Winter 2018-19 Is Coming

[frd]

2 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

FWIW, Mitch is very bullish on this winter per his posts on phillywx. Expects 30-40” at his house near BWI.

Mitch no doubt figured out the riddle of the QBO   :-)        Awesome to hear, I miss his posts here though.  

[AfewUniversesBelowNormal]

Big +PNA showing up on 15 day |G\FS. Looks a lot like 13-14 Winter. 

[MJO812]

Congrats D.C?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2018/10/29/forecasters-private-sector-strongly-favor-snowy-winter-washington/

[frd]

32 minutes ago, Snow88 said:

Congrats D.C?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2018/10/29/forecasters-private-sector-strongly-favor-snowy-winter-washington/

Seems to be a general idea the worse of winter ( cold & snow ) begins after the first of the year. But again, you never know.  I like the concensus from the few mets featured here in the article for AN snowfall. I believe Accuweather has tweaked/changed the forecast they had, now going with more snow for the Northern Mid-Atlantic

Looking forward to seeing the next updates as well in early November from the seasonal models,  such as the Ukmet and the Euro.  Want to see them stick to the general theme the last two months, as that would give many even greater confidence for a decent winter this year. 

[CAPE]

Looks like perhaps a bit of a PV perturbation on the GEFS as we head towards mid Nov. Who knows what significance it will have, if any. Better than seeing one big, consolidated blue ball though.

[WxUSAF]

Judah’s on the early winter strat PV disruption train. Which is not that surprising I guess. 

And speaking of Judah, there’s a new review paper online about snowcover and link to winter patterns. Its in Nature. Haven’t finished reading it yet. Check @wxjay on twitter for the link but it’s paywalled.

[CAPE]

Snapshot of h5 on the new edition of the EPS weeklies heading into mid Dec...not too shabby.

[poolz1]

Snapshot of h5 on the new edition of the EPS weeklies heading into mid Dec...not too shabby.

Was just going to post. Weeklies seem pretty washed out early on....more than normal. My biggest takeaway is they at least seem to be agreeing with the the euro monthly for how December should shape up.

[CAPE]

2 minutes ago, poolz1 said:

 

Was just going to post. Weeklies seem pretty washed out early on....more than normal. My biggest takeaway is they at least seem to be agreeing with the the euro monthly for how December should shape up.

 

Similar overall to the last run of the weeklies moving into early Dec too. I will take it.

[psuhoffman]

3 hours ago, frd said:

Seems to be a general idea the worse of winter ( cold & snow ) begins after the first of the year. But again, you never know.  I like the concensus from the few mets featured here in the article for AN snowfall. I believe Accuweather has tweaked/changed the forecast they had, now going with more snow for the Northern Mid-Atlantic

Looking forward to seeing the next updates as well in early November from the seasonal models,  such as the Ukmet and the Euro.  Want to see them stick to the general theme the last two months, as that would give many even greater confidence for a decent winter this year. 

The signal is pretty conflicting on that.  It depends what you think is most important in terms of analogs.  Of course if you include too many criteria and are too selective in how close a match you require you end up with no matches at all...or too limited a sample size to draw any meaningful conclusions.  For instance 2002/3 is a pretty good match in some areas but a bad qbo and solar match.  Some of the best matches in terms of location of enso forcing and the qbo are 1957/8, 1963/4, 1977/8, 1994/5. If we expand the criteria a bit more 1965/6, 1968/9, 1986/7, 2002/3, 2004/5, and 2009/10 are all somewhat close in some ways with at least enso and one other factor being "close". 

Of the 4 best matches IMO, 1957 and 1963 both had significant snowfall in December in Baltimore.  9.5 and 9.7".  1977 and 1994 had no appreciable snowfall before January.  58 and 64 were both blockbuster winters.  1978 recovered to be a much above normal snowfall season, 1995 was a dud.  So 2/4 had snowfall in December.

If we expand the analogs to get more possible matches the results are a bit more pessimistic for early season snow.  We add 5 years but only 3 had snowfall before January, and 1968/9 it was only 4.1" and that came in mid November.  December was snowless in 4/6 years with 2002 being the exception. 

Overall the expanded list gives us 4 years with significant snowfall in December and 6 years without.  What sticks out to me is the all or nothing nature of snowfall in December in those years.  It was either more then 9" or less then 1".  So there seems to be a slightly increased risk of a big snowfall December but barring that a shutout is also an increased risk.  There were no average type snowfall Decembers.  So take that for what its worth. 

As for what that means for the winter 1966, 1978, and 1987 recovered from a bad start to be very good winters.  2005 bounced back from an awful start to be at least respectable.  1995 was the only total dud in the expanded analog list. 

 

[psuhoffman]

If we throw out 2009/10 and 1994/5 as the high and low outliers we actually get a pretty consistent analog set ranging from a pretty median snowfall winter on the low end to a blockbuster on the high but definitely favoring above normal snowfall.

Suffice it to say a repeat of 2009/10 with that kind of extreme blocking is highly unlikely.  Wish it was as obvious what caused 1994/5 to be such a crappy outlier in a set of very good winters with similar conditions.  I guess sometimes the weather just wants to weather.   

[frd]

2 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

If we throw out 2009/10 and 1994/5 as the high and low outliers we actually get a pretty consistent analog set ranging from a pretty median snowfall winter on the low end to a blockbuster on the high but definitely favoring above normal snowfall.

Suffice it to say a repeat of 2009/10 with that kind of extreme blocking is highly unlikely.  Wish it was as obvious what caused 1994/5 to be such a crappy outlier in a set of very good winters with similar conditions.  I guess sometimes the weather just wants to weather.   

Was not 1994/5 actually decent to our NE ?  I thought it was maybe ?  

Good data , thanks .  

 

[frd]

1 hour ago, poolz1 said:

 

Was just going to post. Weeklies seem pretty washed out early on....more than normal. My biggest takeaway is they at least seem to be agreeing with the the euro monthly for how December should shape up.

 

What is that look up top, elongated PV ?

[psuhoffman]

11 minutes ago, frd said:

Was not 1994/5 actually decent to our NE ?  I thought it was maybe ?  

Good data , thanks .  

 

Philly only had 9.8" and NYC 11.8. Boston had 41.5 which is slightly above average but New England is a whole other climate animal I don't consider years where we have to get north of NYC to see significant differences to be a "close miss". 1995 was equally awful up here too btw so being inland in the mid Atlantic  didn't help either. 

[poolz1]

What is that look up top, elongated PV ?

Looks like it to me.....pretty much higher than normal heights over the pole from late November on....of varying strength.

If the weeklies are correct in about a week we should see the ens start to pick up on the Aleutian low forming. I feel like that is the “foundation “ of this this winter....add in a subtropical jet that has some juice and some decent blocking periods....we are bound to fair pretty well.

[psuhoffman]

43 minutes ago, poolz1 said:

 

Looks like it to me.....pretty much higher than normal heights over the pole from late November on....of varying strength.

If the weeklies are correct in about a week we should see the ens start to pick up on the Aleutian low forming. I feel like that is the “foundation “ of this this winter....add in a subtropical jet that has some juice and some decent blocking periods....we are bound to fair pretty well.

 

That is the key imo also.  Like I said earlier the only difference I could find in the one dud winter in the analog set most are using was a cold pool where the warm pool is in the north pacific.  If that was enough to disrupt the pattern up in that area it could be why that winter went to crap compared to all the others.  Get that Aleutian low with the corresponding epo ridge along with a strong stj coming in under it...split flow into the CONUS and were in good shape.  Add in just a couple periods where the nao isnt hostile and we will probably do well.  Assuming that idea doesn't fail I am very optimistic on this winter.  

[Bob Chill]

2 hours ago, C.A.P.E. said:

Snapshot of h5 on the new edition of the EPS weeklies heading into mid Dec...not too shabby.

 

You didn't post the most important (snow) maps.

[NorthArlington101]

You didn't post the most important (snow) maps.

The Control has a region-wide Thanksgiving event. ️

[psuhoffman]

4 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

You didn't post the most important (snow) maps.

Oh lord....here we go, buckle up.  

[psuhoffman]

Just now, NorthArlington101 said:

 

The Control has a region-wide Thanksgiving event. ️

 

FRINGED!!!

[NorthArlington101]

FRINGED!!!

Its a Cville jackpot when I’m going to be back in Arlington so I’m rooting for a north shift with you.

[WarrenCtyWx]

1 hour ago, psuhoffman said:

Philly only had 9.8" and NYC 11.8. Boston had 41.5 which is slightly above average but New England is a whole other climate animal I don't consider years where we have to get north of NYC to see significant differences to be a "close miss". 1995 was equally awful up here too btw so being inland in the mid Atlantic  didn't help either. 

Boston had 14.9 and even ORH only had 24.9 according to xmacis. I believe (though not certain) it was awful from Virginia to Maine.

[Bob Chill]

14 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

FRINGED!!!

 

15 minutes ago, NorthArlington101 said:

 

The Control has a region-wide Thanksgiving event. ️

 

Heh, we're in mid season form already. I'll be in CT for thanksgiving. Control is a bit of a kick in the pill box. But 4 weeks is plenty of time for a north trend...all the way to Nova Scotia 

[psuhoffman]

20 minutes ago, WarrenCtyWx said:

Boston had 14.9 and even ORH only had 24.9 according to xmacis. I believe (though not certain) it was awful from Virginia to Maine.

if so maybe i saw the wrong year for Boston's total...either way it was a crappy snow winter anywhere around here with only one storm and pretty much nothing else.  

[showmethesnow]

I see the usual suspects are asking for snow maps. Errrr....Wait, was that Chill asking???  Oh God, If he's asking I think these boards are in trouble this winter. 

[clskinsfan]

Tucker Barnes and his team are with the snowy and late winter call as well. Nice write up from them by the way:

http://www.fox5dc.com/weather/2018-2019-winter-outlook-for-dc-colder-snowier-winter-for-region#/

[AfewUniversesBelowNormal]

I kind of hate the yearly analogs because I think we can make a big jump year to year.

[WinterWxLuvr]

1 hour ago, clskinsfan said:

Tucker Barnes and his team are with the snowy and late winter call as well. Nice write up from them by the way:

http://www.fox5dc.com/weather/2018-2019-winter-outlook-for-dc-colder-snowier-winter-for-region#/

Its obvious that the people making those maps don't understand where the mountains actually start.  Snowfall west of Winchester is pretty much the same as it is in Winchester until you get well to the west.  Move that 60-90 about 10 miles east and you have where the mountains are.

[psuhoffman]

10 minutes ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

Its obvious that the people making those maps don't understand where the mountains actually start.  Snowfall west of Winchester is pretty much the same as it is in Winchester until you get well to the west.  Move that 60-90 about 10 miles east and you have where the mountains are.

That's always been obvious to me also.  Sometimes they do that around the edges of their snowstorm maps also.  If you look up into PA or out west they pay no attention to what their snowfall ranges do in those areas.  If they aren't going to put any effort into that area they should simply make the map area smaller and not include it.  If there is an area I am not too familiar with and don't want to bother with it I just don't include it in my map. 

[CAPE]

12 minutes ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

Its obvious that the people making those maps don't understand where the mountains actually start.  Snowfall west of Winchester is pretty much the same as it is in Winchester until you get well to the west.  Move that 60-90 about 10 miles east and you have where the mountains are.

They aren't even trying out in the western highlands on that map. With the general call of above normal snow across the whole region, places like Canaan should be pushing 200.