Jump to content

GrrClark

Members
  • Content count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

20 Good

About GrrClark

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Glenrothes, Fife 200m ASL

Recent Profile Visitors

525 profile views
  1. A scant covering is all. Not sure how that is relative to my post of last night unless of course that is some sort of justification for people being petulant.
  2. In the grand scheme of things never has there been so much self indulgent woe betiding p**h and nonsense as n the recent model thread. I do understand personal desire, but quite honestly it is pitiful how otherwise intelligent grown men become petulant and childish oafs when their desire is not reflected by a mathematical model
  3. My apologies if being misleading in my post. I do appreciate that there are models within the forecasting suite that do have sufficient resolution to factor in local scale features, but my understanding was that the hemispheric modelling at day 5 is not run at a resolution that would consider that. Always happy to be corrected.
  4. The NWP model output that you are considering certainly don't factor in small topographical features like the Cheshire Gap as the resolution of the model is not nearly fine enough to be able to do so. As computing power continues to increase then the resolution of the models will be able to get to a point where they can consider topographical features and localised weather features such as the development of thunderstorms, but as yet that level of model run is not possible unless it is of a very narrow focus.
  5. What baffles me is the anthropomorphising of a what is a very complicated set of equations with a vast amount of data points. I genuinely wonder if many of the posters do understand what numerical weather prediction actually is. Models "sniffing out something" or "latching onto an idea" are examples of this; it is really hard sums and nothing else. Equations don't "sniff something" out, they follow a set of prescribed mathematical rules with a series of variables and give an answer. When experienced forecasters then give a very learned opinion on how those mathematical outputs can be interpreted, given a backdrop of other information and analysis, and if it differs from what someone else wants to see then it is seen as a personal attack. As for the cliches!!! I thought footballers were the worst for hackneyed statements, but I think the model forum has them licked.
  6. Scotland - Weather Chat

    Sadly still just a dusting here as the snow shield of the Lomond Hills is working horribly well.
  7. Scotland - Weather Chat

    Had a good shower around 10:30 that gave everything a light covering, but all melted again. The odd flurry in between times, but nothing lasting.
×