January 2023 Mid-Long Range Disco

[HighStakes]

16 minutes ago, cbmclean said:

Eastern ridge definitely starting to be beat down by Jan 8th, but 2m anomalies still mostly warm through Jan 12.  Not sure of that is residual from Pac Puke or just the new pattern is meh.

Last 2 run of Euro ensembles backed off slightly on the EPO going negative. It still has it going down but keeps it positive where before it clearly had it neutral to going negative. Let's hope it returns to the looks we were getting before today. Way too early to tell is the new pattern is just meh. AO appears to be negative and PNA firmly positive by the 8th. Last 2 run also also backed off a bit on a -NAO but still has it clise to neutral. We'll see. 

[Daniel Boone]

2 hours ago, Terpeast said:

The way I read this graph is that 100 years ago, we averaged 10 more inches of snow a year than we do now. Or put another way, average snow decreased by 45% over 100 years. 

To be fair, the downtrend started way early - around the 1910s to 1920s. By the 40s and 50s, we were getting similar amounts as now. Then the 60s went bonkers, then back down to around 13-15” a year.

I wonder though, is there a discontinuity in this graph when they changed the measuring station to DCA? And what year was that?

Yeah, the 60's were a snow lovers Decade. The - NAO was pretty much a mainstay. Enso State didn't matter so much nor did the PDO. It would still Snow. 

[DarkSharkWX]

when the jet retracts we should at least get a transient +PNA, +SCAND showing up as well which indicates that Atlantic should get fixed soon, how long this favorable pattern lasts depends on how long jet stays in favorable place. def not a bad look below with +PNA over Rockies, ridging over Canada and Arctic w/ Aleutian low and +SCAND which puts pressure on PV

[Solution Man]

2 hours ago, Terpeast said:

The way I read this graph is that 100 years ago, we averaged 10 more inches of snow a year than we do now. Or put another way, average snow decreased by 45% over 100 years. 

To be fair, the downtrend started way early - around the 1910s to 1920s. By the 40s and 50s, we were getting similar amounts as now. Then the 60s went bonkers, then back down to around 13-15” a year.

I wonder though, is there a discontinuity in this graph when they changed the measuring station to DCA? And what year was that?

“Snowfall records for the District of Columbia date back to 1884. Measurements were recorded at the downtown National Weather Bureau and Signal Service offices along G Street and M Street until the official observation site was moved to National Airport in 1941. Over the years there have been repeated calls to move the official site back to the District.” WTOP

 

[pazzo83]

2 hours ago, WesternFringe said:

No, it is about how the median better represents 140 year data sets and how 10” is a magic cutoff for judging yearly snowfall in DC, as are certain decades better comparison decades than others.   When in reality, annual snowfall remains much the same across 140 years.  And yes, across cities as well.

So, mock away.  But facts are facts.  And average annual snowfall is relatively unchanged in DCA in 140 years.  And is relatively unchanged statistically in most east coast cities now that I am looking into it.

And how many want to explain our poor run of snowfall luck and the unchanging average on more bigger storms and less smaller storms as a result of global warming.  Even though global warming predicts the opposite (less big storms).  

Folks have tried to show you this is just objectively false in a variety of ways.

[WesternFringe]

1 hour ago, pazzo83 said:

Folks have tried to show you this is just objectively false in a variety of ways.

Well, folks are wrong then.  I ran the numbers and the slope of the line is virtually zero.  Yes, DC is getting .03” less per year on average over the 140 year period.  That is statistical noise.   DC is getting 0.17” more per year since 1960s.  That is also statistical noise.

The single digit snowfall years ‘trend’ is arbitrary, too.  Some years with 2 recordable events might yield 9.8” for the season and some years a 10.2” total could have come from 6 recordable storms.  We would need to look at snowfall per event by year to make any valid conclusions on snowstorms trending bigger or not.

i am not trolling.  I simply am saying the numbers in DC at least do not point to a cataclysmic drop in snowfall over the last century and a half.  They just don’t.

[CAPE]

The GEFS has been remarkably consistent with the idea of tracking a wave eastward and off the coast around the 9th. I made a detailed post about the progression on Saturday and it is still pretty much the same. What has changed on the latest runs is somewhat less cold available at that time with the western trough still hanging on. Obv not the best look in the NA either, but that was always the case for this period. CMC ens also has the same general look for this timeframe. Not much else to track for now other than large scale pattern stuff.

[WinterWxLuvr]

45 minutes ago, CAPE said:

The GEFS has been remarkably consistent with the idea of tracking a wave eastward and off the coast around the 9th. I made a detailed post about the progression on Saturday and it is still pretty much the same. What has changed on the latest runs is somewhat less cold available at that time with the western trough still hanging on. Obv not the best look in the NA either, but that was always the case for this period. CMC ens also has the same general look for this timeframe. Not much else to track for now other than large scale pattern stuff.

But the real question is how does it affect the long term snowfall stats in DC?

[CAPE]

1 minute ago, WinterWxLuvr said:

But the real question is how does it affect the long term snowfall stats in DC?

Yes that is of utmost importance. It could be included in a discussion/debate thread on the topic in the Climate change section.

[anotherman]

But the real question is how does it affect the long term snowfall stats in DC?

I thought it was, “what time will the polar vortex hit my house?”

[RevWarReenactor]

Still have not had a plowable snow here since the Blizzard of 2016. So now going on 7 years. I am sure @psuhoffman will be along to tell me how normal that is or perhaps even above average for this area; cool. I am very optimistic though, about a nice chase to upstate NY sometime in January or Feb. Did ALbany last year for a foot. It was so awesome. Highly recommended. 

[CAPE]

10 minutes ago, RevWarReenactor said:

Still have not had a plowable snow here since the Blizzard of 2016. So now going on 7 years. I am sure @psuhoffman will be along to tell me how normal that is or perhaps even above average for this area; cool. I am very optimistic though, about a nice chase to upstate NY sometime in January or Feb. Did ALbany last year for a foot. It was so awesome. Highly recommended. 

Hard to believe, but your area has been betwixt and between a lot lately. Had 3 plowable events here last Jan alone.

[BristowWx]

17 minutes ago, RevWarReenactor said:

Still have not had a plowable snow here since the Blizzard of 2016. So now going on 7 years. I am sure @psuhoffman will be along to tell me how normal that is or perhaps even above average for this area; cool. I am very optimistic though, about a nice chase to upstate NY sometime in January or Feb. Did ALbany last year for a foot. It was so awesome. Highly recommended. 

You’re not alone.  Many areas are suckage.  Mine in particular is almost always too far in one direction.  So grab the shorts ,fire up the grill ,gas up the mower and let’s have the hap happiest New Years this side of the nut house. 

[Solution Man]

8 minutes ago, BristowWx said:

You’re not alone.  Many areas are suckage.  Mine in particular is almost always too far in one direction.  So grab the shorts ,fire up the grill ,gas up the mower and let’s have the hap happiest New Years this side of the nut house. 

Moving golf clubs back to front of garage for end of week and next week and then on to Orlando for a week after that. Can’t get snow, so might as well golf. 

[Terpeast]

10 hours ago, Solution Man said:

“Snowfall records for the District of Columbia date back to 1884. Measurements were recorded at the downtown National Weather Bureau and Signal Service offices along G Street and M Street until the official observation site was moved to National Airport in 1941. Over the years there have been repeated calls to move the official site back to the District.” WTOP

 

Well there we go. This immediately makes the entire graph suspect.

If we really want to get scientific about this, we should cut out anything before 1941. Or pull snowfall records from other stations in/around DC and do a regression against the DCA data, then extrapolate the slope backwards to 1884.

Like Bob Chill said, I’m willing to bet the result will have us just needing one prozac instead of two. 

[BristowWx]

5 minutes ago, Solution Man said:

Moving golf clubs back to front of garage for end of week and next week and then on to Orlando for a week after that. Can’t get snow, so might as well golf. 

 Not a bad idea…if you’re gonna punt half of January might as well enjoy it. 

[Solution Man]

8 minutes ago, Terpeast said:

Well there we go. This immediately makes the entire graph suspect.

If we really want to get scientific about this, we should cut out anything before 1941. Or pull snowfall records from other stations in/around DC and do a regression against the DCA data, then extrapolate the slope backwards to 1884.

Like Bob Chill said, I’m willing to bet the result will have us just needing one prozac instead of two. 

 

[87storms]

18 minutes ago, Terpeast said:

Well there we go. This immediately makes the entire graph suspect.

If we really want to get scientific about this, we should cut out anything before 1941. Or pull snowfall records from other stations in/around DC and do a regression against the DCA data, then extrapolate the slope backwards to 1884.

Like Bob Chill said, I’m willing to bet the result will have us just needing one prozac instead of two. 

Yea, that definitely changes the game, but it does seem like we're not doing as well with the smaller events (i.e., stat padders).  One thing I know that hasn't changed is that most of the data falls between a relatively large range (6-29 inches lol).  We might be a snow town, but we're definitely not a consistent one.  Fringe did this already, but the coefficient of determination is around 6%, so you're just not gonna get much out of running trendlines.  The positive thing to take from any of this is that we still get the occasional MECS/HECS.  The best thing to do (which I've seen done already) might just be to run numbers against the larger teleconnections, specifically ENSO.

[Twilly05]

37 minutes ago, Terpeast said:

Well there we go. This immediately makes the entire graph suspect.

If we really want to get scientific about this, we should cut out anything before 1941. Or pull snowfall records from other stations in/around DC and do a regression against the DCA data, then extrapolate the slope backwards to 1884.

Like Bob Chill said, I’m willing to bet the result will have us just needing one prozac instead of two. 

That’s my point. Skewed data leads to skewed conclusions. 

[Its a Breeze]

10 hours ago, Solution Man said:

“Snowfall records for the District of Columbia date back to 1884. Measurements were recorded at the downtown National Weather Bureau and Signal Service offices along G Street and M Street until the official observation site was moved to National Airport in 1941. Over the years there have been repeated calls to move the official site back to the District.” WTOP

 

Ugh, remember 2016, when literally down the street the recordings were several inches to about a foot more....

Why they choose to still measure at whatever spot they're measuring at DCA is beyond me.

[Solution Man]

3 minutes ago, Its a Breeze said:

Ugh, remember 2016, when literally down the street the recordings were several inches to about a foot more....

Why they choose to still measure at whatever spot they're measuring at DCA is beyond me.

Quote

Completely agree

 

[kgottwald]

On 12/26/2022 at 11:22 PM, pazzo83 said:

lol

Remember 2004-05, when Brownsville, Texas got a white Christmas but the DC area had to wait another month for its first measurable??

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

56 minutes ago, Its a Breeze said:

Ugh, remember 2016, when literally down the street the recordings were several inches to about a foot more....

Why they choose to still measure at whatever spot they're measuring at DCA is beyond me.

There's been a long debate, as I understand, about how representative or not DCA is for "The District" (and the immediate inside-the-beltway area around there) when it comes to snowfall.  Seems there's always a debate after every HECS.  Not sure about temperatures.  It may be pretty well spot-on in terms of the urban heat island effects within the District itself.  But snow?  My own experience is that for several of those big storms, like 2016, DCA has notably less than reports that come out of several locations within the District; places like the National Arboretum, Capitol Hill, and the northwest areas of the city that all typically report.  I used to live in the Capitol Hill neighborhood (up until 2009) and would almost always have more than what DCA officially listed, even for more modest events.  It's tricky, of course, because even within DC there are elevation and other variations that can impact such measurements.

ETA:  Now all that said, using the measurements at DCA to note any trends at that location is still worthwhile I would think.  For whatever that is worth.  I don't really want to get much into the statistical argument that has been raging here the past couple of days other than to say I feel the trends have been clear, even when only taking the National Airport location itself since 1941 and discarding the previous "DC" measurement location in upper NW near Georgetown.  And one other thing:  I don't totally agree with a comment made that global warming necessarily equals "fewer big storms."  In fact, I believe it's been argued that the opposite is true, at least to some extent, though the snowfall impact might be even more restricted to areas that can get cold enough.  Relatively warmer atmosphere, more moisture...and so if you're lucky enough to have the right thermal profile and setup (which we still do get here!) at the right time, you can get a huge HECS-level event like a Jan. 2016.  And I tend to agree with @psuhoffman and some others concerning the more "marginal" events around DC:  that they do seem to be fewer.  I know that's anecdotal and could be related to other factors and trends as well, but even still.

[brooklynwx99]

55 minutes ago, 87storms said:

Yea, that definitely changes the game, but it does seem like we're not doing as well with the smaller events (i.e., stat padders).  One thing I know that hasn't changed is that most of the data falls between a relatively large range (6-29 inches lol).  We might be a snow town, but we're definitely not a consistent one.  Fringe did this already, but the coefficient of determination is around 6%, so you're just not gonna get much out of running trendlines.  The positive thing to take from any of this is that we still get the occasional MECS/HECS.  The best thing to do (which I've seen done already) might just be to run numbers against the larger teleconnections, specifically ENSO.

given the effect of AGW, I think what we're going to be seeing is a lot more winters like 2016... warm for the most part aside from a major storm in the east (or more)

so I could see a decade at BWI with three years at 30-50" and three years under 10" with the winters in the decade cumulatively averaging +3 in temp. just a lot more variance

this is kind of what we've already been seeing, even up in NYC. a lot less nickel and dime stuff, but many, many more NESIS ranked storms over the last 20 years. you guys have had some bad luck over the last 5 years or so since 2016, but I think it's more chalked up to that and an unfavorable base state more than anything

if we flip back to a 2010-2015 esque base state and it's still not snowy, then we'll know something is wrong. until then, just wait for +ENSO... which should be next year

[jayyy]

Jeez, this thread went down the shitter. Let’s move the back and forth about average snowfall and global warming elsewhere please. There is a banter and panic room thread. Please use it if you’re going to going into defcon mode 7 days into winter.

There is zero evidence that the days of seeing solid winters in the MA is over. The mid Atlantic to northeast had a pretty epic run from the mid 90s into the early 2000s and again from 2010-2015, minus a handful of truly crummy winters. To all of a sudden say the “long term trends are alarming” isn’t a sincere analysis based on fact. It’s mainly based on feelings about a lackluster past 6ish years. And even that depends on location.

Northern MD has actually fared pretty well during some of those winters. Does it suck that DC didn’t get in on the fun? Of course it does. But that’s the nature of living in a marginal climate where your average snowfall for any given season is roughly 20”. Sometimes you’re going to have an extended period of bad luck / outcomes when a degree or two and 50 miles makes all of the difference. Meanwhile, Buffalo is at 100” for the winter and it’s December 27th. The weather is unpredictable like that.

Where I’m from in the lower Hudson valley had an awesome stretch of above average seasons (snowfall) from 2000-2015, minus a few duds, with a good number of the past century’s top KUs occurring in that timeframe. We can’t honestly look at the past 20 or so winters and say “welp, guess we’re screwed forever”. That’s nonsense.

Can’t wait to flip back to +ENSO state and to get our mod. Niño so this crapola about it never snowing again can finally stop.

[CAPE]

We really need the NPJ to back off(retract) a bit, and/or shift a little more poleward. The location of the exit region of the jet core favors a trough in the GoA.

It does appear to retract/weaken a bit towards the end of the run. Hopefully we see some relaxation over the next few model cycles.

 

[dallen7908]

Typically, when we are waiting for a pattern transition in the 10-14 day range, discussion of possible stratospheric help in the 2-4 week time frame is filling these pages (for better or worse, usually the latter).  Is there a reason we're not hearing about the possibility of stratospheric help yet this winter? Too early in the season? Not in the cards? Link too weak? 

[CAPE]

1 minute ago, dallen7908 said:

Typically, when we are waiting for a pattern transition in the 10-14 day range, discussion of possible stratospheric help in the 2-4 week time frame is filling these pages (for better or worse, usually the latter).  Is there a reason we're not hearing about the possibility of stratospheric help yet this winter? Too early in the season? Not in the cards? Link too weak? 

Probably just not at that level of desperation yet lol.

I am sure certain hypsters on Twitter are all over it though.

[WxUSAF]

12 minutes ago, dallen7908 said:

Typically, when we are waiting for a pattern transition in the 10-14 day range, discussion of possible stratospheric help in the 2-4 week time frame is filling these pages (for better or worse, usually the latter).  Is there a reason we're not hearing about the possibility of stratospheric help yet this winter? Too early in the season? Not in the cards? Link too weak? 

Probably because the strat vortex is very strong, but also has not been well coupled to the troposphere this winter.

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

18 minutes ago, brooklynwx99 said:

given the effect of AGW, I think what we're going to be seeing is a lot more winters like 2016... warm for the most part aside from a major storm in the east (or more)

so I could see a decade at BWI with three years at 30-50" and three years under 10" with the winters in the decade cumulatively averaging +3 in temp. just a lot more variance

this is kind of what we've already been seeing, even up in NYC. a lot less nickel and dime stuff, but many, many more NESIS ranked storms over the last 20 years. you guys have had some bad luck over the last 5 years or so since 2016, but I think it's more chalked up to that and an unfavorable base state more than anything

if we flip back to a 2010-2015 esque base state and it's still not snowy, then we'll know something is wrong. until then, just wait for +ENSO... which should be next year

Thanks for this.  It's kind of what I was trying to say in part in my comment above, but you worded it a lot better.  That's the idea I was trying to get across, what you said, about an increase in variability even as the base state becomes overall warmer.  And I think what you said about NYC is kind of true here, to a lesser extent:  there are more NESIS-level storms in the past 20 years, though fewer in this area compared to farther north of course.  And fewer of the smaller but still fun events.