3/10 and beyond... all the waves threats

[BristowWx]

7 minutes ago, Wonderdog said:

I like your optimism brother. 

I’m thinking it can’t be worse.  Chuckle chuckle 

[North Balti Zen]

Gonna copy this from the futility thread:

 

Here's what the new futility marks look like without some sort of Hail Mary event...just...woof. New number 1 worst snow total ever at BWI and Dulles and 3rd worst at DCA. 3 of the top 5 worst snow total seasons ever at each airport since 2011/12 season to now. It is...alarming as fuck. 

 

BWI:

.2 - 2022/23

.7 - '49/'50

1.2 - '72/'73

1.8 - 2011/12

1.8 - 2019/20

DCA

.1 - '97/'98

.1 - '72/'73

.4  - 2022/23

.6 - 2019/20

2.0 - 2011/12

Dulles:

.4 - 2022/23

2.2 - '72/'73

2.6 - 2001/02

2.9 - 2019/20

3.7 - 2011/12

[Ruin]

2 hours ago, nj2va said:

 

Where do I sign?

lol yeah ill take it like I was trying to say for a week plus. these bs signs of cold air the temp guidance was talking about was flat out wrong. maybe 2 days of slightly below average then mostly at or above.

[BlizzardNole]

2 hours ago, nj2va said:

 

Where do I sign?

That looks good to me.  Bring on spring!  Any way we could get a +5 April, average May and a -3 June?

[Chris78]

10 minutes ago, Ruin said:

lol yeah ill take it like I was trying to say for a week plus. these bs signs of cold air the temp guidance was talking about was flat out wrong. maybe 2 days of slightly below average then mostly at or above.

We just finished a stretch of 6 days in a row of below normal highs. With a few of those days being down right cold for mid March. 

Not sure what area your quoting temps for but  the models correctly forecasted a below normal period.

Now they missed on other key areas like continued burying of Energy along the west coast that hampered any possibility of seeing snow.

This has been a bias all winter for the models of underestimating the trough in the west in the long range.

[frd]

10 minutes ago, Chris78 said:

We just finished a stretch of 6 days in a row of below normal highs. With a few of those days being down right cold for mid March. 

Not sure what area your quoting temps for but  the models correctly forecasted a below normal period.

Now they missed on other key areas like continued burying of Energy along the west coast that hampered any possibility of seeing snow.

This has been a bias all winter for the models of underestimating the trough in the west in the long range.

The base state. Controlled 90 %  of the winter in the East. Meanwhile,  the Atlantic is set to really warm up. Already much above normal.  

[psuhoffman]

1 hour ago, North Balti Zen said:

It is...alarming as fuck. 

 

careful, apparently pointing this ridiculously obvious fact out is controversial and political 

[kristia]

12 hours ago, BristowWx said:

At least next winter won’t be this winter. A whole new set of failure scenarios await.  Onward and upward!  

This is my sentiment also. If it snows, awesome. If it doesn’t, ok. Snow is just one of the many things I look forward to but I’m not going to get bent out of shape if it doesn’t materialize. It’s a small piece of the pie chart of my life and that’s how I’ve started to look at it. 

[psuhoffman]

56 minutes ago, Ruin said:

lol yeah ill take it like I was trying to say for a week plus. these bs signs of cold air the temp guidance was talking about was flat out wrong. maybe 2 days of slightly below average then mostly at or above.

It has been chilly...DC just had like 6 straight day's below avg temps...its just too late for it to matter wrt snow.  

[psuhoffman]

The base state longwave pattern this winter was hostile for us.  This would have been a below avg snowfall winter here in any era.  But I think getting really awful almost no snow winters is going to become more common.  Actually it already has, thanks @North Balti Zen for the data above.  There was nothing that uncommon about the general pattern this year.  We have had numerous years with a similarly hostile longwave pattern in the past.  And most of those years we managed to fight our way to 8" or 10" or something in that ballpark across most of the area.  We had some variability.  We had a period in December and March with a workable pattern.  We also got some perfect track storms during a bad pattern that in the past we could luck into some snow even in a bad pattern.  But lately...decent patterns that only last a week or two don't often work out.  Part of that is it seems our "hit" ratio on threats even in better patterns is lower lately.  Another part of that is it gets so freaking warm across N America when we are in a bad pattern...that we often waste most of a better pattern just getting it colder...and by the time we get cold air the pattern is breaking down.  ANd it is so warm in bad patterns that trying to luck our way to a fluke snow is almost impossible.  That wasn't always the case.  Unfortunately I think this is likely to remain the normal.  We will still have good seasons.  There will be years where the longwave pattern is good and promotes cold air directed into the eastern US and we will get snow.  But the bad years are likely to be REALLY bad.  To put it simply...bad patterns are now just so warm that its almost impossible to get snow during a hostile pattern anymore, that means years that might have been 8" or 12" from some fluke hits during a year with a hostile base state overall...are more likely to end up like 2020 and 2023 where we get almost no snow at all.  

 

Getting a ton of snow in a year with a good longwave configuration won't disprove this theory...we are focused on getting a test case for "can it snow a LOT in a good year anymore" and I too am interested in that...but since a lot of our seasons are not going to be those good years...I would like to see evidence we can fight our way to a respectable snowfall in a more hostile pattern by hitting on marginal temp events and flawed setup storms...unfortunately I fear that is a lost cause.  

[Chris78]

1 hour ago, frd said:

The base state. Controlled 90 %  of the winter in the East. Meanwhile,  the Atlantic is set to really warm up. Already much above normal.  

I don't disagree with you. All is true and played a big part in making our winter snowless

 

I disagree with ruins assessment that models got the stretch of below normal temps wrong.

[stormy]

An interesting chart showing D.C. winter snowfall anomalies back to 1949. This reveals that the most consistent below normal stretch of winters occurred in the early to mid 1950's and again around 1990.

[SnowenOutThere]

4 minutes ago, stormy said:

An interesting chart showing D.C. winter snowfall anomalies back to 1949. This reveals that the most consistent below normal stretch of winters occurred in the early to mid 1950's

Something about the graph seems off because according to https://www.weather.gov/media/lwx/climate/dcasnow.pdf the 1950s had several below average years but also a winter with 18 inches of snow (53-54) yet there is no positive spike on the chart, it also says that the average for the chart is 11.6 but Im not sure where they got that number from or if stayed consistent on the graph as time passed.

[psuhoffman]

Another concern I have revolves around where we are in the snowfall cycles.  There is a lot of variability and random chaos within our snowfall climo.  That is because historically we can fluke our way to a single storm even in a bad pattern.  A good pattern doesn't always produce.  There is some randomness to getting a good or bad pattern in any cycle.  But within that seasonal and decadal variability is a clear trend where we get better cycles for snowfall and worse.  My fear is that our snowfall decline has been worse than we knew because it was being masked by what was actually a "snowy" cycle from 2000-2015.  Let me illustrate what I mean...

 

the late 40's to late 50's was a bad longwave base state for snowfall here and prior to this current period was probably the worst long term era for snowfall in our area.  This was actually the most comparable pacific cycle to the one we are in now, so not surprising we had low snowfall during that era also.  But keep this look in mind later when we see the current pattern.  

 

The next cycle 1958-1971 was our snowiest period since the 1800s mostly driven by a consistent -NAO.  

Which was followed by a shorter cycle of a hostile pacific without NAO help in the 70s that was pretty bad for snowfall...This was another period compared to the current one.  Again it was bad for much of the same reasons WRT the pacific but keep this look in mind when we compare to our current period later 

Which was followed by again a more favorable snowfall period from 1977 to 1988.  But... look at the pattern...and look at our results.  That base state pattern from 1977 to 1988 was actually BETTER than the one in the 60's but with much lower snowfall results.  

It could be argued our snowfall decline began to accelerate during this period...but was being masked by the fact we were in a generally good pattern which allowed for some big seasons and enough snow to mask that it should have been BETTER.  

We then entered the next really awful period of snowfall from 1989 to 1999.  With the exception of 1996 this was a brutal stretch of snowfall winters and the pattern below justifies that.  Mean +NAO and -PNA.  This should have been an awful snowfall period based on the pattern so there is nothing to really take from this other than it was just a bad base state cycle.  

But look at 2000 to 2015. 

This should have been a GREAT snowfall period again in line with the 1960s.  But again it was muted.  Yea we did better than from 1989 to 1999 and better than we have done since...but while places further to our north like NYC and Boston were getting absolutely berried with snowfall way above their normal during these 15 years...we were basically just averaging...about avg.  This should have been a HUGE red flag...that places north of us were getting record snowfall during this cycle and yet we were unable to really take advantage and were just too far south and warm to get similar results.  I don't mean we should have had the same snowfall as NYC or Boston...but the same ratios.  If they were 150% of normal during this period we should have been 150% also.  It should have been a huge warning that they were 150% of normal and we were only able to pretty much be avg during a period that should have been extremely snowy given the pattern above.  

Now... look at 2016 to 2023

There are a couple take aways here.  First the longwave pattern is again hostile.  This would be a down period in any era.  BUT...this is NOT as bad as the 50's or 70's or 90s.  We have had a -AO over this period.  That should have mitigated some of the hostile pac.  Those other awful periods had both a hostile PAC and a hostile AO.  Yet this period has been significantly less snowy than those other hostile cycles.  WHY?  There is one very obvious difference.  I mean come on.... this is not about climate change.  This has already happened.  Look at all the red!  Its just so much warmer.  Look how little blue there is ANYWHERE!  Now go back and look at all those eras I posted...and look at the trend in the blue/red.  It's got warmer over each era if you take the whole northern hemisphere as a whole.  This is ridiculously obvious.  But the super nino in 2016 sent this trend into hyperdrive.  It created a new significantly warmer base state for the cycle we have been in since.  This is not political or controversial...yes we are in a down cycle, yes this would be a low snowfall period no matter what era we were in with this pattern...but the reason this period has been so much worse than previous bad cycles is its so much warmer so we don't get as many fluke lucky snows in bad patters anymore because a bad pattern is warmer...and just too warm to get snow no matter what the storm track is.  But IMO the acceleration of the downward trend in our snowfall actually has been going on for a while but was masked by the fact we were in an incredibly snowy period in terms of the longwave pattern which was hiding the fact our snowfall was decreasing.

 

Now what I don't know is whether this trend reverses itself at all.  Does the effect of the last super nino wane at some point and was this a warmer period within the longer term warming.  But everyone seems to be rooting for another nino...great...and yea that probably would help our chances of snow in that given season...but there is a chance we are rooting for something that will make the majority of our seasons when we arent in a perfect pattern even worse by again accelerating the warming trend on a larger scale.  But now we are getting into predictive discussions and everything I have posted above is NOT predictive it is simply pointing out what has already happened and how we got to where we are now.  

[psuhoffman]

20 minutes ago, SnowenOutThere said:

Something about the graph seems off because according to https://www.weather.gov/media/lwx/climate/dcasnow.pdf the 1950s had several below average years but also a winter with 18 inches of snow (53-54) yet there is no positive spike on the chart, it also says that the average for the chart is 11.6 but Im not sure where they got that number from or if stayed consistent on the graph as time passed.

He is on my ignore list so I didn't see his original post...but if its the chart I think it is I can explain.  That chart is incredibly misleading when comparing trends over eras because it normalizes seasonal snowfall to each era.  In the 1950's DC's avg snowfall was still about 17" so a 17" season would show up as normal on the chart where as a 17" season now would show up as above normal since DC's avg is now down to 14".  That kind of chart is useless for showing a trend because by normalizing each season to a running mean it masks changes in the mean.  It is simply showing you the cycles of getting above and below normal snowfall in a given period for the avg of that given period.  It's fine for showing up and down cycles of snowfall but useless for showing changes or trends over time within those cycles.     

[psuhoffman]

@SnowenOutThere there is no comperable period to this.  Not even close.  The 1950's were our next closest awful snowfall period...but the worst 7 year period during that stretch was from 1950 to 1956 where DCA had 68".  The last 7 years DCA has had 47.7".  It's not even close.  To avoid this being the worst 8 year period ever next season DCA will need 34.5" of snow.  Anyone want to bet on that?  Please, my children's college fund could use a boost.  

It gets even worse after that because all previous periods like this were bookended by huge snowfall periods.  For DCA to avoid the worst 10 year period they need to average 31" over the next 3 seasons!  Who wants to take bets on that?  Again...please.  

I am sure we will get a snowy winter sometime soon.  And clowns like him will try to say "see there is no trend in snow" but we don't just need a snowy season.  It's been so bad for so long...we need what would be an unprecedented snowy period over several years just to get back to not being the worst period ever.  I really don't think some get just how bad it is compared to previous standards.  

[Maestrobjwa]

1 hour ago, kristia said:

This is my sentiment also. If it snows, awesome. If it doesn’t, ok. Snow is just one of the many things I look forward to but I’m not going to get bent out of shape if it doesn’t materialize. It’s a small piece of the pie chart of my life and that’s how I’ve started to look at it. 

This. I think we HAVE to start looking at it this way. And eventually I think we're gonna get used to whatever the new reality is (it still stings because it's kinda new). We can continue to enjoy snow when it comes, but I think we gotta stop looking at NOT getting it as some objectively bad thing. Maybe not using terms like "alarming" and "worrying" when it comes to the snow trends...maybe change the way we think about it (and adopt your perspective of snow being just one slice of the pie of things to enjoy). I'm starting to think that, at least for some of us, overtime we've been conditioned to view it as some big negative in life when it actually isn't. Now why this happend I have no clue...but I'm now asking the question: "So we got no snow...Why does that HAVE to be SO bad?"

I mean hey, we just went through a historically bad winter and things are uncertain going forward...but we're still okay, ain't we? 

[Ruin]

2 hours ago, Chris78 said:

We just finished a stretch of 6 days in a row of below normal highs. With a few of those days being down right cold for mid March. 

Not sure what area your quoting temps for but  the models correctly forecasted a below normal period.

Now they missed on other key areas like continued burying of Energy along the west coast that hampered any possibility of seeing snow.

This has been a bias all winter for the models of underestimating the trough in the west in the long range.

the below period time was said to be the 16th on  and was said to be much below normal I owuldnt call 50 when the average high is 52 chilly the coldest day we had was 48. for many of us it was warmer then forecasted for a few days and for me I had 2 days below normal the rest were average and even had 2 days above 

[WxUSAF]

28 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

@SnowenOutThere there is no comperable period to this.  Not even close.  The 1950's were our next closest awful snowfall period...but the worst 7 year period during that stretch was from 1950 to 1956 where DCA had 68".  The last 7 years DCA has had 47.7".  It's not even close.  To avoid this being the worst 8 year period ever next season DCA will need 34.5" of snow.  Anyone want to bet on that?  Please, my children's college fund could use a boost.  

It gets even worse after that because all previous periods like this were bookended by huge snowfall periods.  For DCA to avoid the worst 10 year period they need to average 31" over the next 3 seasons!  Who wants to take bets on that?  Again...please.  

I am sure we will get a snowy winter sometime soon.  And clowns like him will try to say "see there is no trend in snow" but we don't just need a snowy season.  It's been so bad for so long...we need what would be an unprecedented snowy period over several years just to get back to not being the worst period ever.  I really don't think some get just how bad it is compared to previous standards.  

Please respond to Tony Pann’s recent tweet with this info 

[mattie g]

40 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

@SnowenOutThere there is no comperable period to this.  Not even close.  The 1950's were our next closest awful snowfall period...but the worst 7 year period during that stretch was from 1950 to 1956 where DCA had 68".  The last 7 years DCA has had 47.7".  It's not even close.  To avoid this being the worst 8 year period ever next season DCA will need 34.5" of snow.  Anyone want to bet on that?  Please, my children's college fund could use a boost.  

It gets even worse after that because all previous periods like this were bookended by huge snowfall periods.  For DCA to avoid the worst 10 year period they need to average 31" over the next 3 seasons!  Who wants to take bets on that?  Again...please.  

I am sure we will get a snowy winter sometime soon.  And clowns like him will try to say "see there is no trend in snow" but we don't just need a snowy season.  It's been so bad for so long...we need what would be an unprecedented snowy period over several years just to get back to not being the worst period ever.  I really don't think some get just how bad it is compared to previous standards.  

DCA in the 50s is a different beast than DCA in the 2020s. I'm not necessarily saying that it's a 20" difference of a beast, but UHI *HAS* to play a part in that.

[stormy]

25 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

This. I think we HAVE to start looking at it this way. And eventually I think we're gonna get used to whatever the new reality is (it still stings because it's kinda new). We can continue to enjoy snow when it comes, but I think we gotta stop looking at NOT getting it as some objectively bad thing. Maybe not using terms like "alarming" and "worrying" when it comes to the snow trends...maybe change the way we think about it (and adopt your perspective of snow being just one slice of the pie of things to enjoy). I'm starting to think that, at least for some of us, overtime we've been conditioned to view it as some big negative in life when it actually isn't. Now why this happend I have no clue...but I'm now asking the question: "So we got no snow...Why does that HAVE to be SO bad?"

I mean hey, we just went through a historically bad winter and things are uncertain going forward...but we're still okay, ain't we? 

You are exactly right!   We just went through a drought winter for snowfall but in all likelihood it will be better next year. To repeatedly make proclamations about how warm it is and insinuate we may never return to the way it used to be is demoralizing to many and certainly not productive. The chart that I posted a little while ago was not intended for illustrating long-term trends. Why would I be so foolish because long-term trends DO NOT EXIST. If we are consistently below normal for the next 50 years, then talk to me about long-term trends. That chart was simply to illustrate up and down cycles in snowfall. About this chart, PSU said " Its fine for showing up and down cycles of snowfall"

Thank you

[Maestrobjwa]

25 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

Please respond to Tony Pann’s recent tweet with this info 

That was the my first thought when I saw his tweet--he needs a good PSU-style smackdown of data, lol

[Maestrobjwa]

3 minutes ago, stormy said:

You are exactly right!   We just went through a drought winter for snowfall but in all likelihood it will be better next year. To repeatedly make proclamations about how warm it is and insinuate we may never return to the way it used to be is demoralizing to many and certainly not productive. The chart that I posted a little while ago was not intended for illustrating long-term trends. Why would I be so foolish because long-term trends DO NOT EXIST. If we are consistently below normal for the next 50 years, then talk to me about long-term trends. That chart was simply to illustrate up and down cycles in snowfall. About this chart, PSU said " Its fine for showing up and down cycles of snowfall"

Thank you

Just to be clear I'm not debating about the specifics of PSU's data about the trends and such...MY post was more about our psychological approach to snow in general. And btw notice he said that his stats are NOT predictive, just explaining wheat has happened so far.

But again, my post was more about how we are viewing all of this. Change could be permanent, or maybe it isn't. Still need to change the way we look at it!

[SnowenOutThere]

1 minute ago, stormy said:

To repeatedly make proclamations about how warm it is and insinuate we may never return to the way it used to be is demoralizing to many

50 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

Maybe not using terms like "alarming" and "worrying" when it comes to the snow trends

Climate change and its effects should be "alarming and "worrying", it should also be somewhat demoralizing that we are permanently changing our climate for the worse and some people don't even believe it on a weather forum. 

[WesternFringe]

Is it a bad sign for snow prospects when you can't tell the difference between the long range thread and the futility thread? lol

[Ji]

I am okay with the no snowstorm part....most of my fun with this hobby is tracking more than snow being on the ground. What i am not okay with was that there was nothing to track. 99% of our threats died by day 8. the few that made it through died at 120 hours. We never got with 84 hours of accumulating snow. Nobody made a forecast map. Bob Chill did a hit run...said this would be a good winter and then we never heard from him again. Same with HM. We didnt even get a threat for freezing rain or sleet...we never even had a chance to bust. There was not a storm to forecast...ever...not even close. 

[Maestrobjwa]

29 minutes ago, SnowenOutThere said:

Climate change and its effects should be "alarming and "worrying", it should also be somewhat demoralizing that we are permanently changing our climate for the worse and some people don't even believe it on a weather forum. 

I think you both may have missed the point of my post. I'm not arguing that here. I just gave those examples in relation to how we see snow itself--not climate change in general! Maybe my psychological post was too unscientific for this thread, lol

[SomeguyfromTakomaPark]

11 minutes ago, Ji said:

I am okay with the no snowstorm part....most of my fun with this hobby is tracking more than snow being on the ground. What i am not okay with was that there was nothing to track. 99% of our threats died by day 8. the few that made it through died at 120 hours. We never got with 84 hours of accumulating snow. Nobody made a forecast map. Bob Chill did a hit run...said this would be a good winter and then we never heard from him again. Same with HM. We didnt even get a threat for freezing rain or sleet...we never even had a chance to bust. There was not a storm to forecast...ever...not even close. 

Yes - no heartbreak this year even because there was never a threat.  My first winter ever without a single threat to track.  

[Eskimo Joe]

18 minutes ago, Ji said:

I am okay with the no snowstorm part....most of my fun with this hobby is tracking more than snow being on the ground. What i am not okay with was that there was nothing to track. 99% of our threats died by day 8. the few that made it through died at 120 hours. We never got with 84 hours of accumulating snow. Nobody made a forecast map. Bob Chill did a hit run...said this would be a good winter and then we never heard from him again. Same with HM. We didnt even get a threat for freezing rain or sleet...we never even had a chance to bust. There was not a storm to forecast...ever...not even close. 

I guess it's better than getting within 24 hours of an event and having the rug totally pulled out from underneath you. //Those// sting like no other.

[psuhoffman]

1 hour ago, mattie g said:

DCA in the 50s is a different beast than DCA in the 2020s. I'm not necessarily saying that it's a 20" difference of a beast, but UHI *HAS* to play a part in that.

I looked at 2 coop sites near here, Westminster and Hanover and both were worse the last 7 years than that comparable period in the 50's.  The departure is SLIGHTLY closer than DCA so it is fair to say some of this is UHI, but looking at other non UHI locations in the area seems to bear out that this period is in fact worse than the 50's in our area even accounting for UHI.