January 2023

[LibertyBell]

1 minute ago, donsutherland1 said:

The split was 33-24.

Don if you get a chance, please do the 1-30 comparisons of both months after the 30th splits come out.

It would also be interesting to see if that month had every day above normal right up to the 31st.

 

[donsutherland1]

11 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Don if you get a chance, please do the 1-30 comparisons of both months after the 30th splits come out.

It would also be interesting to see if that month had every day above normal right up to the 31st.

 

The January 1-30, 1932 mean temperature was 43.7.

[LoboLeader1]

NYC saw nearly 10 hours of daylight today. Looking forward to an early spring and putting this lackluster winter in the rearview mirror.

[LibertyBell]

21 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

The January 1-30, 1932 mean temperature was 43.7.

I would love to see where we stand after the 30th this month.  Were 1-30 above normal in 1932 also?

 

[LibertyBell]

20 minutes ago, LoboLeader1 said:

NYC saw nearly 10 hours of daylight today. Looking forward to an early spring and putting this lackluster winter in the rearview mirror.

That may happen after that 4 day cold shot next week.

 

[donsutherland1]

9 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

I would love to see where we stand after the 30th this month.  Were 1-30 above normal in 1932 also?

 

Yes. The high was 60 and the low was 33.

[dWave]

On 1/27/2023 at 9:13 PM, Volcanic Winter said:

UHI in NYC is insane sometimes. Way worse than I ever realized. 

I’m already at 27F right now 47 miles due south: 

Only 3 freezing or below lows for the month, and they were all marginal. You could argue NYC hasn't had a true hard freeze in Jan, which I previously wouldn't think is possible.

[LibertyBell]

20 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

Yes. The high was 60 and the low was 33.

Oh the split was 60/33 on the 30th?  Wow thats quite the split...a cold front must have come through that night too.

Were the first 30 days of January above normal that year too, Don?

So far our lowest January temperature has been 28, I don't see that changing, so that could be another way we beat 1932.
You know if we don't beat 1932 numerous people are going to say that since we weren't warmer, this is cyclic and can't be human caused climate change.

 

[donsutherland1]

8 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Oh the split was 60/33 on the 30th?  Wow thats quite the split...a cold front must have come through that night too.

Were the first 30 days of January above normal that year too, Don?

So far our lowest January temperature has been 28, I don't see that changing, so that could be another way we beat 1932.
You know if we don't beat 1932 numerous people are going to say that since we weren't warmer, this is cyclic and can't be human caused climate change.

 

No. January 4, 1932 was slightly below normal.

[winterwx21]

0z RGEM has steady light accumulating snow tuesday night into wednesday morning. That gets my attention since RGEM has been so good.

Overall the models have been all over the place with these little waves for mid to late week. Impossible to predict right now, but it seems as if we have a shot of seeing something in the tuesday to friday time period when we have cold air in place. 

[eduggs]

19 minutes ago, winterwx21 said:

0z RGEM has steady light accumulating snow tuesday night into wednesday morning. That gets my attention since RGEM has been so good.

Overall the models have been all over the place with these little waves for mid to late week. Impossible to predict right now, but it seems as if we have a shot of seeing something in the tuesday to friday time period when we have cold air in place. 

Weak waves in fast flow are difficult to model. The 0z RGEM might break the snowless streak for NYC, but overall looks very minor. Rest of the period looks suppressed on all guidance.

[Winterweatherlover]

4 hours ago, mannynyc said:

The NAM is drunk again.

In this case it has some support from the RGEM

https://www.pivotalweather.com/model.php?m=rdps&rh=2023012900&fh=84

[MJO812]

Cmc and gfs has a coastal during the 1st week. Coastal huggers this far out

[LibertyBell]

45 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

No. January 4, 1932 was slightly below normal.

I still think that we'll build enough of a cushion so that the marginally cold air on Tuesday won't really matter-- it's still 50 degrees and I dont see it getting lower than 45 tonight, Don.

Same for tomorrow night.  Hopefully we boost the average to 44, where EWR is at, and that should be enough of a cushion for the new record.

 

[Winterweatherlover]

9 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Cmc and gfs has a coastal during the 1st week. Coastal huggers this far out

Too bad the cold air has departed but a low as strong as depicted could produce its own cold air so it would depend on the track. 

[SnoSki14]

I wonder if the big time cold shot the models show for early Feb will verify. GFS gives us subzero readings actually

You may think it's crazy but it happened in Feb 2016 after a ridiculously warm December. 

[Wxoutlooksblog]

22 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

I wonder if the big time cold shot the models show for early Feb will verify. GFS gives us subzero readings actually

You may think it's crazy but it happened in Feb 2016 after a ridiculously warm December. 

There's a reasonable chance it ends up colder than forecast just because of the cold air's origins and it's track into the lower 48. It's not dumping south then coming east it's coming down across the upper Great Lakes and Ontario and the winds will blow right down the Hudson Valley which often brings us our coldest temperatures here in NYC.

WX/PT

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, Wxoutlooksblog said:

There's a reasonable chance it ends up colder than forecast just because of the cold air's origins and it's track into the lower 48. It's not dumping south then coming east it's coming down across the upper Great Lakes and Ontario and the winds will blow right down the Hudson Valley which often brings us our coldest temperatures here in NYC.

WX/PT

Not this first colder airmass that one will be going down to Texas first.  The real arctic airmass is the one that comes at the end of the week correct?  The first one is just average cold.

 

[Wxoutlooksblog]

18 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Not this first colder airmass that one will be going down to Texas first.  The real arctic airmass is the one that comes at the end of the week correct?  The first one is just average cold.

 

I don't even consider the first one cold. The discussion previous was primarily about later in the week/weekend. I guess if I'm not pinpoint specific you're going to assume I'm making an incorrect comment. 2-3 posts above mine nobody but you are even mentioning the airmass for Tues-Thurs and by my words it is clear what I'm talking about.

WX/PT

[MANDA]

5 hours ago, Wxoutlooksblog said:

There's a reasonable chance it ends up colder than forecast just because of the cold air's origins and it's track into the lower 48. It's not dumping south then coming east it's coming down across the upper Great Lakes and Ontario and the winds will blow right down the Hudson Valley which often brings us our coldest temperatures here in NYC.

WX/PT

With the forecast trajectory of the cold air mass, origin, track and position of the high pressure just imagine what could happen with a snowpack for the late week outbreak!  NYC would have a shot at zero or a tad below.  The airmass over southeast Canada and adjacent NYS/NE will be truly untouched pure Arctic air.  Intensely cold.  We may rival some of the overnight lows of the Christmas outbreak but not quite get to those levels.  Might be close though depending on a few factors.  Not the least of which is the timing of the coldest of the 850's over the area.  Useless cold air I know but at least SOMETHING to take interest in.

[LibertyBell]

4 hours ago, Wxoutlooksblog said:

I don't even consider the first one cold. The discussion previous was primarily about later in the week/weekend. I guess if I'm not pinpoint specific you're going to assume I'm making an incorrect comment. 2-3 posts above mine nobody but you are even mentioning the airmass for Tues-Thurs and by my words it is clear what I'm talking about.

WX/PT

Others have said that the "cold is coming in Tuesday" in reference to a possible snow event Tuesday night, but that really isn't all that cold, it's average at best. I bet that we'll still have highs near 40 with that first airmass, regardless of what the models are saying (they've been underdoing temps by 5 degrees or even more.)

 

 

[EasternLI]

Past 30 days of OLR(shading) with 200mb velocity potential from JMA. Past 30 days of sst averaged. Warm pool did the heavy lifting in the tropics this month. You'd expect a horrible Pacific with this type of positioning here. Just like we got. I have a theory about why the Pacific jet may have remained supercharged for so long as well. With the TPV parked in siberia for the bulk of the month. Which set some cold records there. Then you have this warm pool sitting directly south of that. I'm wondering if that sharp temperature contrast between the two features at least helped that happen. The longevity of it. Can't prove that right now, but it's a idea. 

[The 4 Seasons]

Congrats on tying the record today for latest first measurable in NYC. Tomorrow breaks it.

[CIK62]

The last 3 days of January are averaging      44degs.(38/51)or +11.

Month to date is     43.2[+9.5}.          January should end at      43.3[+9.6].    Second Place or Better.

Reached 51 here yesterday at 3pm.

Today:    48-52, wind sw.,  m. cloudy, 44 tomorrow AM.

35 Days of preparation to get a few BN days:

43*(67%RH) here at 6am.      46* at 9am.      47* at 10am.       48* at Noon.      down to 46* at 1pm.     up to 52* at 3pm.      48* at 8pm.

[SACRUS]

48 hour arctic shot Friday - Sunday - looks similar to Christmas Eve into Christmas day type readings.   Have to wonder if a clipper starts to show up on guidance towards the end of the weekend.    Beyond there back on the warmer side of the street by the 7th.

 

 

[SACRUS]

Records

 

Highs:

EWR: 70 (2002)
NYC: 69 (2002)
LGA: 68 (2002)


Lows:

EWR: 0 (1977)
NYC: 0 (1873)
LGA: 7 (2005)

 

Historical :

1780 - On the coldest morning of a severe winter the mercury dipped to 16 degrees below zero at New York City, and reached 20 degrees below zero at Hartford CT. New York Harbor was frozen for five weeks, allowing a heavy cannon to be taken across the ice to fortify the British on Staten Island. (The Weather Channel)

[donsutherland1]

New York City's snow season futility rankings through January 28th:

[wdrag]

For the ensemble checkers within our membership: The Canadian and United States ensembles are similar through 10 days-nothing major but offering a mean of 1-4" VA to New England whilst the European has been suppressing chances and less than 1". Ensembles tend to be conservative because of the spread in their multiple solutions. It's been an unusual and overall warm winter here in the eastern USA but I think there has to be a hazardous event sometime between Tue the 31st and Tue Feb 7 from VA to New England.  Whether that includes first measurable snow of the season DCA-NYC???   It's sort of between 1/31-2/7, thereafter odds for sticking seem to decrease considerably 2/8-15. 

[MJO812]

Pretty amazing how the Euro and GFS show brutal cold temps for highs and lows next weekend even if it's for one day.

[EasternLI]

1 hour ago, EasternLI said:

Past 30 days of OLR(shading) with 200mb velocity potential from JMA. Past 30 days of sst averaged. Warm pool did the heavy lifting in the tropics this month. You'd expect a horrible Pacific with this type of positioning here. Just like we got. I have a theory about why the Pacific jet may have remained supercharged for so long as well. With the TPV parked in siberia for the bulk of the month. Which set some cold records there. Then you have this warm pool sitting directly south of that. I'm wondering if that sharp temperature contrast between the two features at least helped that happen. The longevity of it. Can't prove that right now, but it's a idea. 

Just to tack on to this quickly. The following figure from the following article, nicely displays what we would like to see instead. Bias this further east towards the central Pacific, you can get a nice Pacific. Biased west, extending towards the Indian Ocean, we can get what we've seen. 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49449-7