Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?

Recretos

Members
  • Posts

    496
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Posts posted by Recretos

  1. forgive me for my ignorance but dosen't this warming look to far away to effect us

    http://modeles.meteo...h-10-336.png?18

    To put it simple, you shouldn't look at this forecasted warming as something that would have like a direct local effect. Look at it as a feature that affects the general overall dynamics in the stratosphere. So basically it affects you locally down the road, but through succession and not directly. Posted Image

    IMHO of course. Posted Image

    Edit: I add "imho" to my posts a bit often. The reason for it is, that around this time last year I had no idea what SSW stands for, and I had no idea what an SSW is. All I knew about stratosphere a year ago, was that there is a cyclonic feature a.k.a. polar vortex present up there, and it somehow affects us down here. So I am less than a year in this whole "strat business", with lots of stuff to learn, but trying to keep a high pace. :)

    • Like 8
  2. @Recretos, some fine analog work there, no idea how you went about creating those charts on the map room. Superb stuff.

    The power of NCEP/NCAR reanalysis tool is really awesome. Posted Image I got the idea to make some correlations when there was talk about snow, not really knowing how much of a common understanding it is in here. Posted Image

    @Chionomaniac: Thanks for the link. I will have some time to spare this weekend, so I hope I will be able to go through some papers.

    I cant help myself, not to wonder, if there is such a difference in the 8-10 day period, how much of a difference can there be on the 384h up in the strat. Of course because of the different idea of the action below, there could easily be some differences in the action "above". :)

    Posted Image

    • Like 2
  3. Recretos - have you seen J Cohen's work regarding stratospehric warming feedback from rate of gain of October Eurasian snowcover? This is well known and has been illustrated many times on here - it confirms what you are trying to show.

    Actually I haven't read any of his papers yet. And neither have I read this whole thread. I was almost 100% that this is nothing new, but I still thought it might be interesting. Sorry about that. I will try to look around next time before I post. :)

  4. thanks for that GF - its just meteociels representation of temps only that is misleading

    Yep. Its misleading because it only shows temperature. The center is still fairly good visible from the gradients and the general shape, but as others have already pointed out, the geopotential height maps are the ones you need to look at, if you want to know where exactly is the forecasted center. :)

  5. So, having read this a number of times, the ECM run, with all it's ensembles can potentially change significantly on day 11 when the ocean - atmosphere variables ( perhaps changes in MJO and El Nino) are factored in.

    Don`t forget the recent kelvin wave coming on, and daily SOI values dropping below -40! smile.png So as good as they are, I would take a slight step back (for a little while) from the monthly ocean coupled models. smile.png

  6. This paper below shows where blocks have occured prior to the wave events that have led to SSW's. As you can see Atlantic blocks seem to favour displacements and Pacific blocks favour splits.

    Look at table 1

    http://www.columbia....es-GRL-2009.pdf

    Very interesting paper. I will read the whole thing as soon as I can find enough time.

    I see the table 1 yes. Basically it could be safely to say that wave 1 and 2 are with respect to Atlantic and Pacific (on a general view) and with respect to displacement and splitting, as you were pointing out with your analogy.

    Thanks again for your time. I probably look really stupid with these questions. I will go through some papers and/or studies to see if I can make things even more clear for me.

    Best regard.

  7. Yes, I understand that part. Posted Image What I meant with location specific was, like for example: wave 1 is always in one specific location and wave 2 also at a specific location. As you just said, the deflection is location or terrain specific, but the number for the specific wave is given because of the order, or sequence. Or at least that's how I now understand. And that was my main dilemma: Is the number given in respect to the wave succession, or is it given to a location specific event, just for example: wave 1 only in Asia and wave 2 only in Pacific/N America.

  8. Waves 1 and 2 are just the number of larghe scale planetary waves that are affecting the stratospheric vortex at a particular time.

    If you imagine that the vortex is a balloon ( a rough analogy here) and you place pressure with 1 finger on that balloon then you will create a distortion similar to 1 wave or wave number 1. If yo place two fingers at opposite sides and apply presssure then that is akin to 2 waves - wave number 2 . And 3 fingers at different points a three wave pattern will be created. We are used to waves with a far smaller wavelength - such as the number of Rossby waves travelling around the troposphere - but the number deflecting the stratospheric vortex at any one time is far smaller.

    Of course the polar strat vortex is more cylindrical in shape and the waves are created by higher pressures throught the depth of the stratosphere. Going back to the balloon scenario it is easier to imagine how wave number 1 can create a displacement type of event on the vortex and wave number 2 a splitting type of event.

    The precursors to the waves are normally higher pressures around mounrtain ranges that can divert a tropospheric wave into the stratosphere creating a mountain torque evnt in the process. There are only so may mountain ranges in the NH that can create this which is why we don't have more than a wave 3 event at any one time.

    Thank you very much. So it really is more of a sequence thing and not a location-specific event, which was my main dilemma. Posted Image Thanks again for your time. And the balloon analogy was splendid! Posted Image

    And of course my usual ECMWF 12z "outlook".

    Still the same idea. the Pacific and Greenland ridge attacking in, keeping the trop. P.V. split, WAA on their W side, with a High dominating the region, keeping the AO "down under" for now.

    Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

    Best regards.

    • Like 1
  9. @recretos there is a link to technical model thread in my signature you may enjoy reading and adding your posts to. Our resident GLAAM expert Glacier Point updates in their regularly and had this recent spike well forecast.

    Thank you very much. I will check it out. My knowledge of GLAAM is quite limited, so I really look forward to any expert opinion. Posted Image And yea, my MJO post was a bit offtopic.

    Speaking of my limited knowledge, I have a question. If anyone would be kind enough to answer it, I would really appreciate it. Its about wave 1 and 2. I basically understand the effects and everything regarding the FU Berlin charts, but I have a hard time explaining to myself, what wave 1 and 2 actually are. Is it any planetary/Rossby wave, or a specific planetary/Rossby wave event, regarding location?

    Its been a long day, so I'm just going to add some ECMWF 12z charts, so I wont be totally offtopic again. Posted Image

    Still decent ensembles. I find it really amazing, how the ensemble mean has the 300+ gph anomaly on a 10-day range.

    Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

    The CFSv2 weeklies (The only CFS that I actually take notice off), kinda agree on the ECM idea.

    Posted ImagePosted Image

    GEFS and BCC ensembles also having a similar idea. Basically what I am trying to show here, is that the ridge offensive on the tropospheric polar vortex doesn't look like its gonna end anytime soon. At least not in the First half of December, as it looks like.

    Posted ImagePosted Image

    AO and NAO forecasts:

    Posted ImagePosted Image

    I will end off with quoting Dr Joe D'Aleo, from his recent thoughts on SSW:

    "I suspect this year will behave more like 2003/04 which has some tropospheric warming in November and early december but in which the warming above in the stratosphere began in December making January brutal."

    Posted Image

    Best Regards.

    • Like 4
  10. @Lorenzo: Escape plan? More like riding it out, if the best case scenario comes to fruition. Posted Image I've "survived" temperatures below -20°C with the deep freeze in February, and more than 35 inches of snow in 2007. So there is nothing left to surprise me. Posted Image (Maybe both at the same time)

    @Chionomaniac. it was really interesting how that super SSW affected Europe in general. One would expect super blockings, but I guess the outcome wasn't that bad either.

    Some of my thoughts on the MJO matter:

    ECMWF has the MJO going more or less into phase 2, while GEFS is holding on to the phase 1 only. But basically a slight disagreement between models.

    Posted Image

    Phase 1 - Phase 2 - Phase 8

    Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

    Phase 1 and 8 have a tendency for the strong Aleutian low, which I just can't get familiar with. They do have the Greenland ridging in the composite. I see a slight problem regarding the ridging tendency in the Central and south Europe.

    Now these are just composites, how the certain phase looked like in the past. So I look at it more like tendencies or "pattern support".

    GEFS is not really reflecting any main phase 1 features.

    Posted ImagePosted Image

    Now the phase 2 composite also doesn't really have any similar main features. It also has an Aleutian low, but much weaker. But, what is interesting, is all the quite strong blocking features around the polar circle, basically more favorable for P.V. split than the phase 1 composite. It doesn't have the Greenland ridge, but it has Azores ridging with a gap into the polar circle. Another important feature are the lowered heights over Europe into E USA.

    Interesting enough, CFSv2 weekly ensembles, are also leaning more towards the phase 2 idea.

    Posted Image

    But given the temperature anomaly and streamfunction composite, one could say a phase 8 is more likely to occur.

    Posted ImagePosted Image

    We have to keep in mind that we are on the verge of a split vortex, which can make things look a bit different than the MJO phase composites. Those composites are very good for guidance and in some cases give the right idea of the outcome, but when the overall dynamics get a bit more complex, there are obvious differences with the phase composites. But I am more than positive that we all realize that. Posted Image

    In the meanwhile, AAM picked up its zonal "pace", going positive (but I still don't believe that an El Nino signal would appear, especially with SOI being quite positive), with GWO responding by moving in the higher AAM phases, respectively with the negative trending mountain and frictional torque.

    Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

    Even tho I have a bit limited knowledge of these processes, this is how I see a possible outcome (my opinion basically):

    Atmospheric Angular Momentum trending back down towards negative values, and with an MJO wave coming on, probably in the Indian ocean (Phase 1-2), GWO moving into phases 8 and then into 1, leaving mountain torque near negative. With the resulting northward momentum transport, and the negative AAM if it happens, the mountain torque should eventually re-intensify. And that would make things a bit more interesting again in a certain range. Posted Image IMHO Anyways. Posted Image

    Best Regards.

    • Like 7
  11. Looks like there will be a decent amount of WAA into the polar circle, on the west side of the Azores High expanding into Greenland. And also from the south flow on the west side of the Aleutian blocking.

    Posted ImagePosted Image

    Posted ImagePosted Image

    Also a positive factor is most defiantly the warm AMO.

    Posted Image

    As a result of the overall activity, AO and NAO currently forecasted to "plummet", as one would expect from movements and pattern changes of this magnitude. Posted Image

    Posted ImagePosted Image

    Things really shaping up.

    Best regards.

    P.S.: Would someone please be kind enough, to explain the theta levels in mb height? I understand all the charts and graphs on the FU Berlin site, but I just can get the right idea of the height of the theta levels, on which vorticity is presented. I have the idea of Higher theta-lower heights, but cant get the idea of the actual height. Google wasn't of much help either. Posted Image

    • Like 3
  12. Hello. Posted Image

    This year I decided to make a seasonal "outlook" of my own. I guess its a statistical forecast, because it is based on reanalysis. This is basically just a composite or a blend of the winters in the past. I used certain winters and blended them together. I have chosen the years and months, based on the overall global setup and similarities in the oceanic and atmospheric features. The graphics were made on October 29, when I finished my analysis process and first published on November 1st on a weather forum in my country. So lets say I have 1 month "lead time" before the start of the forecasted period. This is my first attempt of "statistical" forecasting, so I don't really expect much success to be honest, but I need to test it, so i decided to make a "public test", by posting it on different weather forums.

    Some interpretation is required. This is basically an average picture, like an ensemble mean, so it has its respected deviation and variance. But just the average or "middle" picture will suffice for my first attempt. I posted this on a forum in my country, so the text on the graphic is in my language (Slovenian). But some words, like the names of the months are similar, so I think you will understand what period is represented on the graphic. Posted Image

    I am only aiming at the DJF 500mb geopotential height anomaly for the verification in March, when the forecasted period is over.

    Now the graphics. Keep in mind that this is unaltered in any way. And it was made in the end of October, when none of these features were present in the seasonal models. At least not in this magnitude.

    Posted Image

    Corresponding precipitation anomaly:

    Posted Image

    And temperature anomaly:

    Posted Image

    And I will also add the December 500mb height anomaly, made on the same date with the same system.

    Posted Image

    And this was CFSv2 when I made these graphics.

    Posted Image

    I first posted these images on a weather forum in my country, on November 1st. And all the graphics were made before that. Here is the link to that topic to prove it. Basically so no one can say that I "cheated", by looking at current models (which differ anyway) and intentionally making a similar picture. Posted Image

    Best regards.

    • Like 7
×
×
  • Create New...