May 2017 Observations and Model Discussion for the Pacific Northwest

[TT-SEA]

I swear you said you liked 2014 a few days ago, and then I pointed out that it and 1991 were in my top 3 analogs.

 

You go through analogs like Dewey went through girls in college. Revolving door.

 

Phil has been pretty consistent with his analogs this spring.   

[Front Ranger]

Phil has been pretty consistent with his analogs this spring.   

 

1983 and 1993, for sure.

[Jesse]

1983 and 1993, for sure.

What I think he was trying to say nicely is that you don't have a great track record for long range forecasting, compared to Phil.

[Front Ranger]

What I think he was trying to say nicely is that you don't have a great track record for long range forecasting, compared to Phil.

Now you're trying to make it about me here too? Get a new schtick.

[Jesse]

Now you're trying to make it about me here too? Get a new schtick.

Not at all. I'm just being honest.

[stuffradio]

How tragic is this

 

[Front Ranger]

Not at all. I'm just being honest.

You're just looking for any little opportunity to poop on me, due to the butt hurt afflicting you.

 

Obvious Jesse is obvious. Just being honest.

[Front Ranger]

How tragic is this

 

MT8_Vancouver_Kanada_ens.png

Warm May.

[Jesse]

You're just looking for any little opportunity to poop on me, due to the butt hurt afflicting you.

 

Obvious Jesse is obvious. Just being honest.

Phil has, overall, been a much more successful long range forecaster than you. You really shouldn't be this offended by that fact. Just take it as an opportunity to get better.

[Phil]

I swear you said you liked 2014 a few days ago, and then I pointed out that it and 1991 were in my top 3 analogs.

Never happened. Where's the quote?

 

You go through analogs like Dewey went through girls in college. Revolving door.

Now you're just making stuff up. Sure, I've made minor tweaks here and there, but nothing major. I know I never had 2014 as an analog for 2017.

[Front Ranger]

Phil has, overall, been a much more successful long range forecaster than you. You really shouldn't be this offended by that fact. Just take it as an opportunity to get better.

D**n, you're right. Just checked and he has a lifetime .324 batting average, while I'm at .310.

 

Stats don't lie!

[Front Ranger]

Now you're just making stuff up. Sure, I've made minor tweaks here and there, but nothing major.

Just pushing your buttons. I know you mate for life when it comes to analogs.

[BLI snowman]

Another oddball was 1957. Hit 87 in April, and didn't exceed that number until September.

 

Yeah, that year from May 1957 to April 1958 was an absolute bore for weather. One of the worst ever!

[Phil]

Just pushing your buttons. I know you mate for life when it comes to analogs.

Touché, I guess.

[BLI snowman]

It's almost like everyone really sucks at forecasting really far out.

[Phil]

It's almost like everyone really sucks at forecasting really far out.

Lol. In all seriousness, this is (and will always be) true. Just about everyone screwed up with the AO last winter, myself included. A bunch of ENSO busts already this year, as well.

[Phil]

Note the top-scoring 00z GFS analogs.

 

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/short_range/tools/gifs/500hgt_comp_00gfs814.gif

[Phil]

If we do follow the 1983/1993 route, a ULL will undercut the ridge sometime in June, following the EAMT reversal but preceding the next jet extension. Exact timing of this probably hinges on the rate at which the MJO orbits into/out of the Pacific.

[wx_statman]

Yeah, that year from May 1957 to April 1958 was an absolute bore for weather. One of the worst ever!

 

Yeah, shades of 1997 or 1999. Dull as it gets around here.

[TT-SEA]

Warm May.

 

Don't look at the 00Z ECMWF.  

[Jesse]

Don't look at the 00Z ECMWF.

More ensemble members for the 06z GFS jumped onto that solution as well.

[SilverFallsAndrew]

Happy Mt. St. Helens Day!

 

[Front Ranger]

Don't look at the 00Z ECMWF.  

 

Scary.

[James Jones]

00Z Euro didn't have much ensemble support, but the 12z OP looks pretty similar to last night's.

[Phil]

The ECMWF does have a tendency to dig troughs too far southwest along the North American high terrain, so it might be over-aggressive with that solution. Then again, the GFS has a clear zonal bias in the long range, so who knows.

 

I personally don't see the forcing for any western troughing until June, but maybe I'm slow biased like last year. In the end, I think the ridge will be undercut as it breaks poleward, as opposed to a retrograde, but I could be wrong about that too.

[Phil]

Almost no mid-latitude heat on the 00z EPS by d15. This actually looks like your classic solar minimum/LIA circulation, with the polar blocking and cold centered over the Europe-North America domain:

 

http://i724.photobucket.com/albums/ww243/phillywillie/Mobile%20Uploads/FD583AEF-55D5-4696-A8AC-D7AE1019D278_zpsp7lf5uyj.png

 

The -AO is basically a global air-conditioner, especially during the winter. It increases tropical cloud cover and convection through reduced large scale static stability, cripples the poleward transport of heat/moisture, retracts the Hadley Cells equatorward, and allows for efficient radiative heat loss at the poles through a reduction in cloud cover and winds (in the winter this is a much bigger deal than in the summer).

 

So it's no coincidence that the periods featuring global scale cooling (1950s-1970s, and the solar minimum years between 2006 and 2011) were dominated by the -AO, and the periods featuring global warming (1910s to the 1940s, and 1980s to the 2000s) were dominated by the +AO.

[Phil]

Looking at the cold season NAO component, it actually leads the global temperature curve by 10-15 years.

 

[Phil]

The 12z GFS CPC analog ensemble now lists 1993 three times, while the top analog is still 1983. Also has 1954 and 1997 on there, both of which have some (limited) applicability.

 

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/short_range/tools/gifs/500hgt_comp_12gfs814.gif

[Front Ranger]

The ECMWF does have a tendency to dig troughs too far southwest along the North American high terrain, so it might be over-aggressive with that solution. Then again, the GFS has a clear zonal bias in the long range, so who knows.

 

I personally don't see the forcing for any western troughing until June, but maybe I'm slow biased like last year. In the end, I think the ridge will be undercut as it breaks poleward, as opposed to a retrograde, but I could be wrong about that too.

 

I think you've actually been fast-biased so far. You originally predicted extended ridging late April/early May, with troughing returning later in May. Late April was a no-go, early May had brief ridging but then deep troughing, and now the real extended period of riding has arrived for late May to...? 

 

So if you're actually a bit fast this year, what does that mean for early June? 

[TT-SEA]

00Z Euro didn't have much ensemble support, but the 12z OP looks pretty similar to last night's.

 

12Z ECMWF does not have much ensemble support either... but I am sensing that only matters when the operational is showing a ridge and the ensembles show a trough.    The operational run and the control run both show sharp trough cutting off and lingering and I am pretty sure that is how it will end up.  

 

Here is the 12Z ECMWF ensemble mean at day 8... clearly different than the operational run.

 

[Phil]

I think you've actually been fast-biased so far. You originally predicted extended ridging late April/early May, with troughing returning later in May. Late April was a no-go, early May had brief ridging but then deep troughing, and now the real extended period of riding has arrived for late May to...?

 

So if you're actually a bit fast this year, what does that mean for early June?

What? Small errors (give/take a week) are unavoidable when forecasting intraseasonally. I would respect you a lot more if you'd stop nitpicking semantics within larger points-of-argument.

[Front Ranger]

What?

 

Errors of +/- one week are unavoidable when forecasting intraseasonally. I would respect you a lot more if you'd stop nitpicking semantics within larger points-of-argument.

 

No need to be so defensive. You were talking about being slow-biased. I was suggesting maybe it was the other way around this year. Talking about the same thing as you, using the same terminology. That's not semantics.

[Front Ranger]

12Z ECMWF does not have much ensemble support either... but I am sensing that only matters when the operational is showing a ridge and the ensembles show a trough.    The operational run and the control run both show sharp trough cutting off and lingering and I am pretty sure that is how it will end up.  

 

Here is the 12Z ECMWF ensemble mean at day 8... clearly different than the operational run.

 

 

As a general rule, ensembles are more trustworthy past day 7. Plenty of exceptions, of course.

 

Big picture, the operational isn't super different than the ensembles anyway. Doesn't look like full-scale troughing for the PNW anytime soon, but perhaps a cut-off within general ridging for 1-3 days. 

 

Plenty of time for that to change, of course. 

[Phil]

No need to be so defensive. You were talking about being slow-biased. I was suggesting maybe it was the other way around this year. Talking about the same thing as you, that's not semantics.

See, this is where context matters. I was referring to my skepticism of the 12z ECMWF solution, which quickly kills the ridge. If I were "fast biased" in relation to the ECMWF, I would have to predict troughing to return within 72hrs.

 

You, once again, decided to take a subtle dig at me, rooted in semantics and a poor grasp of context.

[Front Ranger]

See, this is where context matters. I was referring to my skepticism of the 12z ECMWF solution, which quickly kills the ridge. If I were "fast biased" in relation to the ECMWF, I would have to predict troughing to return within 72hrs.

 

Does that make any sense to you?

 

I understand the context. I was just saying up to this point, it hasn't seemed like you've been slow-biased, it seemed the opposite.

[Phil]

I understand the context. I was just saying up to this point, it hasn't seemed like you've been slow-biased, it seemed the opposite.

Do you know what "bias" means? It needs to be a consistent tendency observed throughout numerous trial periods.

 

Timing errors, within one week, in forecasts made over a month out, are actually unavoidable. Sometimes error potential is even greater, depending on the complexity of the evolution(s).

[Phil]

12Z ECMWF does not have much ensemble support either... but I am sensing that only matters when the operational is showing a ridge and the ensembles show a trough. The operational run and the control run both show sharp trough cutting off and lingering and I am pretty sure that is how it will end up.

 

Here is the 12Z ECMWF ensemble mean at day 8... clearly different than the operational run.

 

I don't know, man. That entire evolution on the operational 12z ECMWF looks bizarre to me. I could see that shortwave digging into the intermountain west, but I'm not sure how it could manage to dig into the PNW unless the upstream ridge axis is being incorrectly modeled, verbatim.

 

I could be wrong, though. Shortwaves have never been my strong suit.

[Jesse]

More and more GFS ensembles showing the crash. I think this is gonna happen guys!!!

[SilverFallsAndrew]

More and more GFS ensembles showing the crash. I think this is gonna happen guys!!!

Yay

[Phil]

More and more GFS ensembles showing the crash. I think this is gonna happen guys!!!

The operational 18z GFS has a 1993 esque jet extension during week two. The ECMWF/EPS disagrees and goes with the retrogression and backdoor undercut.