Jump to content

MysticMouflon

Members
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

19

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Birmingham, UK
  1. You're right, that's exactly what the MO is saying as to why the warning is out so 'early'. What makes me smile are the conspiracy theories as to why or not the MO issue a warning and then what sort of warning it is. They don't always get it right and their reasoning isn't always completely transparent but I also don't believe that they've got a secret agenda to spite the public!
  2. I naively thought that most 'simply' lifted it from whichever model they use so, to take the case of GFS-based forecasts which @Man With Beard was helping me with earlier, it's less than suitable for local forecasting. It would certainly *appear* (I may very well be wrong) that sites like XCWeather and, dare I say it, this one do exactly that for their 'local' forecasts because, for the 5 or 6 locations I was following today (including Birmingham, Bristol, Colchester and Hull - so a fair spread), they seemed to bear very little resemblance to reality.
  3. I believe you but, let's take Birmingham for example, the GFS-based forecasts were saying gusts in the mid to high 60s for 4 hours in a row but it never gusted above the low 50s. The GFS charts I saw seemed to agree with this. I'm not arguing - I can see that you know A LOT more than I do - so I would like to understand where I'm going wrong with how I'm interpreting things.
  4. I am definitely showing my ignorance here but the GFS charts/forecasts I saw were also way over the top in terms of wind speeds. Am I looking at the wrong things? I genuinely want to learn!
  5. I agree. I'm glad the people I care about heeded the advice and stayed indoors today. I also feel sad for all the people who are suffering and will continue to suffer for many days to come as a result of what has happened to them. The 'weather nerds' (I'm here, so I'm guilty as charged) certainly did over-hype it though. The models weren't great in the end - 60-70 mph gusts as squalls go over is not the same as hours of 60-70 mph widespread inland gusts - but quite a few people were rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of half the country being flattened whilst giving the Met Office a kicking for resisting the urge to over-egg it too soon because it didn't fit with what they wanted to happen. Let's be honest, it didn't really happen as advertised. I apologise. I know I'm being a bit provocative but it you read through this thread from the start, you might see what I'm getting at.
  6. Fair enough, but looking back over the predictions (which is all they were), 'we' were potentially in for hours of it, not sporadic gusts associated with frontal activity. (I feel very sorry for the poor people who have suffered as a result.) The MO were getting quite a lot of stick about their forecasts and warnings but I don't think they were that far off in the end, even when it comes to the earlier amber warning in the south east which is now starting to look at the very least prescient.
  7. It's still probably too early but dare I venture to suggest that the MO got more of this right than wrong and that the main models at least (I'm looking at you GFS and ECM) were quite a way off both in terms of timing and wind predictions? Ok, the squall lines have been nasty for some but, overall, the wind event was overdone in terms of the numbers. Yes, people needed to be warned because it is fairly unusual but the widespread 70+ mph inland gusts people on here were going on about only yesterday just haven't happened (yet!). Still, it's all useful information that will hopefully improve the models further.
×
×
  • Create New...