January Medium/Long Range: A snowy January ahead?

[Heisy]

For those here who don't know or aren't sure (or need a reminder)... AIFS is deterministic AI model that uses the operational ECMWF as initial conditions. It is not an ensemble model, nor an ensemble member, which is pretty amazing since ensembles tend to perform better at long leads. AIFS might be picking out good "analogs" and extrapolating what happens after each analog as a composite, and doing an excellent job at that.

Thanks for this info, been tracking it all winter and it’s been really freaking good, the last event and the current one it basically settled in on placement by day 4-5 and didn’t wiggle much from there. What’s interesting is the graphics look a little smoothed out like it is an ensemble mean.

Does anyone with SV have the snow map from the 6z run for this event? Just curious what it showed


.

[frd]

6 minutes ago, Terpeast said:

I checked the EPS weekly clusters for Jan 23-Feb 7 (sorry, can't share or I'll get in trouble), and 60% does have a pacific ridge, but with some extension northward into western AK, and some troughiness into the midwest and east. It's not as bad a look as we might expect. 40% is SE ridge.

In this area we still appear to have a decent delivery method for cold.  I am not worried about rain at this time for the potential system near the 20 th.  

Meanwhile,  nationwide snow cover continues to expand, more so with the southern system next several days.    

[mitchnick]

3 minutes ago, Heisy said:

Thanks for this info, been tracking it all winter and it’s been really freaking good, the last event and the current one it basically settled in on placement by day 4-5 and didn’t wiggle much from there. What’s interesting is the graphics look a little smoothed out like it is an ensemble mean.

Does anyone with SV have the snow map from the 6z run for this event? Just curious what it showed


.

Heisey, I  agree it has done well inside 4-5 days, but it has jumped all around beyond day 10, less so between 7-10. The Eps have done a very good job with the pattern since mid-November, if not excellent. 

Terpeast, you're are spot on with the MJO. I  thought the JMA had a decent last year, but this year Gefs and Eps have definitely done better. Eps weeklies as of yesterday's run were only modestly AN for claround the first half of February, with N to AN precip. I think we can score the first half, if only modestly. 

[Terpeast]

9 minutes ago, Heisy said:

Thanks for this info, been tracking it all winter and it’s been really freaking good, the last event and the current one it basically settled in on placement by day 4-5 and didn’t wiggle much from there. What’s interesting is the graphics look a little smoothed out like it is an ensemble mean.

Does anyone with SV have the snow map from the 6z run for this event? Just curious what it showed


.

The smoothing is probably from averaging across analog matches above a certain confidence interval. Like taking rollforward maps of 10 different analog matches (for example) and then averaging them all together. Probably an oversimplification, but you get the idea.

[Heisy]

Heisey, I  agree it has done well inside 4-5 days, but it has jumped all around beyond day 10, less so between 7-10. The Eps have done a very good job with the pattern since mid-November, if not excellent. 
Terpeast, you're are spot on with the MJO. I  thought the JMA had a decent last year, but this year Gefs and Eps have definitely done better. Eps weeklies as of yesterday's run were only modestly AN for claround the first half of February, with N to AN precip. I think we can score the first half, if only modestly. 

Right, once it gets to around day 5-6 it starts locking up pretty well. Sunday will bring the 20th day 7 so hopefully by then maybe we’re tracking something.


.

[psuhoffman]

46 minutes ago, IronTy said:

To be fair he's basing that off the JMA forecasting phases 4/5.  Assuming the JMA is right I agree with him that it'll be hard to overcome that hostile a regime.  Maybe we get something big just as it flips, or maybe the JMA is wrong and it doesn't flip.  We'll know in a couple weeks.  

He relies too much on the MJO, which is just one factor not THE factor.  He also has been wrong so much lately, but worse than that, I've become convinced he is dishonest, because over the years he has said things that I KNOW he knows is not true, used certain indicators in opposite ways to fit a narrative.  Now I will admit usually that narrative is the opposite and he is hyping cold and snow, but he did make a forecast for a warm low snow winter so maybe now he is just trying to fit that narrative.  I dont know, but given his track record over the last decade or so...not sure how anyone can trust anything he says anymore.  

[psuhoffman]

38 minutes ago, Terpeast said:

Not so fast... I just saw a new trade wind plot and it appears that trades might want to push W of the dateline well into the eastern half of the MC. If this pans out, that will suppress convection over the MC and keep it westward into the IO (phases 2-3) with a little forcing over the eastern pacific. This is the kind of "split forcing" we've been getting almost the whole winter rather than the dreaded 4-5-6 warm phase forcing.

I am not an MJO expert nor do I pour over the forcing plots with the same regularity as some of the MJO zealots, however, I've noted over the years a pattern where the MJO tends to "fit in with" the pattern not necessarily drive it in a different direction.  Its symbiotic.  When we've been stuck in crap winters waiting for some MJO wave to save us, it never does, even when it gets into the central pacific there ends up being conflicting forcing in the MC running interference or the wave is too weak to effectively impact the pattern or some other such excuse.  And many many moons ago when we used to get good winters...the same would happen in the other direction...we had somewhat hostile MJO waves in good winters that failed to wreck the pattern in the same way as a hostile wave in a bad winter would.  Because, as you pointed out, there is some residual conflicting forcing still in a favorable place or whatever reason, but the base state is usually harder to break than simply "here comes the MJO".  If it was that simple we would all be better forecasters. 

[cbmclean]

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

I am not an MJO expert nor do I pour over the forcing plots with the same regularity as some of the MJO zealots, however, I've noted over the years a pattern where the MJO tends to "fit in with" the pattern not necessarily drive it in a different direction.  Its symbiotic.  When we've been stuck in crap winters waiting for some MJO wave to save us, it never does, even when it gets into the central pacific there ends up being conflicting forcing in the MC running interference or the wave is too weak to effectively impact the pattern or some other such excuse.  And many many moons ago when we used to get good winters...the same would happen in the other direction...we had somewhat hostile MJO waves in good winters that failed to wreck the pattern in the same way as a hostile wave in a bad winter would.  Because, as you pointed out, there is some residual conflicting forcing still in a favorable place or whatever reason, but the base state is usually harder to break than simply "here comes the MJO".  If it was that simple we would all be better forecasters. 

Well put, but La Nina + -PDO + bad MJO leave me with low expectations for FEB.

[midatlanticweather]

 

 

[WVclimo]

Wasn’t the MJO cycling through phases 4-5-6 during December when it was below-normal cold nearly the entire month ?

[cbmclean]

2 minutes ago, midatlanticweather said:

 

 

boo, hiss.

[brooklynwx99]

2 minutes ago, WVclimo said:

Wasn’t the MJO cycling through phases 4-5-6 during December when it was below-normal cold nearly the entire month ?

yup, didn't matter at all. the MJO isn't a silver bullet as much as some here would make you believe

[psuhoffman]

1 hour ago, cbmclean said:

Well put, but La Nina + -PDO + bad MJO leave me with low expectations for FEB.

I am uncertain where we go following January 20th or so.  But I am a lot more optimistic than I was a month ago.  I was on the record expecting Jan 20 on to be pretty bad...so it still would not surprise me.  BUT... the PDO is now about neutral and heading the right way.  The Nino is incredibly weak and has failed to assert much dominance on the pacific longwave pattern.  The high latitudes have been more favorable than I expected.  Could it all fall apart and flip to typical Nina Feb torch...sure, but some of the more neutral PDO nina's didn't even do that.  Feb 2006 wasn't that bad and we got a MECS.  I am now ambiguous on my expectations post Jan 20, I could see it go either way.  

[mitchnick]

31 minutes ago, Heisy said:

Right, once it gets to around day 5-6 it starts locking up pretty well. Sunday will bring the 20th day 7 so hopefully by then maybe we’re tracking something.


.

You're wishing my life away!

[Bob Chill]

3 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I am uncertain where we go following January 20th or so.  But I am a lot more optimistic than I was a month ago.  I was on the record expecting Jan 20 on to be pretty bad...so it still would not surprise me.  BUT... the PDO is now about neutral and heading the right way.  The Nino is incredibly weak and has failed to assert much dominance on the pacific longwave pattern.  The high latitudes have been more favorable than I expected.  Could it all fall apart and flip to typical Nina Feb torch...sure, but some of the more neutral PDO nina's didn't even do that.  Feb 2026 wasn't that bad and we got a MECS.  I am not ambiguous on my expectations post Jan 20, I could see it go either way.  

Been an interesting year. Feels like a changing of the guard from the persistent hell last 7 years or so. We don't even talk about the pac jet this year heh. 

 

Agree on your mjo posts. Imo- When the mjo is persistently bad, it's not the root cause of our woes, it's just another instrument in the symphony working against us. Works both ways too. LR models have busted badly breaking down a favorable mjo too quickly. I see the mjo as a persistence indicator. Like when it's being stubborn in general and it coincides with delayed or busted prog'd pattern flips in the conus. That's a really bad sign but it's certainly not all caused by the mjo. 

Persistence trumps climo and long range models are very climo based. We see this over and over. Majority of winters have 1-2 dominant features and they don't always line up with enso climo. Figuring those out in advance is hard of course but these features can often dominate a winter no matter what lr models say. Imo- things are lookin pretty good for us down the line

[hstorm]

33 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

I am uncertain where we go following January 20th or so.  But I am a lot more optimistic than I was a month ago.  I was on the record expecting Jan 20 on to be pretty bad...so it still would not surprise me.  BUT... the PDO is now about neutral and heading the right way.  The Nino is incredibly weak and has failed to assert much dominance on the pacific longwave pattern.  The high latitudes have been more favorable than I expected.  Could it all fall apart and flip to typical Nina Feb torch...sure, but some of the more neutral PDO nina's didn't even do that.  Feb 2026 wasn't that bad and we got a MECS.  I am not ambiguous on my expectations post Jan 20, I could see it go either way.  

Bold early prediction!  

[psuhoffman]

29 minutes ago, hstorm said:

Bold early prediction!  

I could blow smoke up your arse and pretend I know what's going to happen like some others do.  

[cbmclean]

1 minute ago, psuhoffman said:

I could blow smoke up your arse and pretend I know what's going to happen like some others do.  

He was just joking at the Feb 2026 typo.

[WxUSAF]

GFS a hit for MECS-LK Day weekend. Looks sorta like a repeat of this past storm in track.

[jonjon]

3 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

GFS a hit for MECS-LK Day weekend. Looks sorta like a repeat of this past storm in track.

Yeah, that seems like a big change from prior runs.  Good sign.

[psuhoffman]

11 minutes ago, cbmclean said:

He was just joking at the Feb 2026 typo.

DOH 

[psuhoffman]

7 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

GFS a hit for MECS-LK Day weekend. Looks sorta like a repeat of this past storm in track.

I would like a redo, with a slightly less suppressive 50/50 location next time 

[Chris78]

8 minutes ago, WxUSAF said:

GFS a hit for MECS-LK Day weekend. Looks sorta like a repeat of this past storm in track.

Can we please nudge it a little further north this time? Only asking for 50 miles or so.

Asking for several Northern crew friends...

[hstorm]

3 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

DOH 

No harm, no foul.

[psuhoffman]

BTW, I am not so sure we actually want storms to look "suppressed" in the long range anymore.  That was a guidance bias 20 years ago, and we still say "just where we want it" when guidance has some southern wave day 10, but is it really what we want?  How often has that worked out lately?  Actually over the last 5 years or so a lot of our snow was rain on the guidance day 10.  More that I can remember than storms that were suppressed and trended north.  

 

Pattern recognition is important here.  When a model run shows some snowstorm day 13 despite the fact that almost every pattern driver is wrong we can be 90% sure its going to end up rain.  But when the pattern in general is good, I am getting to the point where I would rather see a wave over or even slightly north of us than squashed in the long ranges.  If cold is nearby there are multiple paths to win.  A wave can end up weaker and south, it could come out in pieces, a lead can cut and a caboose can get us, a lead wave can become a 50/50 for a following wave, we can get a front end CAD thump...

But guidance has become pretty good at picking up on suppression and its rare anymore that some wave thats down in the deep south and suppressed off the SE coast ends up coming up the coast.  Its been a really long time since that happened.  

[mitchnick]

Gem at the end is tasty.

[WxUSAF]

1 minute ago, mitchnick said:

Gem at the end is tasty.

Looked a smidge warm, but it was about to cook

[mattie g]

2 minutes ago, mitchnick said:

Gem at the end is tasty.

...as long as the nothern vort doesn't crush things.

[Heisy]

The wave the gfs has isn’t the same progression as the euro Ai….cmc is more in agreement, and boy does it look like it’s gearing up at the end of
the run.





.

[North Balti Zen]

51 minutes ago, psuhoffman said:

BTW, I am not so sure we actually want storms to look "suppressed" in the long range anymore.  That was a guidance bias 20 years ago, and we still say "just where we want it" when guidance has some southern wave day 10, but is it really what we want?  How often has that worked out lately?  Actually over the last 5 years or so a lot of our snow was rain on the guidance day 10.  More that I can remember than storms that were suppressed and trended north.  

 

Pattern recognition is important here.  When a model run shows some snowstorm day 13 despite the fact that almost every pattern driver is wrong we can be 90% sure its going to end up rain.  But when the pattern in general is good, I am getting to the point where I would rather see a wave over or even slightly north of us than squashed in the long ranges.  If cold is nearby there are multiple paths to win.  A wave can end up weaker and south, it could come out in pieces, a lead can cut and a caboose can get us, a lead wave can become a 50/50 for a following wave, we can get a front end CAD thump...

But guidance has become pretty good at picking up on suppression and its rare anymore that some wave thats down in the deep south and suppressed off the SE coast ends up coming up the coast.  Its been a really long time since that happened.  

This post is so good I want to take it out for a nice dinner.