Yarmy

Moreover, they are surely useless to anyone who’s spent even 5 minutes looking at the model output. You are already miles more up to date than they are.

Yes, subtle differences in the position, orientation, and strength of the Greenland block. Going to be some time before all this is resolved. However, it would be foolish to favour a GFS 6z op run over the UKMO and ECM 0z.

The issue for the south (on this run) is that the Norwegian shortwave extends too far west and phases with the low pressure crossing the Atlantic between T144 and T168. Just a question of timing really. A smidgen further E-SE and a bit quicker and everyone would be in the game. UKMO is similar.

It's 350 pages a minute. It only loads the page you are on, not all of them.

Yes, certainly much better than the ICON. The much-maligned Norwegian shortwave actually helping for a change (on the GFS too).

Flowing westwards into Iceland while most of Europe and the UK bathe in positive 850hpa temps. The whole pattern needs to shift southwards 1000 miles.

It's not mild: the first chart is showing the *difference* between the 0z suite and the 6z suite. The second is an anomaly chart.

It's possible of course. Here's the classic (and somewhat overused) example from Dec 62. A rampant tpv lobe over Greenland and what would appear to be endless cyclogenesis from NE North America. 48 Hours later: (Crucially there was no pesky Norwegian shortwave to scupper things, but there we are). For the avoidance of doubt, I think it's extremely unlikely that anything like this will pan out. HP over the UK and Europe looks likely in the medium range with its progression northwards determining whether that's mild and dry or cold and dry.

Just a huge destructive storm with localised flooding. Joy to the World!

Well yes, and that's exactly what it does. The cyclogenesis starts here: ...and then it tracks NE through the UK. Of course, it's too far out to determine exact details of the track, position, and depth of a storm, so it's extremely unlikely to pan out like that. But I'm not seeing anything particularly unphysical aside from the GFS tendency to deepen depressions too much.

Well we'd better hope it corrects southwards and becomes shallower because otherwise that's a catastrophic storm for Ireland and the southwest.

Intermittent snow showers here. Not enough intensity to settle though.

The Atlas Mountains. There are ski resorts there!

Ha, it looks like that's a bias-corrected run too. What on earth does the unaltered version look like?

People keep going on about the Atlantic blasting through, but the single defining characteristic of recent GFS op runs in the outer reaches (i.e Day 10 onwards) is the precise opposite of that. I think people just immediately think +NAO = zonal, stormy and wet. Instead (just as a single frame example), we have this as a typical synoptic: That's a very positive NAO and AO, but it is very dry and (for the most part) bone-chillingly cold at the surface across thousands of miles of continental Europe and Asia.

That's the original paper. The online version appears to have been updated last in Feb 2020. NOAA CSL: Chemistry & Climate Processes: SSWC CSL.NOAA.GOV NOAA CSL: Advancing scientific understanding of the chemical and physical processes that affect Earth's atmospheric composition and climate.

Beautiful. Just think of the heating bills though. And how is one supposed to play golf?

No snow here (except for a few flurries last night), but a hard frost, deep blue skies, and little or no wind. Beautiful walking weather. Much better to be bitter on the outside than bitter on the inside.

It has an almost legendary status because it is apparently the MetO's premium mid to long range tool, but is (currently) visible to only a select few.

Ha, confirmation bias, isn't it. Had the ECM been showing Scandi heights while the GFS wasn't, nobody would've given the latter the time of day. Anyway, carpe diem. Absolutely beautiful out there this morning, walking the dog at 7am.

Because you detect planets around other stars by tiny variations in the brightness of the light being emitted by the star. The frequency and magnitude allow you estimate the orbit and mass (I'm over simplifying here). In the Kuiper belt there is nothing emitting any light in any portion of the electromagnetic spectrum.

Just looking at the BBC website and there's virtually nothing about this storm unless you dig through. I suppose the good people of the North-east can read all about the footballing philosophy of Ralf Rangnick as their roofs get torn off in the night.

Was just thinking that. A lot of people are going to get caught out by this.

Well there are 3 different things here, which have somehow become connected in your head. 1. Planet X (or Nibiru) was a bonkers conspiracy theory about a planet that would sweep through the solar system in the early 21st Century causing a pole shift and the destruction of life as we know it. Originally, it was meant to happen in 2003, then 2012, then... 2. Planet 9 is a mooted Neptune-sized body way (waaaay) out in the outer solar system. It was proposed in a paper in 2015, but has yet to be detected and there is some scepticism over its existence. See here: Why astronomers now doubt there is an undiscovered 9th planet in our solar system THECONVERSATION.COM In the search for the hypothetical Planet Nine, scientists may have uncovered another explanation for the patterns in the orbits of Kuiper Belt objects. 3. Neil Ferguson. What this has to do with any of the above is beyond me? It's absolute nonsense anyway (of course). As a general note, I'll leave a quote from Carl Sagan which you might ponder. "For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Hopefully, they'll bin the whole thing so I don't have to sit and watch it every night with the family. For some reason they enjoy watching people they've never heard of eat animal genitalia.