February 2023

[LibertyBell]

2 hours ago, tdp146 said:

Eventually these things will clutter the night sky. Try and take a timelapse astrophotography shot and you’ll have streaks of starlinks or the half dozen other companies that are sending stuff up there  

we have that problem with planes too

I'm using freeware called Sequator that removes this stuff from pictures while stacking using the "best pixels" feature.

It still looks ugly in the skies but at least it can easily be removed from images.

[donsutherland1]

New York City's snow season futility rankings through February 14th. As per the guidance, things could change next week.

[donsutherland1]

Morning thoughts…

Today will be partly sunny and unseasonably warm. High temperatures will reach the lower and middle 60s in most areas. Likely high temperatures around the region include:

New York City (Central Park): 62°

Newark: 65°

Philadelphia: 65°

Unseasonably mild weather will prevail through Friday.

Normals:

New York City: 30-Year: 42.1°; 15-Year: 42.2°

Newark: 30-Year: 43.0°; 15-Year: 43.1°

Philadelphia: 30-Year: 44.2°; 15-Year: 44.0°

[MJO812]

Stratosphere warming ongoing ?

[snowman19]

Stratosphere warming ongoing ?

It just started

[CIK62]

The next 8 days are averaging      46degs.(40/53) or +9.

Month to date is       39.3[+4.7].        Should be       41.7[+6.3] by the 23rd.

Reached 55 here yesterday at 4pm.

Today:   58-62, wind s. to w., p. sunny later, 54 tomorrow AM.

As far as any snow---the only featured 24 hour periods are  the 22nd-23rd and the 28th.     For just 1":

 

46*(67%RH) here at 6am.       45* at 7am.       47* at 9am.       50* at 11am.      Stuck at 50* with south wind here at Noon.    Still 50* at 1pm.      From 2:00pm-2:15pm up 5 to 55*,-just like that.      57* at 3pm.        60* at 3:30pm.        62* at 4pm.        63* at 4:30pm.     Reached  64* at 4:40pm.      62* at 5pm.        60* at 5:30pm-9:30pm.       59* at 10pm and 11pm.

 

[EastonSN+]

I think Bluewave had a good post earlier showing SSWEs following low snowfall seasons.

One thing to be cautious of when looking at the stats, and depending on ones point of view (seems to be split amongst the METS across the forums) is whether or not December was a true failure due to the pattern never really being "good", or "bad luck" where the second storm was so intense it essentially killed the third wave which had the most potential.

Think December 2000, what if that storm was a few miles east? Then that blocking period would have been a complete failure, and this past Decembers failure would not have been as "shocking".

So, long story short, it will all come down to how negative the RNA is vs. 1. The strength of the Blocking and just as important, 2. The LOCATION of the Blocking (same really could be said about the position of the RNA).

NOBODY knows what will happen. We just have to let it play out. Hard to bet against the RNA in a Nina like this, but as we all know RNA is not as detrimental as it is December and January. 

As for low snowfall records, 97/98 was only saved by a fluke late season late March event. Please keep that in mind when ingesting and analyzing this season. The only difference so far is a late March fluke, which can happen in any season.

If that fluke did not happen, then this is not historic, just a repeat.

 

[snowman19]

Great questions:
1. We don't know if it will downwell. However, last week there was a S-G dipole max above 40 mb, which per Dr. Simon Lee, is a positive indicator for it to go down into the troposphere. And the models are suggesting a -NAO in two weeks.
2. Nobody knows the specifics on which areas of the world would be affected the most if it downwells. But if the -NAO that models are hinting at starting in two weeks actually occurs, that would obviously bode well for chances for cold in the E US.
3. The timing varies with each SSW but effects including an -NAO/-AO often start within 1.5-2 weeks of the SSW date, which would be either very late Feb or very early March. So, imho, IF there is to be a colder pattern from this, it would very likely start earlier than mid to late March.

Agree. If we get to 3/1 and we don’t have a legit -NAO block or at least one definitely imminent, it’s probably over. The Niña background state (RNA/SE ridge) isn’t going anywhere. The MEI is still -1 and the SOI is still strongly positive. The MJO 8-1-2 fantasies look to fail again, the Niña standing wave convection is still there and it’s going to destructively interfere with the MJO wave as it tries to propagate into phase 8, the enhanced trades shearing it aren’t going to help either

[Brian5671]

Have to think March evens out--Jan was +10 and Feb looks to be +5 or +6 temp wise...

[Volcanic Winter]

It’s crazy how much worse this DJF period would look if Dec didn’t feature the cold shots and stretch of slightly BN temps that it did. It’s keeping the DJF average from looking more extreme. 

Would be a lot more digestible this year if we just had a super front and back loaded winter with snow only in Dec and March. We know one of those didn’t happen, but how about the other? If the SSW enacts a surface response and we see an -NAO, I gotta believe NYC gets a pity advisory / warning event out of it. 

My expectations are thoroughly welded to the floor, but hey, you never know, right? At least the unfolding shakeup leaves the door open to at least see a flake before the spring summer torching begins. 

Also, was just up in Danbury CT for my birthday with my wifey. We had a great little trip, but it felt so wrong being in parks at almost 1k ft elevation with not a single snow pile anywhere to be seen:

[snowman19]

Agree. If we get to 3/1 and we don’t have a legit -NAO block or at least one definitely imminent, it’s probably over. The Niña background state (RNA/SE ridge) isn’t going anywhere. The MEI is still -1 and the SOI is still strongly positive. The MJO 8-1-2 fantasies look to fail again, the Niña standing wave convection is still there and it’s going to destructively interfere with the MJO wave as it tries to propagate into phase 8, the enhanced trades shearing it aren’t going to help either

[LibertyBell]

3 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

New York City's snow season futility rankings through February 14tth. As per the guidance, things could change next week.

Things could change next week, Don?  All I've been seeing is temps in the 50s lol

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, EastonSN+ said:

I think Bluewave had a good post earlier showing SSWEs following low snowfall seasons.

One thing to be cautious of when looking at the stats, and depending on ones point of view (seems to be split amongst the METS across the forums) is whether or not December was a true failure due to the pattern never really being "good", or "bad luck" where the second storm was so intense it essentially killed the third wave which had the most potential.

Think December 2000, what if that storm was a few miles east? Then that blocking period would have been a complete failure, and this past Decembers failure would not have been as "shocking".

So, long story short, it will all come down to how negative the RNA is vs. 1. The strength of the Blocking and just as important, 2. The LOCATION of the Blocking (same really could be said about the position of the RNA).

NOBODY knows what will happen. We just have to let it play out. Hard to bet against the RNA in a Nina like this, but as we all know RNA is not as detrimental as it is December and January. 

As for low snowfall records, 97/98 was only saved by a fluke late season late March event. Please keep that in mind when ingesting and analyzing this season. The only difference so far is a late March fluke, which can happen in any season.

If that fluke did not happen, then this is not historic, just a repeat.

 

It was a true failure.... bad luck would be like December 1989....it really wasn't that cold in December either, if you go up against the longterm average it was milder than normal.

 

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, EastonSN+ said:

I think Bluewave had a good post earlier showing SSWEs following low snowfall seasons.

One thing to be cautious of when looking at the stats, and depending on ones point of view (seems to be split amongst the METS across the forums) is whether or not December was a true failure due to the pattern never really being "good", or "bad luck" where the second storm was so intense it essentially killed the third wave which had the most potential.

Think December 2000, what if that storm was a few miles east? Then that blocking period would have been a complete failure, and this past Decembers failure would not have been as "shocking".

So, long story short, it will all come down to how negative the RNA is vs. 1. The strength of the Blocking and just as important, 2. The LOCATION of the Blocking (same really could be said about the position of the RNA).

NOBODY knows what will happen. We just have to let it play out. Hard to bet against the RNA in a Nina like this, but as we all know RNA is not as detrimental as it is December and January. 

As for low snowfall records, 97/98 was only saved by a fluke late season late March event. Please keep that in mind when ingesting and analyzing this season. The only difference so far is a late March fluke, which can happen in any season.

If that fluke did not happen, then this is not historic, just a repeat.

 

we don't define seasons by snowfall though we define them by temperatures and the warmth this year has been more extreme and consistent than 97-98

2000-01 was also a much colder winter than this year's, there really is no comparison.

 

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, EastonSN+ said:

I think Bluewave had a good post earlier showing SSWEs following low snowfall seasons.

One thing to be cautious of when looking at the stats, and depending on ones point of view (seems to be split amongst the METS across the forums) is whether or not December was a true failure due to the pattern never really being "good", or "bad luck" where the second storm was so intense it essentially killed the third wave which had the most potential.

Think December 2000, what if that storm was a few miles east? Then that blocking period would have been a complete failure, and this past Decembers failure would not have been as "shocking".

So, long story short, it will all come down to how negative the RNA is vs. 1. The strength of the Blocking and just as important, 2. The LOCATION of the Blocking (same really could be said about the position of the RNA).

NOBODY knows what will happen. We just have to let it play out. Hard to bet against the RNA in a Nina like this, but as we all know RNA is not as detrimental as it is December and January. 

As for low snowfall records, 97/98 was only saved by a fluke late season late March event. Please keep that in mind when ingesting and analyzing this season. The only difference so far is a late March fluke, which can happen in any season.

If that fluke did not happen, then this is not historic, just a repeat.

 

This is most definitely still historic because we have the warmest January on record and a bunch of other warm records to go along with it.

 

[EastonSN+]

Just now, LibertyBell said:

It was a true failure.... bad luck would be like December 1989....it really wasn't that cold in December either, if you go up against the longterm average it was milder than normal.

 

I disagree.

If the second storm was not intense we could have had a 6 plus event easily. Then the whole historic discussion is gone.

If you want to debate it. Raise it to the NE Mets who are 100% on the luck side. And no, they are not saying only New England was unlucky while CC was the reason for anyone outside of NE.

[matt8204]

14 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

with all the toxic chemical spills going on, humanity is doing a lot of things wrong on this planet.

Instead of looking for intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, we need to wonder whether it even exists on earth.

 

We are capable of wonderful things but our arrogance and short-sightedness often supersedes our intelligent side.  

[EastonSN+]

1 minute ago, LibertyBell said:

This is most definitely still historic because we have the warmest January on record and a bunch of other warm records to go along with it.

 

We are still behind 01/02 on temps so not historic yet. Plus the snowfall that season could easily be passed with a lucky setup this month.

[LibertyBell]

Just now, EastonSN+ said:

I disagree.

If the second storm was not intense we could have had a 6 plus event easily. Then the whole historic discussion is gone.

If you want to debate it. Raise it to the NE Mets who are 100% on the luck side. And no, they are not saying only New England was unlucky while CC was the reason for anyone outside of NE.

They have a different point of view because of where they live....it's a lot more difficult to get snow here in December than it is there.  Historically the coast around here rarely ever sees good snow in December.

It's a matter of the local climate....this pattern was much better for them than it was for us.

 

[wdrag]

1 minute ago, matt8204 said:

We are capable of wonderful things but our arrogance and short-sightedness often supersedes our intelligent side.  

EGO=greed as well. 

[donsutherland1]

6 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Things could change next week, Don?  All I've been seeing is temps in the 50s lol

There’s a window of opportunity during 2/22-24. A lot can still change, but at least there’s some guidance with some snowfall. Let’s see where things stand at the end of the week.

[LibertyBell]

Just now, EastonSN+ said:

We are still behind 01/02 on temps so not historic yet. Plus the snowfall that season could easily be passed with a lucky setup this month.

01/02 was my GOAT but specifically talking about January it's definitely historic and it looks like the January-February couplet will be historic too-- what are supposed to be the two coldest months of the year will probably have their warmest two month average on record.

 

[EastonSN+]

1 minute ago, LibertyBell said:

They have a different point of view because of where they live....it's a lot more difficult to get snow here in December than it is there.  Historically the coast around here rarely ever sees good snow in December.

It's a matter of the local climate....this pattern was much better for them than it was for us.

 

No. They are not saying Only New England was unlucky. They spoke of the entire setup. They are not saying luck only applies to New England.

[LibertyBell]

Just now, donsutherland1 said:

There’s a window of opportunity during 2/22-24. A lot can still change, but at least there’s some guidance with some snowfall. Let’s see where things stand at the end of the week.

Don I was just thinking of you!  What say you-- will the January-February couplet this year be the warmest such couplet on record?

 

[LibertyBell]

Just now, EastonSN+ said:

No. They are not saying Only New England was unlucky. They spoke of the entire setup. They are not saying luck only applies to New England.

It's definitely not luck-- I've lived here long enough to know it was a bad pattern for snow for among many reasons-- the ocean waters were simply too warm.  You can look at the stats to see how poorly the coast does in December with snow.

People use luck as an excuse when they dont understand-- there was no luck involved down here.

[LibertyBell]

4 minutes ago, matt8204 said:

We are capable of wonderful things but our arrogance and short-sightedness often supersedes our intelligent side.  

Yes like thinking we can beat nature....you can't beat something that you are a part of, you only end up screwing yourself.

 

[LibertyBell]

6 minutes ago, EastonSN+ said:

I disagree.

If the second storm was not intense we could have had a 6 plus event easily. Then the whole historic discussion is gone.

If you want to debate it. Raise it to the NE Mets who are 100% on the luck side. And no, they are not saying only New England was unlucky while CC was the reason for anyone outside of NE.

Trust me it's not luck-- 10 out of the last 35 winters have had less than 10" of snow here.

 

[EastonSN+]

1 minute ago, LibertyBell said:

It's definitely not luck-- I've lived here long enough to know it was a bad pattern for snow for among many reasons-- the ocean waters were simply too warm.  You can look at the stats to see how poorly the coast does in December with snow.

People use luck as an excuse when they dont understand-- there was no luck involved down here.

Go back and review December. If that second storm was less intense, the third wave, which at times the models showed a major hit, would have clicked us. 

The warm waters did not do anything to energize or make the 3rd wave a cutter.

I am taking your response above as the red taggers Mets in the NE forum have no idea what they are talking about. 

Are you a MET? You understand more than them.?

[brooklynwx99]

16 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

It's definitely not luck-- I've lived here long enough to know it was a bad pattern for snow for among many reasons-- the ocean waters were simply too warm.  You can look at the stats to see how poorly the coast does in December with snow.

People use luck as an excuse when they dont understand-- there was no luck involved down here.

lmao it was absolutely not a bad pattern. the warm ocean waters had nothing to do with why that system before Christmas cut. the TPV dove a bit too far west... the pattern was still developing at the time 

if you bring the wave that was responsible for that storm down from Canada a day later, we all get smoked. it was just bad luck. that's all you can say... would be impossible to make that kind of statement more than 5ish days in advance

and the third wave went OTS because it came in a day too late and the ridge out west collapsed. again, that all comes down to chaos and not how good or bad the overall synoptic pattern is. we easily could have gotten hit by both

[LibertyBell]

21 minutes ago, brooklynwx99 said:

lmao it was absolutely not a bad pattern. the warm ocean waters had nothing to do with why that system before Christmas cut. the TPV dove a bit too far west... the pattern was still developing at the time 

if you bring the wave that was responsible for that storm down from Canada a day later, we all get smoked. it was just bad luck. that's all you can say... would be impossible to make that kind of statement more than 5ish days in advance

and the third wave went OTS because it came in a day too late and the ridge out west collapsed. again, that all comes down to chaos and not how good or bad the overall synoptic pattern is. we easily could have gotten hit by both

So that abnormally warm area of water in the NW Atlantic had nothing to do with it?

I'm going by the record of December on the south shore of Long Island and it's pretty ugly-- unless you have a historic pattern like December 2009, 2010...you really don't get much snow here in December.

If that pattern had occurred later in the winter, as in Mid to late January or February I'd buy it-- but December isn't a winter weather month here anymore.