Winter 2019-20 Preseason Discussion

[CAPE]

 

This was the CanSIPS h5 look for Nov when the Sept 30(October run) initially came out. It only got better from there.

This is the message on TT-

CanSIPS hindcast climatology has been updated for the new version of the model, and anomalies are now correct again.

Meaning a complete 180 from this map, lol.

 

[Isotherm]

6 hours ago, frd said:

Some folks are talking about why the seasonal models are going with a mostly positive NAO and a + AO in the winter forecasts. 

Simon believes it is due to the models seeing a stronger winter PV.

IMHO I don't see that. Sure,  it may, as others stated, get stronger in November, but off the charts strong well I am not so sure. 

Also, the pattern supports some attempts at weakening the PV and don''t forget the descending QBO as well.  Maybe @Isotherm could comment. 

I read from one source that the signal for the + NAO and + AO also may be related as to how the seasonal models see and resolve oceanic SST profiles. 

However, a great video from BAMMwx recently mentioned that most model SST forecasts out in time are not correct. I forget the exact wording but he stated they are only correct 19 % of the time. 

He also mentioned that the model, NMME or close to that,  is notorious for being too warm. So since the oceans play such a huge role in driving the pattern if those seasonal models are off in forecasting future SST profiles, then the seasonal temp forecasts will be off along with other outcomes. 

 

This is also a great addition to this topic, from Zac. 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

@frd. Below is the latest proxy data on the QBO. Easterly shear stress has propagated slightly below the z20 level at this point. My estimation, given slope and pace of decline in this particular cycle is that neutralization will occur mid-winter. Not much time right now, but I'll have more detailed thoughts on my NAO/AO forecast in my winter outlook, posted in about 10 days. Just waiting on a couple more pieces of data to incorporate into the final formula.

Here's the image:

[poolz1]

Well it was pretty much the only climate model with that look. As we have discussed over and over... a legit -NAO is pretty much extinct during winter until it materializes in real time.

Absolutely. Always nice to at least have a climate model or two go against the grain. But, like I said a few pages back...last year taught me a lot. I really hung my hat on the fact that every climate/long range model show absolute epicness. What’s the difference with every model now showing the opposite of last year? Nothing, IMO. 2 weeks at a time is my new motto...though I do love trying to figure out the longer range stuff. It’s tough to keep my nose out of week 3+.

[CAPE]

Well at least we now know(as we should have all along) that the CanSIPS was still a crap model, as it always had been, and despite this "update" it surely will continue to be...complete crap.

[uncle W]

one thing for sure is a negative AO and NAO means better chances for a colder than normal December with more snow...

Washington DC's coldest and warmest Decembers since 1950 with the monthly AO/NAO and snowfall as of Dec. 31st..

year.....ave temp.....snowfall.....AO...…...NAO

1989......27.9...……...12.5".....-0.644.....-1.15

1960......31.0...………..8.7".....-0.343..... 0.06

1963......31.1...………..6.4".....-1.178.....-1.92

2000......31.8...………..2.0".....-2.354.....-0.58

1959......32.9...………….T.....…-0.042..... 0.44

1962......33.2...………16.2".....-0.711.....-1.32

1955......33.6...………..2.8".....-0.444..... 0.17

2010......34.6...………..2.1".....-2.631.....-1.85

1976......35.5...………..1.4".....-2.074.....-1.60

1950......35.6...………..5.4".....-1.928.....-1.02

1995......35.6...………..1.8".....-2.127.....-1.67

1983......36.0...………..0.3"..... 0.186..... 0.29

1969......36.3...………..6.8".....-1.856.....-0.28

1961......36.4...………..2.5".....-1.668.....-1.48

1985......36.4...………..0.7".....-1.948..... 0.22

2005......36.4...………..4.8".....-2.104.....-0.44

1968......36.6...………….T...…..-0.783.....-1.40

...………….........………………………...………………………......….

2015......51.2...………….0...….. 1.444..... 2.24

1984......45.6...………..0.3"..... 0.446..... 0.00

1982......45.5...………..6.6"..….. 0.967..... 1.78.

1971......45.5...………..1.5"..... 0.824..... 0.60.

2001......45.5...………….0.....…-1.322.....-0.83

2012......45.4...………..0.2".....-1.749..... 0.17.

2011......45.0...………….T...….. 2.221..... 2.52.

1990......44.5...………..3.0"..... 1.277..... 0.22

1998......44.4...………..0.5"..... 1.353..... 0.87

1994......44.2...………….T...…... 0.894..... 2.02

1956......44.2...………..0.2"..... 0.001..... 0.10

2006......44.2...………….T...… ..2.282..... 1.34

1979......43.7...………….T...….. 1.295..... 1.00

2014......43.7...………….T...….. 0.413..... 1.86

1972......43.6...………….T...….. 1.238..... 0.19

2018......43.5...………..1.4"..... 0.110..... 0.61

1974......43.1...………..0.1"..... 0.556..... 1.50

1978......43.1...………..3.1".....-0.980.....-1.57

[Jebman]

Washington DC and the greater Mid Atlantic Region are in for a very very frigid winter of 2019-20 with very well above normal amounts of snow.

Book it.

[aldie 22]

Lol guess I'll check in on Wednesday next

[CAPE]

44 minutes ago, leesburg 04 said:

Lol guess I'll check in on Wednesday next

It's early yet.

We just can't know.

[CAPE]

9 hours ago, uncle W said:

one thing for sure is a negative AO and NAO means better chances for a colder than normal December with more snow...

Washington DC's coldest and warmest Decembers since 1950 with the monthly AO/NAO and snowfall as of Dec. 31st..

year.....ave temp.....snowfall.....AO...…...NAO

1989......27.9...……...12.5".....-0.644.....-1.15

1960......31.0...………..8.7".....-0.343..... 0.06

1963......31.1...………..6.4".....-1.178.....-1.92

2000......31.8...………..2.0".....-2.354.....-0.58

1959......32.9...………….T.....…-0.042..... 0.44

1962......33.2...………16.2".....-0.711.....-1.32

1955......33.6...………..2.8".....-0.444..... 0.17

2010......34.6...………..2.1".....-2.631.....-1.85

1976......35.5...………..1.4".....-2.074.....-1.60

1950......35.6...………..5.4".....-1.928.....-1.02

1995......35.6...………..1.8".....-2.127.....-1.67

1983......36.0...………..0.3"..... 0.186..... 0.29

1969......36.3...………..6.8".....-1.856.....-0.28

1961......36.4...………..2.5".....-1.668.....-1.48

1985......36.4...………..0.7".....-1.948..... 0.22

2005......36.4...………..4.8".....-2.104.....-0.44

1968......36.6...………….T...…..-0.783.....-1.40

...………….........………………………...………………………......….

2015......51.2...………….0...….. 1.444..... 2.24

1984......45.6...………..0.3"..... 0.446..... 0.00

1982......45.5...………….0...….. 0.967..... 1.78.

1971......45.5...………..1.5"..... 0.824..... 0.60.

2001......45.5...………….0.....…-1.322.....-0.83

2012......45.4...………..0.2".....-1.749..... 0.17.

2011......45.0...………….T...….. 2.221..... 2.52.

1990......44.5...………..3.0"..... 1.277..... 0.22

1998......44.4...………..0.5"..... 1.353..... 0.87

1994......44.2...………….T...…... 0.894..... 2.02

1956......44.2...………..0.2"..... 0.001..... 0.10

2006......44.2...………….T...… ..2.282..... 1.34

1979......43.7...………….T...….. 1.295..... 1.00

2014......43.7...………….T...….. 0.413..... 1.86

1972......43.6...………….T...….. 1.238..... 0.19

2018......43.5...………..1.4"..... 0.110..... 0.61

1974......43.1...………..0.1"..... 0.556..... 1.50

1978......43.1...………..3.1".....-0.980.....-1.57

Yup. A -AO along with a Nino have the highest correlation to above avg snow for DC I believe. Not surprising. When there is a sustained -AO, there is also a tendency for NA blocking to develop. Nino strength and location also has an influence on the NAO state.

[mattie g]

10 hours ago, WxUSAF said:

If NAO <= 0 then NAO = +5

CASE WHEN CANSIPS.NAO > 0 THEN ‘ORANGE’ ELSE ‘ORANGE’ END AS SHITE

[uncle W]

14 hours ago, uncle W said:

one thing for sure is a negative AO and NAO means better chances for a colder than normal December with more snow...

Washington DC's coldest and warmest Decembers since 1950 with the monthly AO/NAO and snowfall as of Dec. 31st..

year.....ave temp.....snowfall.....AO...…...NAO

1989......27.9...……...12.5".....-0.644.....-1.15

1960......31.0...………..8.7".....-0.343..... 0.06

1963......31.1...………..6.4".....-1.178.....-1.92

2000......31.8...………..2.0".....-2.354.....-0.58

1959......32.9...………….T.....…-0.042..... 0.44

1962......33.2...………16.2".....-0.711.....-1.32

1955......33.6...………..2.8".....-0.444..... 0.17

2010......34.6...………..2.1".....-2.631.....-1.85

1976......35.5...………..1.4".....-2.074.....-1.60

1950......35.6...………..5.4".....-1.928.....-1.02

1995......35.6...………..1.8".....-2.127.....-1.67

1983......36.0...………..0.3"..... 0.186..... 0.29

1969......36.3...………..6.8".....-1.856.....-0.28

1961......36.4...………..2.5".....-1.668.....-1.48

1985......36.4...………..0.7".....-1.948..... 0.22

2005......36.4...………..4.8".....-2.104.....-0.44

1968......36.6...………….T...…..-0.783.....-1.40

...………….........………………………...………………………......….

2015......51.2...………….0...….. 1.444..... 2.24

1984......45.6...………..0.3"..... 0.446..... 0.00

1982......45.5...………..6.6"..… 0.967..... 1.78.

1971......45.5...………..1.5"..... 0.824..... 0.60.

2001......45.5...………….0.....…-1.322.....-0.83

2012......45.4...………..0.2".....-1.749..... 0.17.

2011......45.0...………….T...….. 2.221..... 2.52.

1990......44.5...………..3.0"..... 1.277..... 0.22

1998......44.4...………..0.5"..... 1.353..... 0.87

1994......44.2...………….T...…... 0.894..... 2.02

1956......44.2...………..0.2"..... 0.001..... 0.10

2006......44.2...………….T...… ..2.282..... 1.34

1979......43.7...………….T...….. 1.295..... 1.00

2014......43.7...………….T...….. 0.413..... 1.86

1972......43.6...………….T...….. 1.238..... 0.19

2018......43.5...………..1.4"..... 0.110..... 0.61

1974......43.1...………..0.1"..... 0.556..... 1.50

1978......43.1...………..3.1".....-0.980.....-1.57

edit...1982 should have 6.6" of snow...the AO went briefly neg on the 12th when DC got the 6.6"...2001 was horrible despite a favorable ao/nao...go figure...

[osfan24]

All this complaining and the GFS says we will be almost halfway to our annual snowfall by mid November. 

[Maestrobjwa]

20 minutes ago, osfan24 said:

All this complaining and the GFS says we will be almost halfway to our annual snowfall by mid November. 

Man...why can't they get that thing right? It's becoming more of an embarrassment...(was hoping they'd have a better upgrade for this winter!)

[CoolHandMike]

I tried to make sense of all of that data:

 

[frd]

Well now, this is a surprise, really taking off.  Granted only a forecast,  but still rather concerning in view of some using this data as a means to associate the seasonal models and the crap AO and NAO forecasts.  Not what we want to see.

courtesy 33andrain posted 3 hours ago

from Snowy  Hibbo 

<<<<<<<<

Well that throws the forecast for a decent December back to the drawing board.

 

At least: what goes up must come down.

>>>>>>>

 

[showmethesnow]

6 hours ago, frd said:

Well now, this is a surprise, really taking off.  Granted only a forecast,  but still rather concerning in view of some using this data as a means to associate the seasonal models and the crap AO and NAO forecasts.  Not what we want to see.

courtesy 33andrain posted 3 hours ago

from Snowy  Hibbo 

<<<<<<<<

Well that throws the forecast for a decent December back to the drawing board.

 

At least: what goes up must come down.

>>>>>>>

 

Graph of the above is the forecasted zonal wind from early October through the present. But if you looked at what we actually saw, it came no where near to verifying (circled below). In fact after a mild bump up in speeds we saw a subsequent noticeable decline. 

Now the GEFS forecasted winds show a continuation of the decline for the next few days before we do see a bump up of wind speeds again but one would have to take that with a good deal of caution after its pretty noteworthy Fail on its last predicted spike.

Now it probably isn't worth much, but the seasonal (CFS) actually shows a fairly significant drop in wind speeds through the winter in particular during the heart of winter. For those not familiar this probably would signify a weakened/disturbed/displaced strat Pv as well as hopefully a predominantly -AO regime through the winter.

 

[showmethesnow]

Nothing in your face about what the GEFS is now throwing at us but this is a very workable look during the winter (probably still a month too soon at this point though). Also a good example of why you don't just look at indices alone but you also need to see the bigger picture and see how all the pieces are interacting. Through this 5 day time period at the end of the extended we are seeing a weak -AO, a neutral NAO, a weak -EPO moving neutral, a moderate -WPO, and a neutral PNA. Looking at these indice values alone you would probably MEH our chances. And yet put them together and I would put our chances of scoring better then average during the winter. The EPS doesn't look as promising, in fact it probably favors the GL into the interior of the NE, but it really isn't that far from being workable look as well.

Now the differences between the GEFS and the EPS on the flow through the CONUS are minimal at best so one may ask why one looks better then the other. So I thought I would throw up what is causing this slight difference. If you look at the GEFS below and look around Alaska we are seeing the upper latitude ridging setting up through the Aleutians with troughing to the east through Alaska. What this is creating is a flat PAC flow underneath that into the US. Over top of that feature we are seeing the N Stream dumping down into the US. This flat PAC flow is helping to divert any energy streaming down the N Stream to the east instead of allowing energy to move towards and strengthening the weakness/trough we see in the Southwest. Subsequently we are seeing the upper latitude trough setting up through the Midwest in a favorable local for our region.

But look what we are seeing with the EPS. The ridging and troughing up around Alaska are flipped. What this is allowing is ridging to develop off of the west coast in the PAC flow which in turn favors troughing to develop to its east. Think of this tendency for troughing as an invite for any energy flowing down the N Stream to go visit the weakness we see in the SW. And in fact this is what we are seeing on the EPS. Now the ridging and troughing on the west coast aren't extreme so we are only seeing a partial dump of N Stream energy into the SW. But this partial dump is enough to strengthen the troughing just enough to see a subsequent bump of heights in the southeast CONUS (black circle) that we do not see on the GEFS. One other thing you will note is that this partial dump in energy in the SW is also skewing the upper latitude trough westward away from the Midwest that we see on the GEFS. This whole setup alters the flow in the east and shifts it northwards. Now as I said the EPS is close, it wouldn't take much to flip its current look into a workable look as well. Then again, it wouldn't take much to flip the GEFS as well. Just a little bit of energy gets dumped into the southwest from the N Stream and we end up with the EPS scenario.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[WinterWxLuvr]

5 hours ago, showmethesnow said:

Nothing in your face about what the GEFS is now throwing at us but this is a very workable look during the winter (probably still a month too soon at this point though). Also a good example of why you don't just look at indices alone but you also need to see the bigger picture and see how all the pieces are interacting. Through this 5 day time period at the end of the extended we are seeing a weak -AO, a neutral NAO, a weak -EPO moving neutral, a moderate -WPO, and a neutral PNA. Looking at these indice values alone you would probably MEH our chances. And yet put them together and I would put our chances of scoring better then average during the winter. The EPS doesn't look as promising, in fact it probably favors the GL into the interior of the NE, but it really isn't that far from being workable look as well.

Now the differences between the GEFS and the EPS on the flow through the CONUS are minimal at best so one may ask why one looks better then the other. So I thought I would throw up what is causing this slight difference. If you look at the GEFS below and look around Alaska we are seeing the upper latitude ridging setting up through the Aleutians with troughing to the east through Alaska. What this is creating is a flat PAC flow underneath that into the US. Over top of that feature we are seeing the N Stream dumping down into the US. This flat PAC flow is helping to divert any energy streaming down the N Stream to the east instead of allowing energy to move towards and strengthening the weakness/trough we see in the Southwest. Subsequently we are seeing the upper latitude trough setting up through the Midwest in a favorable local for our region.

But look what we are seeing with the EPS. The ridging and troughing up around Alaska are flipped. What this is allowing is ridging to develop off of the west coast in the PAC flow which in turn favors troughing to develop to its east. Think of this tendency for troughing as an invite for any energy flowing down the N Stream to go visit the weakness we see in the SW. And in fact this is what we are seeing on the EPS. Now the ridging and troughing on the west coast aren't extreme so we are only seeing a partial dump of N Stream energy into the SW. But this partial dump is enough to strengthen the troughing just enough to see a subsequent bump of heights in the southeast CONUS (black circle) that we do not see on the GEFS. One other thing you will note is that this partial dump in energy in the SW is also skewing the upper latitude trough westward away from the Midwest that we see on the GEFS. This whole setup alters the flow in the east and shifts it northwards. Now as I said the EPS is close, it wouldn't take much to flip its current look into a workable look as well. Then again, it wouldn't take much to flip the GEFS as well. Just a little bit of energy gets dumped into the southwest from the N Stream and we end up with the EPS scenario.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The biggest difference I see is basically the ridge position over Alaska. Across the continental US the flow is very similar. Both look like an opportunity of some southern stream energy to flow along the southern border into an east coast trough. Not a bad setup imo. I think people also tend to be swayed by the colors on those maps. If I can read a map scale properly, that height anomaly over the se amounts to about 50 feet above normal for that pressure level. Doubt that that is significant. The flow looks good on both. Now what it might evolve into is another story and one I wouldn’t even venture a guess about.

[poolz1]

Also, the flow feeding the Canadian trough is straight out of Siberia and the Arctic. Creating a nice source region for us down the road.

[showmethesnow]

1 hour ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

The biggest difference I see is basically the ridge position over Alaska. Across the continental US the flow is very similar. Both look like an opportunity of some southern stream energy to flow along the southern border into an east coast trough. Not a bad setup imo. I think people also tend to be swayed by the colors on those maps. If I can read a map scale properly, that height anomaly over the se amounts to about 50 feet above normal for that pressure level. Doubt that that is significant. The flow looks good on both. Now what it might evolve into is another story and one I wouldn’t even venture a guess about.

The problem with the EPS is that any system that amplifies/strengthens to our west in that setup would tend to move poleward until it meets some resistance towards US/Canada border probably putting it to our north and west as it passes by. Now this look is suggestive of possible over running events where weak energy slides along the boundary kicking moisture into the colder air. But even then I think we would be fighting to see the energy slide under us. Even if we did see the energy sliding under us if you look at the pressure anomalies they would argue that any more noteable winter precip would be located towards the border where the stronger neg anomalies are located. This is where you will typically see the deeper colder air located. EPS has us on the northern fringe of the + pressure anomalies which is where you typically do not want to be in an over running setup (shallow cold, if any, quickly eroded) if you want more then a possible quick shot of wintery precip before a quick flip over to rain.

[showmethesnow]

1 hour ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

The biggest difference I see is basically the ridge position over Alaska. Across the continental US the flow is very similar. Both look like an opportunity of some southern stream energy to flow along the southern border into an east coast trough. Not a bad setup imo. I think people also tend to be swayed by the colors on those maps. If I can read a map scale properly, that height anomaly over the se amounts to about 50 feet above normal for that pressure level. Doubt that that is significant. The flow looks good on both. Now what it might evolve into is another story and one I wouldn’t even venture a guess about.

The EPS is actually a pretty good look when it comes to the EPO/WPO regions. Right now it is just missing but slide that ridging eastward 100/200 miles where it is over cutting the SW weakness/troughing somewhat (would mitigate the N Stream dumps into the west) and the upper latitude trough and the flow through the east notably improves. 

[frd]

6 hours ago, showmethesnow said:

The EPS doesn't look as promising, in fact it probably favors the GL into the interior of the NE, but it really isn't that far from being workable look as well.

Now the differences between the GEFS and the EPS on the flow through the CONUS are minimal at best so one may ask why one looks better then the other. So I thought I would throw up what is causing this slight difference. If you look at the GEFS below and look around Alaska we are seeing the upper latitude ridging setting up through the Aleutians with troughing to the east through Alaska. What this is creating is a flat PAC flow underneath that into the US.

@showmethesnow good post but I can't stop having concerns for our area in the heart of winter until we see some type of change in the ongoing long duration pattern. 

I really didn't even notice this in a general sense, but Eric Webb posted recently that what we are seeing is the same general pattern repeating over and over, for a period of years. 

For the last year I have seen the same issues manifest themselves in the Pacific, the semi permanent Central Pac High,  robust WAR, the Pac configuration of SSTS,  the very fast Pac jet, lack of West Coast ridging , etc. The areas that are benefiting from this so far are the same as last year, Northern Plains, Rockies, and when it gets deeper into the season areas  to our far North will join the list.  

What are your thoughts when this multi year pattern changes?

showme, one caveat IMHO,  if get Davis Straights blocking develops,  or shift ridging out West East a bit in our favored climo period, then bang you can have a severe winter outbreak here.   

Here is what Webb said:

Eric Webb

 

@webberweather

This pattern goes back to 2012-13* and has persisted in some way, shape, or form in every winter besides the 2015-16 Super Nino. There's very little, if any reason to believe it won't be around this year.

 

[showmethesnow]

14 minutes ago, frd said:

@showmethesnow good post but I can't stop having concerns for our area in the heart of winter until we see some type of change in the ongoing long duration pattern. 

I really didn't even notice this in a general sense, but Eric Webb posted recently that what we are seeing is the same general pattern repeating over and over, for a period of years. 

For the last year I have seen the same issues manifest themselves in the Pacific, the semi permanent Central Pac High,  robust WAR, the Pac configuration of SSTS,  the very fast Pac jet, lack of West Coast ridging , etc. The areas that are benefiting from this so far are the same as last year, Northern Plains, Rockies, and when it gets deeper into the season areas  to our far North will join the list.  

What are your thoughts when this multi year pattern changes?

showme, one caveat IMHO,  if get Davis Straights blocking develops,  or shift ridging out West East a bit in our favored climo period, then bang you can have a severe winter outbreak here.   

 

It has felt like forever where every second post of mine during the winter has discussed energy dumping/not dumping into the perpetual weakness we see in the southwest. There is only so many times you can mention that we need to see the west coast ridging slide eastward over cutting the weakness in the southwest. Or that we don't want to see a stronger trough because it will bump up the SE ridging. Or that we need to see a -NAO (and not getting it) to offset the PAC's influence with the CONUS flow.

So when does it end? IT ENDS NOW, DAMIT! Because I said so. 

But in all seriousness I believe we will see changes within the PAC when we finally start realizing a legit -NAO regime during the winter again. When will that happen though? My money is that we will see that flip this year or next. Actually somewhat optimistic that we may see it this year though it may be the latter half of winter before it starts manifesting itself.

[frd]

21 minutes ago, showmethesnow said:

But in all seriousness I believe we will see changes within the PAC when we finally start realizing a legit -NAO regime during the winter again. When will that happen though? My money is that we will see that flip this year or next. Actually somewhat optimistic that we may see it this year though it may be the latter half of winter before it starts manifesting itself.

Well you are in good company , Benchmark thinks we get a -NAO. 

In 8 days I think isotherm releases his forecast and I am found of his work forecasting NAO phase.       

From a simply solar min perspective it tends to show up,  although some research, as you know, states a lag period. 

[poolz1]

Well you are in good company , Benchmark thinks we get a -NAO. 
In 8 days I think isotherm releases his forecast and I am found of his work forecasting NAO phase.       
From a simply solar min perspective it tends to show up,  although some research, as you know, states a lag period. 

If the epic blocking during 09/10 was due in part from the low solar, then the lag has already occurred. (That’s more of a question than a statement). We are currently running very close to that period of time. Some hopes last year that the low solar would help us and maybe it effects started to snowball early this spring and is in process?

[Treckasec]

1 hour ago, frd said:

good post but I can't stop having concerns for our area in the heart of winter until we see some type of change in the ongoing long duration pattern. 

I really didn't even notice this in a general sense, but Eric Webb posted recently that what we are seeing is the same general pattern repeating over and over, for a period of years. 

For the last year I have seen the same issues manifest themselves in the Pacific, the semi permanent Central Pac High,  robust WAR, the Pac configuration of SSTS,  the very fast Pac jet, lack of West Coast ridging , etc. The areas that are benefiting from this so far are the same as last year, Northern Plains, Rockies, and when it gets deeper into the season areas  to our far North will join the list.  

This pattern goes back to 2012-13* and has persisted in some way, shape, or form in every winter besides the 2015-16 Super Nino. There's very little, if any reason to believe it won't be around this year.

 

For what it's worth... Only some of the winters between 12-13 and 18-19 exhibited that average pattern. Those winters are: 13-14, 14-15 (not a great match, though), and 17-18. Those winters were better 'round these parts compared to the other winters: 12-13, 15-16, 16-17, and 18-19. Though, I do remember this region having some difficulties in 17-18 with being too far west for some of the coastals. Regardless, that average pattern has generally not been terrible, even if it hasn't been conducive for large, slow nor'easters like those seen in 09-10. 

 

12-13

 

13-14

 

14-15

 

15-16

 

16-17

 

17-18

 

18-19

 

[frd]

27 minutes ago, poolz1 said:

 

If the epic blocking during 09/10 was due in part from the low solar, then the lag has already occurred. (That’s more of a question than a statement). We are currently running very close to that period of time. Some hopes last year that the low solar would help us and maybe it effects started to snowball early this spring and is in process?

 

BAMMwx ( good winter seasonal record ) has very high value placed on solar min this winter, while some research   has the solar min effects on ocean currents take a multi year lag to manifest itself.  As far as I can tell we are close to a bottom. 

[showmethesnow]

58 minutes ago, frd said:

Well you are in good company , Benchmark thinks we get a -NAO. 

In 8 days I think isotherm releases his forecast and I am found of his work forecasting NAO phase.       

From a simply solar min perspective it tends to show up,  although some research, as you know, states a lag period. 

Solar factors into my thoughts, though as you said there is typically a lag time from the min. And the question there is when do we actually hit the min. Not to mention that it correlates more to general high latitude blocking (-AO) then to specifically a -NAO though the blocking tends to favor the NAO region. QBO and its progression also are factoring in. There are also other small things here and there as well as tendencies within the pattern that are influencing my thoughts. 

DUH! Wrote this up awhile ago and just realized I never posted it.  Getting old sucks. 

[frd]

38 minutes ago, showmethesnow said:

Solar factors into my thoughts, though as you said there is typically a lag time from the min. And the question there is when do we actually hit the min. Not to mention that it correlates more to general high latitude blocking (-AO) then to specifically a -NAO though the blocking tends to favor the NAO region. QBO and its progression also are factoring in. There are also other small things here and there as well as tendencies within the pattern that are influencing my thoughts. 

DUH! Wrote this up awhile ago and just realized I never posted it.  Getting old sucks. 

Things such as ozone also factor in, as HM mentions this from time to time as well.

One Fall many years ago there was chatter among some pros that focused on a sudden ramp up in solar activity near the min. This might have been  the solar min prior to the 09 - 10 winter. 

I was looking at various factors lately and it certainly it appears no worries, we continue to move lower in many of the metrics.    

[Maestrobjwa]

2 hours ago, frd said:

BAMMwx ( good winter seasonal record ) has very high value placed on solar min this winter, while some research   has the solar min effects on ocean currents take a multi year lag to manifest itself.  As far as I can tell we are close to a bottom. 

Now what I haven't understood about the solar minimum...now a local met (Tony Pann) tweeted a couple months ago that we had the highest number of spotless days since 2009...Now was 2009 already after the minimum? Now one wikipedia source had the official "start" of the current cycle as being in late 2008...so that would support the lag idea. But then...we have 1995-96 winter...where it appears we bottomed out in 1996 (yet we had the crazy blocking and historic la nina winter that preceded that minimum...interesting)

 

Also seemed to take advantage of the minimum in 1986-87...with the minimum being recorded as September 1986 (would that be like a 4-month lag or coincidence?)