samsara2 - 33andrain Weather Discussion Community Jump to content

samsara2

Enthusiast
  • Content Count

    612
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

samsara2 last won the day on October 6

samsara2 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

465 Excellent

About samsara2

  • Rank
    Star Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    New York, NY

Recent Profile Visitors

265 profile views
  1. Some are saying Boston had a meteo-tsunami last night. I would disagree -- it was certainly a brief, rapid rise, but I do believe the 'period' of meteotsunamis is substantially more abbreviated than what we saw last night. Also, there were three "bursts" which I would assume ARE derivative of high winds, but are not derivative of meteotsunami phenomena, which would normally be singular, and shorter (period wise). Thoughts from others?
  2. Cold coast to coast with a few exceptions immediately on CA & SE shorelines Not just cold, FRIGID. Is it coincidental that this is being modeled coincident with our crossing below 2012's record low Arctic extent minima? The difference this year is that I believe continental snowfall extent is BIGLY above 2012. So we are (IMO) in for the same reaction we saw in winter 2013-13, except in 2019-20, it will be much colder and snowier with earlier onset. Does this potentially mean we will torch thereafter? Yes. But if we do torch, I think winter will resume earlier than it did in 2012-13, and it may not even let up for any major period at all, given how far we are ahead across the continents in terms of snowfall. We have made a rapid transition towards a continentally-based cryosphere in the NHEM since 2012 and I expect this will only continue this winter. Look at the Arctic as this event unfolds. It isn't like there is a kink or a little blob. The ENTIRE ARCTIC is +500MB anomalies and the only cold 500MB spots are relegated to the Kara, Hudson, and Okhotsk. Does this mean the GFS can be trusted at 360 hours? NO. But the HUGE scale of the projected anomalies up north mean that there is higher confidence for such a look in the extended range, at least in my opinion, especially considering SSTs in the Arctic are also the warmest on record for the date, vastly higher than even 2016, 2012, or 2007. It actually looks like where the ice has remained extant, temps are much colder than 2012, 16, and 07. But where the water is open, there is much more heat. I wonder if this will turbo-charge the tropospheric PVs this winter as the central airmass continually leaks out concurrent with +500MB incursions. That will simultaneously leave the strat vortex perpetually perturbed, weak, or split.
  3. It's getting cold in here So put on all your clothes I am, getting, so cold, I gotta put my clothes on
  4. You can see how this latest shift is very significant and cements a continuation of the delay in the switch to offshore winds, which limit the surge. At 45 hrs on 6z, we still have onshore wind, and it is STRONG. Yesterday's 6z forecast for the same time shows the gradient much farther east at the same hr. The lows are also consolidating closer to the coast, and shifting west each run. I think this is potentially VERY alarming for the entire seaboard from Cape May on up.
  5. The 6z NAM has shifted MAJORLY west and stronger with the low. This is a continuation of the ongoing trend so it is not a one-off. The further west the storm is, and the further south the GL low gets, the more likely the stall into the coast will occur over New Jersey instead of Massachusetts. If the stall occurs over New Jersey, this would be sufficiently strong, as modeled, to deliver a surge in excess of 5-6' to NYC, IMO. As-is, I think a 3-4' surge is possible per latest guidance.
  6. They come through my AC and I am on the 24th floor... at least I think that is where they come from... and they will last til December, it is awful omg
  7. If the sea ice analogy holds with 2012-13, we will get an anomalous early storm, and then winter finally arrives in February. I don't think that will be the case, but it is certainly a possibility.
  8. Oh boy. And then there is now snow appearing as well. The 0z EURO now shows a max of almost 12" in the Catskills and another area of snow in NW CT and SW MA. The 12z showed a very limited area of snow in SRN Vermont of minimal accumulation. If we see these trends continue into tomorrow's runs, there is going to be a lot of snow appearing in elevated areas, and the forecast for the highest elevations could get much heavier.
  9. Look at hr 72. That is the worst possible look for NYC surge. The winds shift by the time they get super high but there will be a push here. As-modeled on 00z EURO I would think this could support a 3-4 foot surge resulting in a max around 9' above MLLW at The Battery. But if it goes any further west, the impacts could increase further. The tides will be about 5.1' and 4.4' vs MLLW for this event so they aren't super high, although we are at a baseline of +1' already vs. forecast (ambient SLR I guess). That means we need 4' of surge on top of current levels, which is actually not unfeasible if things line up here. The 72 hour projection is very Sandy-esque although the trajectory of the event is different. Funny enough we just crossed below 2012 to take title of lowest Arctic extent on record for the date (as of tonight's JAXA release).
  10. 00z EURO is big. 50+ gusts for full Five Boroughs, hurricane force gusts in eastern edge of Queens, and over all of Nassau County. MUCH windier. There is a max of 80MPH+ gusts on the North Shore of LI. Zooming out, the impact is much higher almost everywhere this run. Block Island gets gusts to 90-100MPH+, as does Nantucket and Cape Cod. There is now a wind max of 100MPH+ immediately S of Nantucket (was not there before). And hurricane force gusts stretch from Boston up to Maine in another wind max. This is much more alarming than the storm last week IMO as the trend has been fairly steady and it is not some offshore Hermione, which was my analog for the last event (and which was most accurate in the end). This storm could much more easily put NYC into the prime sector for surge, and although I think wind is the biggest concern for now, that could change with additional track adjustments.
  11. It is worth noting that we are likely (IMO) to see the snowfall trends continue into October and November (re: +gains). 9/10 of the last Octobers have seen positive continental anomalies in North America. The same can be said for 8/10 of the last Novembers. These months have both shown a propensity for much more snow coverage in recent years, even if anomalies in NYC have not exactly correlated with the middle of the continent (nevertheless, we have also seen substantial snow events in these months in 2011, 2012, and 2018, for better or worse). Funny enough, September was our first below-average September re: SCE since 2012. However, since October began, the Canuck graphs (and Rutgers) show extent increasing to much above normal. We are currently ~10 days ahead of recent normals. You can also see the pulse-like nature to snowcover in the below graph, and it appears we are currently at a temporary peak (now falling). It is worth using the derivative of this graph instead of the raw peaks and valleys for determining when growth and loss are experiencing respective maxima and minima, and there appears to be about an oscillation occurring with a 10-14 day period. Growth maxes have occurred centered on or around 8/15, 8/29, 9/15, 9/25, 10/5. Shrinkage has centered on 8/17, 9/3, 9/20, and 10/1. And it looks like 10/13 may be the next shrinkage min. It also appears the time between consequent shrinkage and growth spurts is shrinking, from two weeks back in August, down to about 10 days as of late. That would put the next continentally "snowy" periods maxing around 10/15, 10/25, and 11/5. The "dull" times would center on 10/13, 10/23, 11/2, and 11/12 (or thereabouts). I'm not sure what this means for NYC or the Northeast, but I'd tend to think that our snowy periods (when they do end up occurring) will fall on the "dull" side of the continental trend, as by the time airmasses originating from out northwest can make it here, there is usually already some melt occurring in the wide geographic expanse between NYC and the Rockies / Arctic, which is where we see the bulk of gains when they do occur. Contrarily, as the airmasses are building out west, and snow extent is maxing its growth phase in the Prairies & Upper Plains, heat is usually in the process of being advected overtop NYC on its way to Greenland or the Arctic in advance of the incoming colder airmasses. This also explains why NYC heatwaves correlate so well with Arctic sea ice loss. As formerly Arctic air is displaced into North America, it dislodges even more mid-latitude oceanic heat into the Arctic. NYC's coastal location means we are much more subject to the discrepancy between heat and warmth even in a year like 2014-15, as opposed to Boston (more sea ice influence from the Maritimes) or anything west of the Appalachians (oceanic influence becomes more difficult and sporadic). Of course we all know this, but it will make for especially extreme weather here as the oceanic temps continue general warming and the continental interior keeps cooling (relative to 1981-2010 normals).
  12. October has matched 2002 almost exactly, month to date, btw. This year has had the cold focused a bit more in the NW Lower 48 vs. broader anomalies in Canada in 02. The warmth in the Arctic and Central Asia is more pronounced this year, and the cold is focused in the NW Rockies instead of NE Europe. I think that bodes well for the prospects of severe temperature anomalies in parts of the country through DJF and into MAM.
×
×
  • Create New...