1 hour ago, Phishy Wx said:

Hybrid ENSO

 

 

 

What’s with the 1951/52 obsession? It’s not even remotely similar to the evolution of this event.  

1 minute ago, Phil said:

What’s with the 1951/52 obsession? It’s not even remotely similar to the evolution of this event.  

I think it's strictly a Mod to strong El Nino year with a easterly QBO and a - PDO

We don’t even have reliable QBO (re)analysis back that far. The best available is the one by ECMWF which implies a much faster easterly shear descent.

Not to mention the ENSO structure and amplitude was vastly different in addition to the IO/IPWP sector.

Throw that in with the fact it’s an ancient analog, and there’s no reason it should be thrown around as often as it has been.

What a beautiful day.  Legit feels hot in the sun. 

1 minute ago, Phil said:

We don’t even have reliable QBO (re)analysis back that far. The best available is the one by ECMWF which implies a much faster easterly shear descent.

Not to mention the ENSO structure and amplitude was vastly different in addition to the IO/IPWP sector.

Throw that in with the fact it’s an ancient analog, and there’s no reason it should be thrown around as often as it has been.

It’s okay that people have different analogs than yours. What are your bullet proof nailed down winter analogs?

3 minutes ago, Phishy Wx said:

I think it's strictly a Mod to strong El Nino year with a easterly QBO and a - PDO

The ENSO/LP structure matters as much (if not more) than the amplitude.

How far into the -QBO phase (late stage E-shear, mature, or early stage W-shear descent) is also just as important as QBO sign (+/-). The direction of shear stress determines the nature of stratosphere/troposphere coupling.

It’s not *impossible* the system state somehow evolves to emulate a moderate, canonical-CPAC Niño that occurred 70 years ago, despite apparent differences, but I wouldn’t wager on it. There are more recent analogs with much better overlap that should be pooled first/weighted higher, IMO.

13 minutes ago, ShawniganLake said:

It’s okay that people have different analogs than yours. What are your bullet proof nailed down winter analogs?

No such thing as bulletproof. It’s like throwing darts, you can miss without a blindfold, but you’re more likely to miss while blindfolded.

Believe it or not 1951/52 is in my analog pool, but in the lower weighted cluster, and definitely not the closest match to date.

Niño/descending E-shear, autumnal +IOD are the best dynamic fits and weighted double, as are non-modoki Niños lacking +PMM or very strong EPAC niños. Other mod/strong EPAC/CPAC niños or modoki niños lacking +PMM weighted normally, along with strong niños with +PMM. Other niños weighted 50%.

FTR, I think 51-52 probably is 'too old' to consider to.  68-69 looks interesting.  arctic outbreak in late dec, lots of snow that winter

 

91-92 and 09-10 are duds here, warm and dry and probably more likely in our 'modern' climate unfortunately.  

Ended up with a very pretty 66/44 day to end September. Morning fog and low clouds, then afternoon sun and cool temps.

On 9/30/2023 at 11:16 AM, Anti Marine Layer said:

78 is not hot.

My balls beg to differ

1 hour ago, Phishy Wx said:

FTR, I think 51-52 probably is 'too old' to consider to.  68-69 looks interesting.  arctic outbreak in late dec, lots of snow that winter

 

91-92 and 09-10 are duds here, warm and dry and probably more likely in our 'modern' climate unfortunately.  

68-69 was an all time great west of the cascades.  Pretty safe to toss it out. 

26 minutes ago, Cascadia_Wx said:

Ended up with a very pretty 66/44 day to end September. Morning fog and low clouds, then afternoon sun and cool temps.

How is this statement any different than @ShawniganLake that you downvoted like an hour ago?

"Downvote for saying direct sunlight is warm! Rar!"

17 minutes ago, SnarkyGoblin said:

How is this statement any different than @ShawniganLake that you downvoted like an hour ago?

"Downvote for saying direct sunlight is warm! Rar!"

Don’t you usually stick to picking fights in the politics thread? ? 

49 minutes ago, Cascadia_Wx said:

Don’t you usually stick to picking fights in the politics thread? ? 

And what exactly are you doing by downvoting the most mundane statements about weather? Trying to make a friend?

2 minutes ago, SnarkyGoblin said:

And what exactly are you doing by downvoting the most mundane statements about weather? Trying to make a friend?

5 hours ago, Phishy Wx said:

FTR, I think 51-52 probably is 'too old' to consider to.  68-69 looks interesting.  arctic outbreak in late dec, lots of snow that winter

 

91-92 and 09-10 are duds here, warm and dry and probably more likely in our 'modern' climate unfortunately.  

Yeah the problem with the 1950s-70s is the IO/IPWP sector was so much cooler than the more modern climate era. Teleconnections operated a bit differently back then.

Interestingly I’d even say the 1930s/40s were closer to the current climate regime than the 1970s/80s.

3 hours ago, ShawniganLake said:

68-69 was an all time great west of the cascades.  Pretty safe to toss it out. 

2018/19 was sort of the modern 68/69 IMO. A number of similarities going into it as well.

This year is nothing like either of those from what I can derive. But anything is theoretically possible. ☃️ 

6 hours ago, Phishy Wx said:

2 really snowy years and 2 terrible duds over here.  averages out to around normal

I don’t think 2009-10 can be considered a dud west of the cascades. Fairly legit arctic outbreak and cold December. 

21 minutes ago, Phil said:

Yeah the problem with the 1950s-70s is the IO/IPWP sector was so much cooler than the more modern climate era. Teleconnections operated a bit differently back then.

Interestingly I’d even say the 1930s/40s were closer to the current climate regime than the 1970s/80s.

2018/19 was sort of the modern 68/69 IMO. A number of similarities going into it as well.

This year is nothing like either of those from what I can derive. But anything is theoretically possible. ☃️ 

I think you stole the 2018-19 = modern 1968-69 from me. ?. 

On 10/1/2023 at 7:02 PM, Phil said:

Yeah the problem with the 1950s-70s is the IO/IPWP sector was so much cooler than the more modern climate era. Teleconnections operated a bit differently back then.

Interestingly I’d even say the 1930s/40s were closer to the current climate regime than the 1970s/80s.

2018/19 was sort of the modern 68/69 IMO. A number of similarities going into it as well.

This year is nothing like either of those from what I can derive. But anything is theoretically possible. ☃️ 

Late December 1968 featured one of the most intense arctic blasts to ever hit the PNW. It was followed by nearly a month of severe cold in January with multiple snowfalls and significant snow cover for nearly the entire month. It was one of the best winters cold and snow wise in PNW history.

I'm not sure what similarities you see with 2018/19 and 68/69, but based on outcome, I would not call 2018/19 a modern 68/69. The early February cold period in 2019 was nothing compared to 68/69.