pretty stark. 

[BTRWx]

13 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

A -EPO definitely helps but what happened in 13/14-14/15 is not the norm and unlikely to repeat. Think 94-95. That had a ridiculous -EPO but the AO/NAO sucked and so did our snowfall. Ice was off the charts though. 

Assuming we never get any AO/NAO help, an occasional -epo isn't going to do it. WnWxluvr likes the argument that we don't need blocking to get snow  because look what recently happened. And I agree with that argument only in the sense that other factors can overwhelm but only in a minority of cases. We are currently in the middle of our 4th consecutive +AO/NAO winter. We beat the odds three times in a row and that's freekin great. But keep getting +AO/NAO winters and we will end up on the losing side the majority of the time. It's hard to refute that evidence. It's pretty stark. 

Last year shows how even brief blocking can do business.

[Ji]

25 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

I tossed 1960. It had a raging -AO JFM. What this year is teaching us is to not be dumb and think we can keep pulling off +AO +climo snow. 

there are places 50-150 miles south of us that are way above average for snow so far this season. Part of is it just stupid luck

[North Balti Zen]

54 minutes ago, SnowGoose69 said:

This year does not even come close to those because places in NNE, parts of NY/PA and the Lakes are doing okay.  Those years the entire country was basically shutout.  This is more like a 96-97 or 92-93 where some places did miserably but many areas of the nation had a snowy cold winter

Yeah, no. This is an own backyard game, and if we get shutout from here - we are historically awful. It is not mitigated by others places doing ok. 

[BTRWx]

14 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

A -EPO definitely helps but what happened in 13/14-14/15 is not the norm and unlikely to repeat. Think 94-95. That had a ridiculous -EPO but the AO/NAO sucked and so did our snowfall. Ice was off the charts though. 

Assuming we never get any AO/NAO help, an occasional -epo isn't going to do it. WnWxluvr likes the argument that we don't need blocking to get snow  because look what recently happened. And I agree with that argument only in the sense that other factors can overwhelm but only in a minority of cases. We are currently in the middle of our 4th consecutive +AO/NAO winter. We beat the odds three times in a row and that's freekin great. But keep getting +AO/NAO winters and we will end up on the losing side the majority of the time. It's hard to refute that evidence. It's pretty stark. 

I like it!

[CAPE]

Looks like some perturbation of the PV occurring, but AO looks to remain positive and man is that is a super +NAO on the eps into early Feb.