Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

March 2024 disco/obs


Torch Tiger
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

I actually don't have problem with it.  Blues have odd behaviors - difficult to pin point that sort of thing. It's probably more of an homage to general possibility ...less 'where' exactly that happens. In fact, I can imagine the cackles and ridicule over the NAM this and that ... all the while missing that point.

We're still technically reeling off that pretty crazy late season -EPO last week. It's modulated(ing) positive, but the loading takes time to extinguish - at this time of year, these indexes sometimes reflect more so in the mid level thermal complexion. If we look at that 850s mb, it doens't appear like there's warm problem to this thing being a kind of red flag -

Although heh... anyone that things this week's been warm at the surface is probably selling snow to Eskimo.  

I'm just saying ... that's why spring blue bombs happen. 

Yeah it's not an isothermal look on the NAM....it's a decent lapse rate from the surface to 850. IF you actually verify that, then latent cooling is going to take the sfc to near-freezing fairly easily if you have any sort of heavy rates.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Typhoon Tip said:

It's close ( all hating and despising aside...) re April 3rd-ish

Henry's chart above is remarkably consistent, as well ..shared with only irrelevant differences between the EPS/GEFS/GEPS ensemble means. In all -->  a deep coupled response to that western limb -NAO you see over the D. Straight, should evolve nearby our lat/lon - that is the teleconnector incarnate.

That's just a 101 interpretation that cannot really be argued.

The problems with it are obviously A... the lateness and climate but excusing  that obviousness for moment ( we've have blizzards in early April before, anyway - ) ...the heights in the west and how they transiently balance against the heights between the GOM and off the SE U.S. coast, are preventative.

The GEFs mean for dailies is actually a very good fit on the 06z, taking a strong primary up the ST Seaway to about Watertown NY ..then, forcing a secondary E of PWM ... because it compromises the -NAO forcing a storm S, while also negotiating those heigher heights underneath/foundation of all that scaffolding down in the deep S/SE.  

It can change... a little more western ridging would help. But, I also suspect the entire 35N band around the entire hemisphere/planet on both sides of the Equator, being some 3 to 7 dm higher than they were 50 years ago ... would continue to impose resistance even if those mid latitude features became better aligned.  The flow would compress, not "yield" in that sense... and compression speeds up the flow - it's basically just that the lower latitudes are destructively interfering.   Complex... 

For now, we need the Pac --> N/A flow structure not be going into a -PNA mode, while these other inhibitors are going on, before we can be more confident in a finale bomb.

I will say though that the 2nd week of April, the seasonal 'flash' is now showing up on the guidance across the board.  It's probable any 1st week system would be the season's mortality gasp in the models.

Atlantic optimal, pacific suboptimal, especially considering CC decrease in baroclinicity. Accurate summary?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dendrite said:

CAR is at 82”

Which is 24.5" BN thru 3/26.  I'm currently 3.1" ahead of them, which is unusual. 
In 2000-01 we finished 5.0" ahead thanks to 55.5" in March.  Ten years later we squeaked ahead by 0.2" after the 15.1" dump on April Fool's day.  The 26-winter difference leaves my place averaging 33" behind CAR.

Edit:  Most of the above clowns would be quite frustrating here if they verified ("slim chance" is understatement).  Seeing 20s and 30s barely 100 miles to the SW while we might reach 3" - even in April that would hurt, worse than 2016 when many SNE points had 5-10" of cold pow while we had cold clouds as the snow season finished 4" below the 2nd worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3k N?AM tells Vermonters to go to the banks of the Connecticut and watch the snow accumulate on the other side of the river.

Quite the remarkable cutoff

 

Edit:  I like the typo in NAM, I am going to leave it.

sn10_acc-imp.us_ne.png

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said:

I actually don't have problem with it.  Blues have odd behaviors - difficult to pin point that sort of thing. It's probably more of an homage to general possibility ...less 'where' exactly that happens. In fact, I can imagine the cackles and ridicule over the NAM this and that ... all the while missing that point.

We're still technically reeling off that pretty crazy late season -EPO last week. It's modulated(ing) positive, but the loading takes time to extinguish - at this time of year, these indexes sometimes reflect more so in the mid level thermal complexion. If we look at that 850s mb, it doens't appear like there's warm problem to this thing being a kind of red flag -

Although heh... anyone that thinks this week's been warm at the surface is probably trying to sell snow to Eskimos.  

I'm just saying ... that's why spring blue bombs happen. 

Me neither...its like an inch or two of trasnparent slush here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Henry's Weather said:

Atlantic optimal, pacific suboptimal, especially considering CC decrease in baroclinicity. Accurate summary?

I wouldn't necessarily blame decreasing b-c on climate change this late in the season - assuming that's what you meant there.

We're losing gradients via seasonal forcing at this time of year pretty fast, anyway, while CC moves much much slow than the forcing of any single transition season.  It's almost impossible parse out the contribution down to a discrete level of either.  But you know the former statement is right -

The heights being modestly in positive anomaly across the deep S/SE, that is more of a larger scale limitation.  It's physically preventing 'as much' N/S amplitude expression, because height falls sandwiched in between that and the NAO blocking becomes a compressed field - which speeds up the flow which stretches things W/E ... Just call it destructive interference.

If this latter limitation somehow alleviates, that trough diving through the Lakes has a chance to slow down while passing under Long Island and that would be interesting

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...