October 2016 Observations and Model Discussion for the Pacific Northwest

[westcoastexpat]

I just don't see the point of being THAT non committal.  What's the point of being interested in weather if you don't even want to take a stab at the coming winter?  It is at least possible to pick outcomes that are the most likely at least.

 

I don't think that's a fair criticism.

 

I said that I don't buy into the October/November "signals" to predict the overall winter pattern. I just don't. The inconsistencies in the arguments on both sides are pretty glaring, in my opinion.

 

I don't think I've been non committal. "Normal, snowier than the last few of winters, variable pattern" actually shows some commitment. My prediction at these very early stages is an overall centred core of arctic air being in the central Upper Midwest/Plains states, with no persistent ridge over PNW and probably warmer than normal temps for the extreme east of the continent. 

 

I don't think you have to say "epic winter" or "epic fail" in order to "commit" or "be interested in the weather". My stab was "normal" and that is a plausible (and statistically more probable) outcome. I'm less interested in climate and more interested in weather (hence being a meteorologist and not a climatologist)... the nuances of a system intrigue me a lot more than the nuances of temp anomalies over a period of months. I'd rather discuss a potential snowstorm in the medium range than "Will there be cold/snow this winter?" The answer to the latter is probably "Yes" ...but I care more about when and how much.

[Phil]

For those not too wild about the progs for November take a look at this. This is a 500mb composite of the Novembers preceding 12 of the best Janauries in the NW from 1915 to 1980. Exactly what the ECMWF weeklies show happening as the month progresses.

Okay, so just to test for continuity, I rolled these years back to October. This is the result I got..honestly I wouldn't say it's very convincing or internally coherent. Relative to the current regime, this aggregation even seems to hold an anti-correlation.

 

http://i724.photobucket.com/albums/ww243/phillywillie/Mobile%20Uploads/BF815D85-5204-4B14-B329-1BE66964B580_zps8rccu8bm.png

 

http://i724.photobucket.com/albums/ww243/phillywillie/Mobile%20Uploads/028FC2D8-C1F9-4579-966A-3E599AC3C559_zpsforahnlb.gif

[MossMan]

I have high hopes for this season...we are going to have a Nov. 1985, a Dec. 2008, Jan. 1950, Feb. 1987 or 88 (can't remember) and a March 1989. Should be doable. That is all. Nice day today by the way.

[snow_wizard]

Shouldn't that be November 1979 instead of November 1980?

 

What about 1978/79? Or 1955/56?

 

I did screw up on the 1979 vs 1980 thing.  I think they were similar anyway.  1955-56 didn't have a cold Jan...at least not notably cold.  Very true I missed Jan 1979.

[snow_wizard]

I have high hopes for this season...we are going to have a Nov. 1985, a Dec. 2008, Jan. 1950, Feb. 1987 or 88 (can't remember) and a March 1989. Should be doable. That is all. Nice day today by the way.

 

The Feb in question was actually 1989.  I would take 1951 for March myself.

[snow_wizard]

Exactly.

 

Even Toledo, far removed from either Fraser or Columbia Gorge outflow, had a 24/14 day on the 5th, followed by 9" of snow on the 6th.

 

East of the Cascades its no contest, the January 2004 airmass produced significantly colder readings (i.e. -29 in LaCrosse, -22 in Spokane, etc). Top tier cold in January, a rarity in the modern era! 

 

It is interesting how my area did better in 2007 than 2004.  I always do better in events where strong east winds aren't a factor.  It usually gets colder with Fraser River events here, because it calms down and easily decouples.

 

I just remembered that Landsburg actually missed out on snow going into the Jan 2007 cold wave so that's why their numbers were less impressive than 2004.  2007 was a really weird event, because I got 4 inches and only live 5 miles from Landsburg.  I can clearly remember watching the radar and thinking how lucky I was to be on the good side of the line for once.

[MossMan]

The Feb in question was actually 1989. I would take 1951 for March myself.

51 would probably be better but it's hard to relate to since it was before my time. My first memories were in the late 70's so everything before that is tough. 1950 would be an exception since it was so epic and my grandparents told me all about it.

[Front Ranger]

I would. Quite clearly a colder event overall.

 

Depends on how you look at it. 2007 had more

 

I think we can all agree that it's pathetic and weird that almost every where has gotten colder than either of those events in November, December, and February in the past 10 years.

[wx_statman]

It is interesting how my area did better in 2007 than 2004.  I always do better in events where strong east winds aren't a factor.  It usually gets colder with Fraser River events here, because it calms down and easily decouples.

 

I just remembered that Landsburg actually missed out on snow going into the Jan 2007 cold wave so that's why their numbers were less impressive than 2004.  2007 was a really weird event, because I got 4 inches and only live 5 miles from Landsburg.  I can clearly remember watching the radar and thinking how lucky I was to be on the good side of the line for once.

 

The snowfall was equally opportunistic in NW Oregon. Parts of the N Coast got up to 8" heading into that event while the Portland area received anywhere from a trace in the south Metro to maybe 2" in Vancouver. Of course we scored a metro-wide 3" to 5" snowfall on the 16th of that month, which made up for things.

 

Overall though, it just wasn't a major Arctic outbreak here in the PNW. Most of the energy got directed south of here, where parts of S. California had a legitimate top-tier cold wave. 

[Phil]

Jim is gonna love the 00z GFS. Huge NPAC trough, western ridging, eastern troughing.

[wx_statman]

Depends on how you look at it. 2007 had more , and slightly colder lows quite a few places. Again, talking the western lowlands. I think it was basically a wash.

 

I think we can all agree that it's pathetic and weird that almost every where has gotten colder than either of those events in November, December, and February in the past 10 years.

 

Why do you think that's an important characteristic of a "major" Arctic outbreak?

[Front Ranger]

When talking about cold waves (and heat waves for that matter), I prefer a regional perspective. From a regional perspective, January 2004 was a more impressive cold wave, in my opinion, than January 2007. As a matter of fact, I consider the January 2004 cold wave to be a "major" Arctic outbreak, while I don't consider the cold wave in mid-January 2007 as such. 

 

But let me ask you - what point are you trying to make? I referenced the January 2004 cold wave because, in my opinion, its the last time we saw a "major" Arctic outbreak in January here in the PNW. Do you disagree with that statement? Do you also consider the January 2007 cold wave to be a "major" Arctic outbreak? You're not being very clear. 

 

I just think it's debatable that Jan 2004 was a greater event for the western lowlands overall than Jan 2007. No biggie.

[Front Ranger]

Why do you think that's an important characteristic of a "major" Arctic outbreak?

 

It's a stat Justin used recently in evaluating an event. You're the one applying the "major" label, I'm just comparing the two events.

 

Look at the stats for BLI and EUG and tell me 2007 wasn't clearly the more impressive event in those two locations. 

 

It just depends on where/what you're looking at.

[Phil]

So all of this adds up to what I said earlier -

 

A "noteworthy" January (to use your words) by historical standards is all but unattainable in the modern era

 

38 years is longer than a standard 30-year climatological baseline. And that's how long it's been since our last significantly cold January, by historical standards. It may happen again, but recent climatology suggests the possibility is remote.

Fair enough. I just don't think it's as "impossible" as you make it out to be. I guess we'll find out eventually.

[snow_wizard]

Another batch of fantstic analogs on tonight's GFS.  Only 2 out of the 10 weren't from good seasons and they were both Ninos.

[snow_wizard]

It's a stat Justin used recently in evaluating an event. You're the one applying the "major" label, I'm just comparing the two events.

 

Look at the stats for BLI and EUG and tell me 2007 wasn't clearly the more impressive event in those two locations. 

 

It just depends on where/what you're looking at.

 

As I've said 2007 was unquestionably better here.  I like cold and clear weather after a decent snowfall and that month delivered better than any other this century in that regard.  2004 was decent, but not quite as long lived on the really good stuff.  I loved New Year's 2004, because that was a rare time when it snowed in this area while most of the rest of Western WA had rain.  A case where outflow winds really helped.

[wx_statman]

I just think it's debatable that Jan 2004 was a greater event for the western lowlands overall than Jan 2007. No biggie.

 

There's definitely room for debate if we strictly talk about the Western lowlands. But that's a fairly narrow segment of the PNW. 

[snow_wizard]

One thing I'm a bit worried about is people are so used to front loaded winters that having one that waits a while may drive some people on here crazy.

[Front Ranger]

As I've said 2007 was unquestionably better here.  I like cold and clear weather after a decent snowfall and that month delivered better than any other this century in that regard.  2004 was decent, but not quite as long lived on the really good stuff.  I loved New Year's 2004, because that was a rare time when it snowed in this area while most of the rest of Western WA had rain.  A case where outflow winds really helped.

 

It snowed all the way to Tacoma, at least. We got 2-3" with that in south Tacoma. Was it rain Seattle north? I don't remember, but I know there was less precip further north.

[Front Ranger]

There's definitely room for debate if we strictly talk about the Western lowlands. But that's a fairly narrow segment of the PNW. 

 

Yes, but it's the climate zone that most people here live in and care about. 

[MossMan]

I just think it's debatable that Jan 2004 was a greater event for the western lowlands overall than Jan 2007. No biggie.

I hardly remember 2004's event, but I remember 2007 clearly...it was fairly long lasting with nearly a foot of snow on the ground.

[MossMan]

One thing I'm a bit worried about is people are so used to front loaded winters that having one that waits a while may drive some people on here crazy.

I will be one of those people. If we have had nothing going into the week of New Years and the models are showing nothing I will most likely have the urge to start posting the "winter cancel" freak out posts.

[Timmy Supercell]

I thought Dec 2007 was bigger than Jan 2007? Asking folks here about that year they seem to remember more snow during the Gale storm. Unless locally areas differed. After all, Klamath didn't get much special in Dec 2008..

[snow_wizard]

It snowed all the way to Tacoma, at least. We got 2-3" with that in south Tacoma. Was it rain Seattle north? I don't remember, but I know there was less precip further north.

 

It was rain from Seattle northward.  There was an east wind early on New Years day which flooded the area from Kent southward with chillier / drier air.  Later on the wind quit, but the more favorable air mass was left in place and the rest is history.

[Timmy Supercell]

It was rain from Seattle northward.  There was an east wind early on New Years day which flooded the area from Kent southward with chillier / drier air.  Later on the wind quit, but the more favorable air mass was left in place and the rest is history.

 

Post #6666!

[snow_wizard]

I will be one of those people. If we have had nothing going into the week of New Years and the models are showing nothing I will most likely have the urge to start posting the "winter cancel" freak out posts.

 

I would be very surprised if December doesn't have something to offer.

[wx_statman]

It's a stat Justin used recently in evaluating an event. You're the one applying the "major" label, I'm just comparing the two events.

 

Look at the stats for BLI and EUG and tell me 2007 wasn't clearly the more impressive event in those two locations. 

 

It just depends on where/what you're looking at.

 

Duration doesn't tell you anything about how impressive ("major") an airmass is. Its just a reflection of how progressive (or not) the 500mb pattern happens to be at the time of the cold wave. A cold wave can have impressive duration, but at the same time not be a major Arctic outbreak. 

 

Remember where I'm coming from. You replied to my post, where I labeled January 2004 as the "last major Arctic outbreak" in the month of January here in the PNW. I agree that both 2004 and 2007 were very similar @ BLI and EUG, with only the duration of 2007 giving that cold wave the edge at both places (since temperatures were similar). Neither cold wave would qualify as a "major" Arctic outbreak at EUG, its more debatable at BLI. 

 

So what do we take out of this? Are we re-framing the narrative to say that we haven't seen a major Arctic outbreak in the Western lowlands of the PNW in the month of January since 1996? Since 1982? 1980? Placing 2004 in that category makes sense to me, given its impact in parts of the Western lowlands as well as east of the Cascades. Placing 2007 in that category wouldn't make any sense to me, since temperatures just weren't that cold - anywhere in the PNW.

[Bryant]

Halloween still looking quite wet, and surprisingly chilly with temps in the low-mid 40s

[snow_wizard]

Duration doesn't tell you anything about how impressive ("major") an airmass is. Its just a reflection of how progressive (or not) the 500mb pattern happens to be at the time of the cold wave. A cold wave can have impressive duration, but at the same time not be a major Arctic outbreak. 

 

Remember where I'm coming from. You replied to my post, where I labeled January 2004 as the "last major Arctic outbreak" in the month of January here in the PNW. I agree that both 2004 and 2007 were very similar @ BLI and EUG, with only the duration of 2007 giving that cold wave the edge at both places (since temperatures were similar). Neither cold wave would qualify as a "major" Arctic outbreak at EUG, its more debatable at BLI. 

 

So what do we take out of this? Are we re-framing the narrative to say that we haven't seen a major Arctic outbreak in the Western lowlands of the PNW in the month of January since 1996? Since 1982? 1980? Placing 2004 in that category makes sense to me, given its impact in parts of the Western lowlands as well as east of the Cascades. Placing 2007 in that category wouldn't make any sense to me, since temperatures just weren't that cold - anywhere in the PNW.

 

1996 was a very solid cold shot.  It dropped to 9 where I was living at the time.  All in all mid Jan to early Feb 1996 was pretty darn nice.

[Timmy Supercell]

Halloween still looking quite wet, and surprisingly chilly with temps in the low-mid 40s

 

While this is relatively good news for us, don't like the prospect of chilly rains already. I was expecting 55-60 degree moderate/heavy showers. Darn it.

[wx_statman]

Yes, but it's the climate zone that most people here live in and care about. 

 

I live in Portland. If I only cared about Portland, January 2004 would win hands down. Remember? 

[snow_wizard]

Halloween still looking quite wet, and surprisingly chilly with temps in the low-mid 40s

 

Yup...the month will end chilly it appears.

[snow_wizard]

I thought Dec 2007 was bigger than Jan 2007? Asking folks here about that year they seem to remember more snow during the Gale storm. Unless locally areas differed. After all, Klamath didn't get much special in Dec 2008..

 

Dec 2007 didn't have any Arctic air at all.  It did snow some though.

[BLI snowman]

It's a stat Justin used recently in evaluating an event. You're the one applying the "major" label, I'm just comparing the two events.

 

Look at the stats for BLI and EUG and tell me 2007 wasn't clearly the more impressive event in those two locations. 

 

It just depends on where/what you're looking at.

 

2004 was definitely a colder airmass for Bellingham.

 

Again, this was the CAA day in 2004 at BLI. Fairly intense.

 

https://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KBLI/2004/1/3/DailyHistory.html

[Timmy Supercell]

I live in Portland. If I only cared about Portland, January 2004 would win hands down. Remember? 

 

Jan 2004 definitely. I lived in Bethany until that summer. Even when I moved it wasn't far away (Hillsboro until thanksgiving '10)

 

What was Jan 2007? lol :v

[wx_statman]

Jan 2004 definitely. I lived in Bethany until that summer. Even when I moved it wasn't far away (Hillsboro until thanksgiving '10)

 

What was Jan 2007? lol :v

 

Nothing compared to January 2004 around these parts!

[Timmy Supercell]

Nothing compared to January 2004 around these parts!

 

The blizzard too. Even any other snows afterwards couldn't give me one. I live over 4000' now and haven't seen a blizzard.

[Bryant]

"The BLOB is not good for NW snow"

 

Cliff Mass is a little too extreme sometimes

 

http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-snow-outlook-for-this-winter-in.html?m=1

[Gradient Keeper]

"The BLOB is not good for NW snow"

 

Cliff Mass is a little too extreme sometimes

 

http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-snow-outlook-for-this-winter-in.html?m=1

Good thing the Blob has been decimated.

[HighlandExperience]

Good thing the Blob has been decimated.

 

This will be the best winter since 2008.