January 2024

[forkyfork]

way out there but this pac isn't going to cut it

[uofmiami]

 

[weatherpruf]

5 hours ago, Stormlover74 said:

Meh we kinda came to expect crappy winters with 1 or 2 3 to 6" events by that point. We weren't spoiled with 60" winters

I don't even remember that much....usually a little snow then rainy slush. 

[MANDA]

1 hour ago, forkyfork said:

way out there but this pac isn't going to cut it

Nope, it sure ain't if it verifies.

[Allsnow]

1 hour ago, forkyfork said:

way out there but this pac isn't going to cut it

Nope. More wasted blocking. EPS has all the cold in Europe 

[forkyfork]

1 minute ago, Allsnow said:

Nope. More wasted blocking. EPS has all the cold in Europe 

as i've said before all the nino turnaround winters had the big snow jan 20 or later

[Allsnow]

1 minute ago, forkyfork said:

as i've said before all the nino turnaround winters had the big snow jan 20 or later

Hopefully the ssw doesn’t send the cold to Europe while we block a pac airmass 

[Volcanic Winter]

In the El Niño thread I think they were posting a split lobe look with one lobe definitely over NA. But I suppose that’s just one model and one run, so who knows. We’ll need luck for sure at this point to get something to go right for a change. We don’t need to be in the deep freeze but we for sure need better air than what we’ve been choking down so far every day. 

[Allsnow]

Weeklies don’t really improve the pac until February 

[WestBabylonWeather]

Best pattern will be in spring when it’s too late. 45 and rain may 1st lol 

 

[North and West]

Weeklies don’t really improve the pac until February 

Sign out and come back at Thanksgiving?


.

[North and West]

Best pattern will be in spring when it’s too late. 45 and rain may 1st lol 
 

Just in time for opening day!


.

[Tatamy]

You don’t even see a fantasy storm on the GFS within 300 hours on these runs.  Every attempt at a ridge gets quickly squashed by that power house PAC jet.  It looks like we really are cooked.  

[Brian5671]

1 hour ago, North and West said:

Just in time for opening day!


.

100%

[North and West]

You don’t even see a fantasy storm on the GFS within 300 hours on these runs.  Every attempt at a ridge gets quickly squashed by that power house PAC jet.  It looks like we really are cooked.  

That’s too bad if it verifies. It really seems like we’re going through that sluggish part of the cycle where we get low-snow winters, and the background AGW just makes it more annoying for lunatics like ourselves.


.

[Tatamy]

FWIW there have been other periods where NYC had snow amounts of less than 20” over successive winters.  These include:

1899 - 1901

1927 - 1932

1949 - 1955

1961 - 1963

1974 - 1975

1979 - 1981

1987 - 1990

1997 - 2000

2006 - 2008

None of these winter periods featured seasonal totals of 20” or more (I am referring to the seasonal totals experienced during these years and not the entire period shown).  Many of them were 15” or less.  These numbers are from the NWS Upton website.  Unfortunately for the weenies it is a part of the climatology here that we do in fact experience successive winters with meager snow amounts.  I would have hated to be a weenie in 1949 knowing that the next 6 winter periods would all have less than 20” of snow.

 

 

 

 

[uofmiami]

This is for Anthony

 

[Allsnow]

18 minutes ago, uofmiami said:

This is for Anthony

 

Impossible. It’s either cutters or suppression…

[MJO812]

DT on board 

[Snowguy66]

As stated before, having DT on your side, can be a kiss of death. Yeah, once in a while he’ll get it right, but most often he’s left with egg on his face. Hopefully he gets it right this time.


.

[Stormlover74]

Just now, Snowguy66 said:

As stated before, having DT on your side, can be a kiss of death. Yeah, once in a while he’ll get it right, but most often he’s left with egg on his face. Hopefully he gets it right this time.


.

Well he's not exactly committing one way or the other

[donsutherland1]

54 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

DT on board 

It should be noted that the 20-30 days DT references would not immediately follow the SSWE. There’s usually a 2-4-week lag. The ongoing return of Atlantic blocking precedes the SSWE, it is not the result of an event that has not yet occurred.

There is some chatter on social media that there won’t be much of a lag. That is wrong. These events take time to propagate into the troposphere and, thereby, influence synoptic patterns.

For an illustration, consider a case where one throws a pebble into the center of a calm pond. It takes time for the ripples to reach shore. If, almost simultaneously to the pebble's being tossed into the center of the pond, an acorn falls from a tree near shore and its ripples arrive much sooner than those from the pebble, one can't attribute those ripples to that of the pebble. The same holds true regarding the redevelopment of blocking, which actually precedes the start of the SSWE.

[eduggs]

5 hours ago, MANDA said:

Nope, it sure ain't if it verifies.

It's actually possible to have a significant snowstorm before or after a "bad" Pacific flow pattern and get that 5-day average look. Heck even jumbled, partially interfering shortwaves could blunt the Pacific influence and still produce a time-smoothed result to match that graphic. LR multi-day-averaged anomaly maps are ensemble-and time-averaged. That produces a very low resolution, continental-scale overview. I think it's important to understanding what we're looking at before we try to interpret it.

[40/70 Benchmark]

6 hours ago, forkyfork said:

as i've said before all the nino turnaround winters had the big snow jan 20 or later

Yes, yes, yes. 

[mannynyc]

Well at least we have 300+ hour fantasies

[NorthShoreWx]

3 minutes ago, mannynyc said:

Well at least we have 300+ hour fantasies

The clown maps for this on C-E LI are going to be suitable for framing.  3'+

[North and West]

It should be noted that the 20-30 days DT references would not immediately follow the SSWE. There’s usually a 2-4-week lag. The ongoing return of Atlantic blocking precedes the SSWE, it is not the result of an event that has not yet occurred.
There is some chatter on social media that there won’t be much of a lag. That is wrong. These events take time to propagate into the troposphere and, thereby, influence synoptic patterns.
For an illustration, consider a case where one throws a pebble into the center of a calm pond. It takes time for the ripples to reach shore. If, almost simultaneously to the pebble's being tossed into the center of the pond, an acorn falls from a tree near shore and its ripples arrive much sooner than those from the pebble, one can't attribute those ripples to that of the pebble. The same holds true regarding the redevelopment of blocking, which actually precedes the start of the SSWE.

Thank you for the straightforward explanation!


.

[North and West]

The clown maps for this on C-E LI are going to be suitable for framing.  3'+

.

[suzook]

5 hours ago, NorthShoreWx said:

The clown maps for this on C-E LI are going to be suitable for framing.  3'+

It's gone on next run already 

[kat5hurricane]

13 hours ago, Tatamy said:

FWIW there have been other periods where NYC had snow amounts of less than 20” over successive winters.  These include:

1899 - 1901

1927 - 1932

1949 - 1955

1961 - 1963

1974 - 1975

1979 - 1981

1987 - 1990

1997 - 2000

2006 - 2008

None of these winter periods featured seasonal totals of 20” or more (I am referring to the seasonal totals experienced during these years and not the entire period shown).  Many of them were 15” or less.  These numbers are from the NWS Upton website.  Unfortunately for the weenies it is a part of the climatology here that we do in fact experience successive winters with meager snow amounts.  I would have hated to be a weenie in 1949 knowing that the next 6 winter periods would all have less than 20” of snow.

 

 

 

 

How about multiple straight years of 2" or less? Just under 20" would be a godsend at this point. Yet another December with light to medium jacket weather around the Holidays, our new norm seemingly. Nice but also unsettling.