Jump to content

  • Member Statistics

    17,611
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

Countdown to Winter 2018 -2019

eyewall

By eyewall,
in New England

Recommended Posts

LibertyBell

LibertyBell

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, dryslot said:

Not very difficult if you don't try to oversimplify things, Just work with a set of ranges and its very simple, i.e. 1-2, 2-4, 4-6, 6-8, 8-10 and so on if i want to get that defined, If not i go 2-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-16 and so on in 4" increments between zones or areas and it works quite well, Even when you throw in the caveats of , "or more" in the favored elevated and upslope areas in some cases.

Right, I like your way a lot better because there isn't an overlap between the ranges.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
RUNNAWAYICEBERG

RUNNAWAYICEBERG

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, dryslot said:

Not very difficult if you don't try to oversimplify things, Just work with a set of ranges and its very simple, i.e. 1-2, 2-4, 4-6, 6-8, 8-10 and so on if i want to get that defined, If not i go 2-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-16 and so on in 4" increments between zones or areas and it works quite well, Even when you throw in the caveats of , "or more" in the favored elevated and upslope areas in some cases.

I like tighter increments, especially in the lower ranges. We should strive for perfection. Whenever I see forecasters say 1-2 feet with locally higher amounts, I turn the page. Pin down the deform snows, dammit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dryslot

dryslot

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

I like tighter increments, especially in the lower ranges. We should strive for perfection. Whenever I see forecasters say 1-2 feet with locally higher amounts, I turn the page. Pin down the deform snows, dammit. 

1-2' is a little to broad, I would go up next increment which is in 6", 8-14", 14-20" etc, etc,  Also at times, From 6" up, 6-10" 10-14', 14-18" and 18-24", if you want to saty in the 4" increments,  It also depends on the type of storm as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LibertyBell

LibertyBell

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, dryslot said:

1-2' is a little to broad, I would go up next increment which is in 6", 8-14", 14-20" etc, etc,  Also at times, From 6" up, 6-10" 10-14', 14-18" and 18-24", It soley depends on the type of storm as well.

When you have big events like that I see a lot of our forecasters use ranges like 6-12,12-18,18-24,24-30, etc.  I think the largest I've ever seen forecasted was 24-36" in the Jan 2016 Blizzard and also for the Jan 1996 Blizzard.  PD2 was right behind that with 24-30" lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dryslot

dryslot

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

When you have big events like that I see a lot of our forecasters use ranges like 6-12,12-18,18-24,24-30, etc.  I think the largest I've ever seen forecasted was 24-36" in the Jan 2016 Blizzard and also for the Jan 1996 Blizzard.  PD2 was right behind that with 24-30" lol

I have found over the last 20 yrs, If you stay within these values, Your going to be a hero more times then not unless you get a storm that whiffs, But i will start on a map, In a range let say 3-6" from 48hrs out and may tweak up 4-8" or back down to 2-4" or more in a specific zone depending on where it looks to be the final track before doing a final map, Most i put out is two, And very rarely, I Even have to change the first one as that's the one i go with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Typhoon Tip

Typhoon Tip

Posted
Posted

This series of 12z charts ... I wonder if might prove a reasonable sort of 'micro' analogue for how this season's storm/pattern frequency unfolds...

We are entering about a five day stint (or so..) of dominant N-stream... after which, that feature/semi-persistence lifts out ...and the flow left in the wake at mid latitudes is left "baggy" and non-descript..but open to suggestion (so to speak). It's when the flow relaxes often that larger scale cyclogen gets more favorable due to lowering shear in the flow.  

So, the Pacific answers the call and ejects a decent wave through the west and tries to phase with vestigial S-stream gunk in the TV/Gulf region...and together there's suggestion of storm genesis. ... 

But anyway, I see that sort of repeating on whole... with bouts of N-stream that relaxes ...setting up our storm chances...   The renegade over-achieving Clipper system notwithstanding... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
40/70 Benchmark

40/70 Benchmark

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

It's not what the predominant NAO signal for the season is per se, but how many times it changes, thats why closer to neutral NAO seem to be the best seasons for snowfall- PD2 for example occurred when the NAO was positive.  There are many examples of this.

Also the warmer than normal temps offshore do allow for quicker bombogenesis and drag in colder air from the north into these storms.  That's actually a more favorable signal for northeast snowstorms than colder than normal waters just offshore.  The continent supplies the cold air and the water supplies the moisture, and the warmer the water the better, because that means the air above that water is more moist and the water is a powder keg for big storms (like what we had last winter.)  This is exactly why the past decade has been so great for big snows.

Yes, but there is a reason why seasons that are predominated by +NAO are milder and not as snowy. Modularity is great, but I'd rather take my chances with it shifting between -1 and neutral, rather than +1 and neutral...there is much more margin for error with regard to track with the former. Sure, the Pacific can still save you, but like I said...less margin for error and more can go wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
40/70 Benchmark

40/70 Benchmark

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, CoastalWx said:

Well Judah tries to cancel winter so all the more to be optimistic.

My only take away from his work is that there is less of a chance of an exotically negative AO/NAO in the seasonal mean this season than weak nino climo would imply. That is about the extent of the significance of this indicator.....he can't wrap his mind around the fact that its but one piece to the polar field puzzle, and should not represent the primary basis for an entire seasonal outlook. This is why his seasonal outlooks stink.

I will be interested to see if he tries to claim victory if we get a cold, snowy winter that verifies with a positive NAO in the mean, which is very possible.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
40/70 Benchmark

40/70 Benchmark

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Typhoon Tip said:

This series of 12z charts ... I wonder if might prove a reasonable sort of 'micro' analogue for how this season's storm/pattern frequency unfolds...

We are entering about a five day stint (or so..) of dominant N-stream... after which, that feature/semi-persistence lifts out ...and the flow left in the wake at mid latitudes is left "baggy" and non-descript..but open to suggestion (so to speak). It's when the flow relaxes often that larger scale cyclogen gets more favorable due to lowering shear in the flow.  

So, the Pacific answers the call and ejects a decent wave through the west and tries to phase with vestigial S-stream gunk in the TV/Gulf region...and together there's suggestion of storm genesis. ... 

But anyway, I see that sort of repeating on whole... with bouts of N-stream that relaxes ...setting up our storm chances...   The renegade over-achieving Clipper system notwithstanding... 

Generally less of an issue an el nino seasons, no?

Not being sarcastic...obviously it can still be an issue, but just in general...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LibertyBell

LibertyBell

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

My only take away from his work is that there is less of a chance of an exotically negative AO/NAO in the seasonal mean this season than weak nino climo would imply. That is about the extent of the significance of this indicator.....he can't wrap his mind around the fact that its but one piece to the polar field puzzle, and should not represent the primary basis for an entire seasonal outlook. This is why his seasonal outlooks stink.

I will be interested to see if he tries to claim victory if we get a cold, snowy winter that verifies with a positive NAO in the mean, which is very possible.

 

Yes you dont want an exotically negative NAO in an el nino anyway otherwise you get a lot of suppression.... a very negative NAO is more useful in a la nina a la 1995-96 or 2010-11.  A weakly negative NAO is perfect for an el nino.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LibertyBell

LibertyBell

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Yes, but there is a reason why seasons that are predominated by +NAO are milder and not as snowy. Modularity is great, but I'd rather take my chances with it shifting between -1 and neutral, rather than +1 and neutral...there is much more margin for error with regard to track with the former. Sure, the Pacific can still save you, but like I said...less margin for error and more can go wrong.

Definitely.... a weakly negative NAO is perfect for an el nino.  Storms like PD2 had the negative NAO prior to the storm and the NAO was rising during the storm, but it was the block prior to the event that set everything up.

By the way, congrats on the Red Sox returning to the world series!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LibertyBell

LibertyBell

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, #NoPoles said:

NOAA has much of the country with a mild winter which on this board = winter cancel

Oh when I saw the map I interpreted it as the areas furthest to the north having the highest chance of milder than normal weather, which for them could still mean it's cold enough for snow. Closer to average temperatures as you move south from the Canadian border.  What I liked was the fact that they had a ridge on the west coast....... we need that.  The other thing I liked is that they had an area of above normal precip along the east coast, so it looks like they are predicting that noreasters will be a regular occurrence.  You could have that verify with something like December being +3, January being close to average (first half mild, second half cold), and February being like -2.  If we get the majority of our precipitation in the second half of winter even if the liquid equivalent is close to average, that can still mean well above normal snowfall.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...