Arctic Outbreak delay?

[Burn1]

NWS and especially the weather channel must be missing something in
reference to a lot the posts here calling for extreme cold


http://www.weather.com/weather/local/US ... earch_city

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/p ... ns/610day/

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/p ... ns/814day/

[/url]

[cctxhurricanewatcher]

NWS and especially the weather channel must be missing something in
reference to a lot the posts here calling for extreme cold


http://www.weather.com/weather/local/US ... earch_city

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/p ... ns/610day/

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/p ... ns/814day/

[/url]

Those CPC products aren't with the bandwith they occupy and the weather channel extended forecast had 50's on Christmas eve and day down here. Well, I woke up on Christmas morning with six inches of powder snow on my front lawn.

[Kennethb]

Alaska looks might cold. Wouldn't Alaska have to warm up, ala ridge, and dump that cold southward to us? Since the models sometimes want to move too fast and that air is cold and slow, maybe they are sniffing something out down the road. Besides some of the coldest and wintry weather, at least here in down south, has occurred in February.

[Air Force Met]

NWS and especially the weather channel must be missing something in
reference to a lot the posts here calling for extreme cold


http://www.weather.com/weather/local/US ... earch_city

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/p ... ns/610day/

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/p ... ns/814day/

[/url]

Those products are garbage. They are probability scemes. I tell you what...from 6-10 days...take the average temp of a place in each state where they have they highest chance of above normal...and then get the avg temps and see if it was above normal. The arctic air for just 3 days will be so far below normal that even if you had a good warmup...it would not be enough to erase the cold shot.

Ignore those charts if you have any hopes of every being a forecaster or wannbe forecaster. Go with the models...not that garbage.

And BTW...during that 6-10 day period...even the GFS has KS in the -20C air on day 6...and still below Oc on day 10 with another shot coming. Now...given that their avg high is 40F...how is it even remotely possible that they will be above normal.

And remember...the maps you posted are % chances that a place will be above normal...it doesn't say it will be. EIther way...those maps have always been garbage and I don't know why they put them out. They are a laughing stock in the biz...so if you use them...you will be doing something that most mets don't do because they know the product is worthless.

[KatDaddy]

Meteorology is very tough and models compound the task of forcasting meteorology. The outside world really has no clue. We are called weather geeks but we all have a focus. We are all on the same team.

[Air Force Met]

Oh Burn...one more thing...

That probability for above normal has to be one of the worst forecasts I have ever seen. Now...think about this...who are you going to trust? The guy working the desk at the NWS office in KS who says it is going to get butt cold...or the guy who is obviously not good enough to work as an operational meteorologist on a counter somewhere so he is stuck working climo. Now...there are some good weather forecasters working climo...but that is what they are good at...looking backwards and research.

Having gone to Tex A&M...I can tell you there are two types of weathermen...1) The counter forecaster (thats me) and 2) The ones good at research...the egg-heads...number crunchers (that is NOT me). The person who made that chart is obviously better at the latter...not the former...and they need to take his crayons away and put him back in the library archive researching the little ice-age or something.

[Burn1]

I never wanted to be a forecaster, However I do have a Broadcasting
Degree and used to be a Sports Anchor......Most of the TV weather guys we have down here are clueless.....I guess just a little below my opinions(lol)

Listen, I have followed those NWS maps(garbage) for a few years now
and to an amateur like me they never seemed to be that far off??

I follow what you are saying and I respect your opinion......

Heading out to Steamboat Springs Co. end of Feb.....Can you give me an
opinion if this outrageous snowfall will continue for the Rockies??
Hope so.....Need all the powder we can get for some good snow boarding

[Air Force Met]

As you know...most broadcast meteorologists are not meteorologists ...they are broadcasters. And most of them try to just follow the NWS forecast and tweak it a little to make it look like they aren't.

As far as CO...I have no idea...not my AOR...but...it looks like the southern jet will become active so I say they will probably become a little drier. However...with this arctic airmass...the next week or so should be very snowy due to all the upslope...even though the NWS in Denver was calling for 40 and PC skies on MOnday...when most of the models are showing them in an arctic airmass with massive upslope conditions. Go figure.

[sertorius]

Air Force Met:

You have made some excellent posts in this thread and I have learned from them-thank you!! I have little doubt that Eastern Kansas and the Kansas City area are going to average a good 5-10 degrees below normal for the next 7-10 days-even if we have one day hit normal, there are at least 8-9 that will be below or massevely below. To be honest, these first 3 weeks of Jan. are beginning to look like our best three weeks of winter since 2000. We were below freezing from last Tuesday thru Sunday (Sunday was 45 degrees then it dropped to 30 in 2 hours!!!) and have been at 33 or below since then. Both the gfs and the euro are showing below normal temps. for the next 7 days at least and we may even have our best chance at bonifide snow event next Monday. (The gfs has had this for the past 3 or 4 runs and the euro shows a little something.) Sorry to drag on, but the idea that this area will be average or above for the first 3/4 of Jan. is just not going to happen.

[frankthetank]

Anchorage, AK...while sitting in the freezer today, is "forecasted" to warm into the 30's by Saturday...

Looking @ the forecast locally now, it looks like the lows projected a day or 2 ago will be a little cold...still looking @ some pretty chilly air here in S Wi....

transient? I think so...

[Air Force Met]

Anchorage, AK...while sitting in the freezer today, is "forecasted" to warm into the 30's by Saturday...

Looking @ the forecast locally now, it looks like the lows projected a day or 2 ago will be a little cold...still looking @ some pretty chilly air here in S Wi....

transient? I think so...

ANd when you see it get warm in AK...you know the Arctic air is coming south.

[jeff]

Oh Burn...one more thing...

Having gone to Tex A&M...I can tell you there are two types of weathermen...1) The counter forecaster (thats me) and 2) The ones good at research...the egg-heads...number crunchers (that is NOT me)

Oh so so so true

[WXextreme]

A couple of additions. First...the polar vortex needs to be off the poles...but north of the US...maybe west of Hudson Bay. The flow does need to be NW to SE...but only enough to get the arctic air moving. IT can actually be zonal over the US. See the analogs of 1983 and Feb 1989 for that evidence. YOu need a lot of cold air (and it is getting much colder now in AK)...and a nice pressure of 1050 or so.

Look at what is happening with the temps in AK. You can see the cold air dammed up against the Alaska range and Wrangell Mts in the Klondike. CLassic arctic air sliding south.

http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sfc_con_temp_na.html

Hi AFM, do you still think that Houston and New Orleans will get a hard freeze from this air mass. I don't disrespect what you are saying, but you seem to be the ONLY MET I can find who thinks that we will be getting that kind of cold.

[Portastorm]

A couple of additions. First...the polar vortex needs to be off the poles...but north of the US...maybe west of Hudson Bay. The flow does need to be NW to SE...but only enough to get the arctic air moving. IT can actually be zonal over the US. See the analogs of 1983 and Feb 1989 for that evidence. YOu need a lot of cold air (and it is getting much colder now in AK)...and a nice pressure of 1050 or so.

Look at what is happening with the temps in AK. You can see the cold air dammed up against the Alaska range and Wrangell Mts in the Klondike. CLassic arctic air sliding south.

http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sfc_con_temp_na.html

Hi AFM, do you still think that Houston and New Orleans will get a hard freeze from this air mass. I don't disrespect what you are saying, but you seem to be the ONLY MET I can find who thinks that we will be getting that kind of cold.

When in doubt, always go with the forecaster who has seen/forecasted similar meteorological episodes and knows the unique nuances of the area in which he is forecasting.

And Air Force Met is not the only one in his camp, there are several notable private industry mets saying the same. So is the NWS Corpus Christi forecaster who issed the morning forecast discussion.

Like I said yesterday, I like my money on the S2K good guy forecasters!

[Air Force Met]

A couple of additions. First...the polar vortex needs to be off the poles...but north of the US...maybe west of Hudson Bay. The flow does need to be NW to SE...but only enough to get the arctic air moving. IT can actually be zonal over the US. See the analogs of 1983 and Feb 1989 for that evidence. YOu need a lot of cold air (and it is getting much colder now in AK)...and a nice pressure of 1050 or so.

Look at what is happening with the temps in AK. You can see the cold air dammed up against the Alaska range and Wrangell Mts in the Klondike. CLassic arctic air sliding south.

http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sfc_con_temp_na.html

Hi AFM, do you still think that Houston and New Orleans will get a hard freeze from this air mass. I don't disrespect what you are saying, but you seem to be the ONLY MET I can find who thinks that we will be getting that kind of cold.

I am not as sure about a hard freeze anymore. The reason for that is that there may be some overrunning setting up and it may be cloudier than I had previously suspected. Originally...I thought there would be a lot of dry air aloft and that would allow for some radiational cooling. However...most of the models now seem to be calling for a pretty good southwesterly flow aloft. That should limit the nighttime temps and not allow for the radiational cooling to be as big a factor. The arctic air is still coming over most of the US east of the rockies. The issue now is does it come down as one package or does pieces break off a bit at a time over the next week or so. The high should continue to build over a big part of NW Canada as they are now in the -55F range.

It's a we'll see. I know I am going out on a limb calling for it to come all the way down here. I just know that models don't handle shallow arctic air well. If pieces break off a bit at a time, then we won't get as cold. We will still be below normal for a while...and the central plains and parts of the southern plains (like OK and N TX) are still going to be well below normal...but the air may not charge down here as much as first thought if only pieces break off. Given the upper flow over Ak and northern Canada...I think the air is going to have a hard time remaining up there for a week. It is a classic flow to be kicked down into the lower 48.

For SE Texas...there are two variables. 1) Does it come down at once or in pieces and 2) Cloud cover. I think the latter will keep the lower 20's away from us...because for us to get that cold it has to be clear and still. I think it will be cloudy during our period of max cold air advection.

It's a wait and see on the final numbers.

[gboudx]

If memory serves me right, a similar situation happened with the Xmas week front. At one point everyone was all excited about cold and possibly wintry precip, then the models flipped and it was completely gone. Folks became down about it and were writing it off. Then, what happened?

FWIW, the local DFW mets seem to base their forecasts on the model run of the day. Just 2 days ago, the 2 I watch were calling for the cold temps, now they are backing off. Only 1 of them(Dan Henry for you local folks) actually commented about how the models have a hard time with air this dense and cold. Oh, and just yesterday we were looking at thunderstorms, possibly severe. Today, apparently there is an extremely strong cap in place, so there is no forecast for severe weather. I'd hate to be a forecaster up here.

[Air Force Met]

If memory serves me right, a similar situation happened with the Xmas week front. At one point everyone was all excited about cold and possibly wintry precip, then the models flipped and it was completely gone. Folks became down about it and were writing it off. Then, what happened?

FWIW, the local DFW mets seem to base their forecasts on the model run of the day. Just 2 days ago, the 2 I watch were calling for the cold temps, now they are backing off. Only 1 of them(Dan Henry for you local folks) actually commented about how the models have a hard time with air this dense and cold. Oh, and just yesterday we were looking at thunderstorms, possibly severe. Today, apparently there is an extremely strong cap in place, so there is no forecast for severe weather. I'd hate to be a forecaster up here.

Forecasting arctic air is very difficult. To see this...all one has to do is go back the last week and look at the flip-flops in the various model runs. Heck...just look at the GFS. It flips daily. Monday it was bearish on the arctic air...then yesterday...bamm...straight south...now...it's back to bearish. The ETA seems to want it to take the plunge....the Euro doesn't know what to do with it...so it moves it east (arctic air doesn't move east)...the UKMET brings it SE...they are all over the place.

So...given the model inconsistancies on this situation...that is why I am sticking with the shot south based on climo (what similiar upper air patterns have brought in the past with similiar airmasses)...because that is really all I can do. The models are worthless because they are so inconsistant from run to run and model to model.

As far as a Texas arctic shot goes...I may well end up eating it on this one...but the first rule of forecasting is 1) When you can't get a good answer from the data you are looking at....then what does climo say? Well...climo says shallow arctic air comes south and that models have a hard time with it.

Of course...given the flip-flops with all the models...one of these model runs has been right (before it became wrong again)...the question is...which one was it

[Air Force Met]

And Air Force Met is not the only one in his camp, there are several notable private industry mets saying the same. So is the NWS Corpus Christi forecaster who issed the morning forecast discussion.

Good point...and this is really what I have been saying. Matter of fact...here is part of his discussion:


THEN SHOULD SEE
ANOTHER PUSH ON THE ARCTIC FRONT ON SATURDAY NIGHT INTO TEXAS.
UNDERCUTTING GUIDANCE BY 10 DEGREES STILL LOOKS PRUDENT FOR SUNDAY
AND MONDAY AS HIGH PRESSURE BUILDS SOUTHWARD AND CLOUDS INCREASE AS
ISENTROPIC UPGLIDE REGIME DEVELOPS. NOT OVERLY CONFIDENT THAT THE
MODELS HAVE A HANDLE ON THIS COLD OF AN AIRMASS...READINGS BETWEEN
-40 TO -55 DEGREES F COVER INTERIOR ALASKA THROUGH THE YUKON INTO
NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA EARLY THIS MORNING. MODELS DO NOT HANDLE
DENSITY CONSIDERATIONS OF ARCTIC AIRMASSES REAL WELL SO MAY NOT HAVE
GONE COLD ENOUGH FOR MONDAY. THE GFS/ECMWF MODELS SHOW AN UPPER LOW
FORMING NEAR BAJA CALIFORNIA MONDAY AND MOVING INTO NORTHWEST MEXICO
TUESDAY. WILL INSERT A SLIGHT CHANCE OF RAIN AREAWIDE ON TUESDAY.


Basically the same 2 variables I spoke of...air is too dense for models to handle it and how much cloud cover will be around.

No cloud cover...then a good freeze during this episode. Lots of clouds? Then a freeze but daytime highs will struggle to get above the lows.

[Portastorm]

And for another confirmation of the "Don't trust the Model Hype" school of thought ... the discussion below is from the CPC themselves this morning:

PRELIMINARY EXTENDED FORECAST DISCUSSION
NWS HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL PREDICTION CENTER CAMP SPRINGS MD
718 AM EST WED JAN 12 2005

VALID 12Z SUN JAN 16 2005 - 12Z WED JAN 19 2005

THE GFS...IN GENERAL...CONTINUES TO SHOW LITTLE CONTINUITY FROM
RUN TO RUN ACRS WRN CAN...THE NORTHWEST...AND NRN PLAINS. THERE IS
A MODEL CONSENSUS THIS MORNING OF THE 00Z CAN/00Z GFS/00Z ECMWF/
LATEST FSU SUPERENS OF REMAINING PROGRESSIVE...BROAD...AND WEAK
WITH THE TROF EXPECTED TO MIGRATE FROM CNTRL TO ERN NORTH
AMERICA...WHICH FITS THE TELECONNECTION CHARTS TIED TO A STRONG
POSITIVE ANOMALY NR 55N 140W. TELECONNECTIONS FAVOR THROWING OUT
THE 00Z NOGAPS... WHICH IS VIRTUALLY ON ITS OWN FROM DAY 4 /SUN/
ONWARD IN TRYING TO BUILD A TROUGH ACRS THE NORTHWEST WITH ONLY 2
ECMWF ENSEMBLE MEMBERS SHOW THIS SOLN THIS MORNING...LESS THAN
HALF AS MANY AS HINTED TWDS THAT SOLN THIS TIME YESTERDAY. THE
STRONG ARCTIC OSCILLATION INDEX WHICH WOULD FAVOR FLATTER FEATURES
IN THE LONGWAVE PATTERN/A MORE ZONAL FLOW...WHICH IS THE DIRECTION
OF THE MODEL TRENDS OF THE PAST COUPLE DAYS.

USED THE 00Z GFS FOR THE PRESSURES/FRONTS...WHICH WAS SIMILAR TO
CONTINUITY. THIS PREFERRENCE DIGS COLD AIR INTO THE WRN AND
CENTRAL US NEXT WEEK MUCH MORE ROBUSTLY THAN THE ECMWF FOLLOWING
SHORT RANGE TRENDS OF THE ETA AND CANADIAN MODELS. DETAILS REMAIN
SKETCHY AS THE HIGHEST VARIABILITY SEEN ACRS NORTH AMERICA THIS AM
IN THE 06Z NCEP AND 00Z ECMWF ENSEMBLES REMAINS ACRS NRN AK...AT
THE APEX OF THE POSITIVE ANOMALY/H5 RIDGE...WHICH WILL HAVE
REPURCUSSIONS FOR WHAT WOULD TRANSPIRE DOWNWIND OF THIS FEATURE
ACRS THE REST OF THE CONTINENT. CONFIDENCE IS ABOUT AVERAGE IN
THIS FCST...THOUGH IT IS LOWER THAN IT HAD BEEN OVER THE PAST
COUPLE WEEKS.

[vbhoutex]

Forecasting arctic air is very difficult. To see this...all one has to do is go back the last week and look at the flip-flops in the various model runs. Heck...just look at the GFS. It flips daily. Monday it was bearish on the arctic air...then yesterday...bamm...straight south...now...it's back to bearish. The ETA seems to want it to take the plunge....the Euro doesn't know what to do with it...so it moves it east (arctic air doesn't move east)...the UKMET brings it SE...they are all over the place.

So...given the model inconsistancies on this situation...that is why I am sticking with the shot south based on climo (what similiar upper air patterns have brought in the past with similiar airmasses)...because that is really all I can do. The models are worthless because they are so inconsistant from run to run and model to model.

As far as a Texas arctic shot goes...I may well end up eating it on this one...but the first rule of forecasting is 1) When you can't get a good answer from the data you are looking at....then what does climo say? Well...climo says shallow arctic air comes south and that models have a hard time with it.

Of course...given the flip-flops with all the models...one of these model runs has been right (before it became wrong again)...the question is...which one was it

This air is already starting south through Montana. I am not anywhere near a pro, but I've watched Texas weather for 30+ yrs and weather in general for about 45 yrs. I highlighted a few things in AFM's discussion, because imo they say it like it is. This is Artic/Siberian cold and only once in a great while will it not move South. I think it will do so this time and I think it is going to surprise some of our forecasters here in TX. Plenty of Snowpack and more building in front of it, so little if any modification till it gets to the South plains, imo. I think in about 36-48 hours we will see some forecasters scrambling to catch up temps wise and I don't mean rising. P-type, early next week, if and where it happens, as usual, is going to be touch and go, if it even happens, at least here in SE TX.