El Nino 2023-2024

[brooklynwx99]

ECMWF seasonal is pretty great for Jan/Feb

[Terpeast]

4 minutes ago, brooklynwx99 said:

ECMWF seasonal is pretty great for Jan/Feb

If I remember correctly, last month’s euro run had the lowest h5 anomalies over the south/SW, now this time it’s over the SE?

[brooklynwx99]

1 minute ago, Terpeast said:

If I remember correctly, last month’s euro run had the lowest h5 anomalies over the south/SW, now this time it’s over the SE?

yeah this is better in that regard for Jan. Feb is about the same but the trough in the east is deeper and there’s actually an Aleutian low

[so_whats_happening]

[mitchnick]

42 minutes ago, brooklynwx99 said:

ECMWF seasonal is pretty great for Jan/Feb

Unless I hear it from Eric Webb, I  won't get excited.

[mitchnick]

Despite the location of the surface anomalies, the upper 300 meters have been shifting westward.

[snowman19]

[George001]

11 hours ago, snowman19 said:

Better hope we get something from the El Niño this winter because it looks like we go right back into yet another La Niña once this event is all said and done
 

Good. La Nina’s after strong/super ninos tend to be quite snowy in the east. 

[GaWx]

 The 30 mb QBO for Oct came in about as expected at -16.98. The closest El Niño summers/autumns to 2023 (analogs) since 1979 in terms of timing of peaks and valleys are 1986, 1991, 2009, and 2014. These had their first -QBO month within two months of the preceding July and had a -QBO throughout winter. 2023’s first -QBO month was July.

 The furthest El Niños from 2023 (anti-logs) in terms of timing since 1979 are 1982, 1987, 1994, 2015, and 2018. These all had their first -QBO month about a year earlier than the preceding July and had a +QBO throughout winter.

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/qbo.u30.index

[40/70 Benchmark]

On 11/4/2023 at 1:28 PM, bluewave said:

The atmospheric response at 500 mb has been a mix of El Niño and La Niña influences. So we could make the argument that the weaker MEI still reflects an element of the La Niña background state. That’s more valuable for forecasting the sensible weather outside the tropics than just looking at what the OLR and SOI are doing. The ridge NW of Hawaii  and over Hudson Bay is more a La Niña feature. While the ridging around Alaska is more El Niño-like in October. The Aleutian low is in an intermediate position between the El Niño and La Niña composites.
 

 

Agree. This is why I feel like we will also have an active N stream this winter.

[40/70 Benchmark]

On 11/4/2023 at 1:49 PM, griteater said:

He probably has additional ideas, but the bolded isn’t true cause the highest MEI values occurred during the big east based El Niños of 82-83 and 97-98 

This is what I point out in his Twitter thread and he never addressed it.

[40/70 Benchmark]

4 hours ago, Terpeast said:

If I remember correctly, last month’s euro run had the lowest h5 anomalies over the south/SW, now this time it’s over the SE?

I was expecting that.

[40/70 Benchmark]

2 hours ago, George001 said:

Good. La Nina’s after strong/super ninos tend to be quite snowy in the east. 

Not really....98-99 was awful, 2016-2017 and 83-84 were meh.

[40/70 Benchmark]

On 11/4/2023 at 12:27 PM, raindancewx said:

Looking back, the biggest difference in the El Ninos that are cold in the Southwest v. the Southeast seems to be how persistent the WPO look is.

The persistently mixed or negative WPO looks show like this -

Persistently positive are more like this -

The Canadian has the big area of enhanced sinking air by Japan and south, like the +WPO composite. So I think the second map is more likely. The WPO and EPO have some tendency to move with the PDO, but the WPO seems more tied to the warmth of Nino 4 / the Indonesian warm pool. There just aren't many -WPO years now, with thunderstorms usually enhanced in MJO phases 4-6.

The reason I like the Canadian is the precipitation patterns it shows usually match what happens in the MJO zones. So then you can test to see if the rest of it makes sense. The look of MJO 8 usually suppresses the enhanced rain running east just north of the equator in the composite - which we don't see on the modelling. 

 

Agree with this...good post. This, like the PDO analogs, is confirmation that this winter will be decided within the polar domain. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

13 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Agree with this...good post. This, like the PDO analogs, is confirmation that this winter will be decided within the polar domain. 

Someone run a composite of 1966, 1969, 1987 and 2003...it probably looks like the Euro.

[snowman19]

Agree with this...good post. This, like the PDO analogs, is confirmation that this winter will be decided within the polar domain. 

[40/70 Benchmark]

9 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

 

 

Makes sense considering how I expect December to unfold....look at the EURO .....+NAO.

Cohen is just having an impulsive outburst, which people are prone to do on social media.

[40/70 Benchmark]

I have said all along those December strat shenanigans aren't going to pay immediate dividends and likely get pushed back.

[GaWx]

3 hours ago, GaWx said:

 The 30 mb QBO for Oct came in about as expected at -16.98. The closest El Niño summers/autumns to 2023 (analogs) since 1979 in terms of timing of peaks and valleys are 1986, 1991, 2009, and 2014. These had their first -QBO month within two months of the preceding July and had a -QBO throughout winter. 2023’s first -QBO month was July.

 The furthest El Niños from 2023 (anti-logs) in terms of timing since 1979 are 1982, 1987, 1994, 2015, and 2018. These all had their first -QBO month about a year earlier than the preceding July and had a +QBO throughout winter.

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/qbo.u30.index

Followup to the above analyzing those QBO analogs and anti-logs:

1. El Niño DJF NAO

-QBO Analogs: two had a -NAO (1986-7 and 2009-10) and the other two had a +NAO (1991-2 and 2014-5). This 50% having a -NAO is actually pretty impressive considering that -NAO winters have been pretty rare (only 6 of the last 44 (14%) winters since 1979-80). Moreover, the only two -NAO El Niño winters of the 14 (14%) El Niños since 1979-80 are the QBO analog El Niños of 1986-7 and 2009-10. The other four -NAO winters (1984-5, 1995-6, 2010-1, and 2020-1) weren’t El Niño.

-QBO Anti-logs: all five had a +NAO.

 

2. El Niño DJF AO:

-QBO Analogs: two had a -AO (1986-7 and 2009-10) and the other two had a +AO (1991-2 and 2014-5). So, 50% had a -AO vs 36% of all 14 Nino winters since 1979-80 having a -AO. So, that’s fairly close.

-QBO Anti-logs: none had a -AO as 4 of the 5 (80%) were neutral and one (1994-5) had a +AO. I consider neutral AO to be between +0.5 and -0.5.

 

Conclusions for this winter’s NAO/AO based on above regarding current QBO in combo with El Niño:

- Nothing overly conclusive since sample sizes are small and the analogs were 50-50 on -NAO/-AO.

- But -NAO chances this winter considering the current era of difficult to achieve -NAO winters may be enhanced somewhat due to current QBO vs where they’d be with different QBO timing.

- -AO chances this winter may be enhanced some due to current QBO.

- Both -NAO and -AO chances during El Niño winters would appear to be higher during analog QBO than during anti-log QBO.

- I’ve in the past not been one to use the QBO much, if any, in winter predictions due to what I’ve perceived to be too much variability of analogs and the difficulty of having large enough sample sizes with similar QBO timing. After all, this QBO table goes back only to 1979. But, I will say based on this latest analysis that I feel somewhat (but not dramatically) better about the chances of a -NAO and -AO this winter than I felt before I did this. To clarify, that doesn’t mean I’m saying either is likely, especially -NAO, though I will say that -AO winters have been less difficult to attain than -NAO winters since 1979-80. I’ve been really down on the chances of a -NAO this winter (even though I’ve been leaning -NAO for Feb, alone) based on how rare they’ve been since 1979-80 along with this winter’s expected high (>100) sunspot activity. All 6 -NAO winters since 1979-80 had low sunspot activity (all had 33 or less). Maybe the QBO/El Nino combo will trump the sunspots. (Plus I know some others here feel this winter’s still ascending part of the sunspot cycle will actually be helpful for -NAO chances even with it approaching max mainly based on an external study.)

[griteater]

7 hours ago, brooklynwx99 said:

yeah this is better in that regard for Jan. Feb is about the same but the trough in the east is deeper and there’s actually an Aleutian low

Not to mention, more yellow up top over the pole 

[GaWx]

 Not what I wanted to see for Dec -AO prospects compared to prior runs but hoping it is just a wobble rather than portending an actual model trend away from the notably weak SPV shown on several runs last week. This one has the ensemble mean’s low at 30-31 m/s (normal for then is 35) vs one run last week being way down at 21 m/s and yesterday’s at 27:

[griteater]

It was mentioned to wait until November to see where the forcing sets up. Well, here we are, precip enhanced across the central and eastern Pacific, but the main bulge is well west 

[GaWx]

42 minutes ago, griteater said:

It was mentioned to wait until November to see where the forcing sets up. Well, here we are, precip enhanced across the central and eastern Pacific, but the main bulge is well west 

The good news from my perspective is that the seasonal models are not dependable because I’d much rather that main bulge be ~30-40 degrees E of where this has it. That is assuming that that main bulge will be the main driver. Would it be?This has the light blues of the bulge from 150E to 170W or centered on 170E. That would favor MJO phase 6 as per the top image below. Phase 6 is the warmest phase for the E US in JFM per the 2nd image below. As one (like most of us) who would like a cool to cold E US winter, I’d prefer it be supportive of phases 8 and 1, which would be supported by enhanced precip a fair bit east of the dateline or near the heart of Nino 3.4 (say, 160W to 140W/centered near 150W) instead of being centered near 170E:

 

[snowman19]

Not to mention, more yellow up top over the pole 

Where is all the cold though? The SE is “cool/cold” from solar irradiance, clouds, precip from the roaring STJ overhead

[Terpeast]

23 minutes ago, GaWx said:

The good news from my perspective is that the seasonal models are not dependable because I’d much rather that main bulge be ~30-40 degrees E of where this has it. That is assuming that that main bulge will be the main driver. Would it be?This has the light blues of the bulge from 150E to 170W or centered on 170E. That would favor MJO phase 6 as per the top image below. Phase 6 is the warmest phase for the E US in JFM per the 2nd image below. As one (like most of us) who would like a cool to cold E US winter, I’d prefer it be supportive of phases 8 and 1, which would be supported by enhanced precip a fair bit east of the dateline or near the heart of Nino 3.4 (say, 160W to 140W/centered near 150W) instead of being centered near 170E:

 

The way I read it is when forcing is centered on a location, it doesn’t mean that there will be mjo activity in that location wall to wall. More like it triggers an mjo wave at phase 6, then it propagates eastward through 7, 8, and 1. Unlike last year, the waters there are plenty warm enough so any mjo wave that propagates should stay strong instead of it hitting a wall

[GaWx]

10 minutes ago, Terpeast said:

The way I read it is when forcing is centered on a location, it doesn’t mean that there will be mjo activity in that location wall to wall. More like it triggers an mjo wave at phase 6, then it propagates eastward through 7, 8, and 1. Unlike last year, the waters there are plenty warm enough so any mjo wave that propagates should stay strong instead of it hitting a wall

 The is a learning process at least for me. I realize it wouldn’t be anything near wall to wall in 6 because it never is that way in any phase. But I just hope that should this model happen to be right with the bulge that it wouldn’t mean more of 6/7 than average due to MJO waves being triggered at 6.

[roardog]

41 minutes ago, snowman19 said:

Where is all the cold though? The SE is “cool/cold” from solar irradiance, clouds, precip from the roaring STJ overhead

 

 

 

 

I thought everyone knew by now that the long range models are terrible with 2M temp anomalies. Canada was “scorching” in 09-10 yet most of the US had a cold winter. 

[mitchnick]

13 minutes ago, roardog said:

I thought everyone knew by now that the long range models are terrible with 2M temp anomalies. Canada was “scorching” in 09-10 yet most of the US had a cold winter. 

Though I  agree with you, I  wouldn't expect the Nina base-state to get erased fast enough to produce numbers like 09/10*. For those of us lucky enough to be in the right spot for snow event(s), be prepared for a lot of wet snow with powder a fond memory. 

*Speaking from a MA perspective. 

[brooklynwx99]

1 hour ago, snowman19 said:

Where is all the cold though? The SE is “cool/cold” from solar irradiance, clouds, precip from the roaring STJ overhead

 

 

 

 

come on dude. that is a cold, stormy 500mb pattern 

[raindancewx]

Here is a list of El Ninos with a -WPO look in October. It's actually pretty common even in the stronger El Ninos. But it tends to flip back hard. The November look on the Canadian is relatively canonical for the transitional start to flip back, with a low pressure weakness by Kamchatka, but not quite over it, with that low north of high pressure by SE Asia.

You can see how the WPO performed in my analogs at the weightings I used in my outlook below.

-WPO El Nino October
1951, 1976, 1986, 1991, 1997, 2002, 2009, 2014, 2015, 2018, 2019

Off the top of my head, the +WPO / -EPO / +PNA / -NAO / -AO look for October is probably fairly similar to 1988 and 2003 along with the obvious match of 2009 that you all want.