Rjs And Bftp Winter 2010/11 Lrf

[mcweather]

Thanks to BFTP AND RJS for taking the time to research and make your forecast. I always look forward to them. Nice to see some reasoning and explanation of what you think affects the situation. If it comes off ( which I would love to see) then it will have been a great forecast. Good luck

[MR EXTREMES]

'This is a rubbish forecast, as it simply doesn't show what I want it to show, I want it mild, so anything else in a forecast bar that is absolute tosh if you ask me!'....... ...Now, I hope the moderators read between the lines and see the ironic sarcasm in my words before they delete this post....Unfortunately the above kind of narrow minded quote is all too familiar not just in this thread, but more especially the model discussion thread....All credit to BFTP & RJS for providing a detailed forecast for the weeks/months to come...A lot of hard work has obviously been done, indeed a lot of knowledge has gone into the forecast, thanks chaps....but, OON has very valid points of view, too many cold rampers on this forum hang on every word of forecasts of wintry weather etc thus the numerous 'fawning' replies, and as Paul mentioned, how many 'plus' reputation points would the forecast have if it was full of atlantic zonal rain, mild temps and wind for the next 3 months??

In summary, top marks to the thread authors for forecast, and top marks to OON for having the balls to post what many think, but wouldn't dare post

im one of them and i think as BFTP

SORRY I MUST AGREE THE TWO EXCELLENT LRF.

THANK U

Edited November 16, 2010 by badboy657

[stewfox]

However, I do applaud the authors for the effort put into it and it will be fun monitoring how it goes.

Well done to them

I love reading all 'forecasts' wether there based on tea leaves or 30yrs of studing the climate for a living.

I think if they had forecast mild and wet they may not have a got such a good review Some posts seem to suggest its a done deal.

Like all forecasts time will tell.

If we took the most accurate bits from the 20 odd forcasts last year we would have had a 95% accurate forcast

Its finding those accurate bits which I think we can determine by using tea leaves.

Edited November 16, 2010 by stewfox

[Mr Plough]

Thanks for the hard work you have put into this forecast Rjs and Bftp. A really interesting read and good luck with it.

Being a paid up member of the Cold brigade I would be most happy if things pan out as you are suggesting.

[A.J]

im one of them and i think as BFTP

SORRY I MUST AGREE THE TWO EXCELLENT LRF.

THANK U

No need to shout, ever heard of forum etiquette?.........obviously not

To reiterate what I posted earlier, BFTP & Roger have posted an in-depth, well informed technical analysis of the weather to come these next few weeks, no argument from me on that.....However, unless I've misunderstood your post (and apologies if I have) why fawn over a forecast, just because it shows potential for cold and snow?...... Honestly, if cold & snow mean that much to individuals, then I suggest those individuals need to get out and socialize more!

[Roger J Smith]

One point that might need clarifying is that we are predicting a milder interval in late January and so this might reduce the difference between forecasts as far as large-scale trends are concerned.

Just wanted to add some timing for energy peaks in the research model -- these are dates we'll be watching for the strongest storm development, starting with today:

JC+SO ... 16 NOV, 13 DEC, 9 JAN, 6 FEB

Full moon 21 NOV, 20-21 DEC, 18-19 JAN, 17 FEB

N Max 25 NOV, 20-21 DEC, 16 JAN, 12-13 FEB

weaker "R" events about four days later than N Max

SC+JO ... 1-2 DEC, 29 DEC, 26-27 JAN, 23 FEB

new moon 5 DEC, 3 JAN, 2 FEB, 3 MAR

S Max ... 7 DEC, 2 JAN, 30 JAN, 26-27 FEB

another cycle of weaker "R" events four days later than S Max

Just note how this works in general, the main pulse of events at mid-winter is every 7-8 days with a weaker event thrown into the cycle in the longer gaps. The related full/N and new/S sets of events get further separated each month until by spring these are up to seven days apart. So the complex timing of the system has a monthly rhythm that tends to repeat but with one set of events separating out from the rest.

What makes this winter's timetable very interesting is that the SC/JO and JC/SO sets are well aligned and superimposed and also have a third energy peak that would form an independent moderate energy set on its own, so as seen with today's example, these disturbances may be very strong throughout the winter season. As the full/N and new/S events are usually the strongest of the set, this is more or less doubling up the chances for strong storms to develop all winter. I like the chances therefore for stormy tendencies to be increased over background, and so the question becomes, what kind of storms? For that we went to the background flow or circulation forecasts from another part (independent to some extent) of the model. As this was pointing more to cold than mild (with mild most likely later January) we think a lot (not all) of these storm events will be tracking south either through or south of the UK.

Willing to speculate that this will all combine to create a very energetic winter circulation over Europe and if cold plays a dominant role, then it would be a really unlucky outcome for there NOT to be significant snowfall with all of that.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Thanks Roger, I hope that point came across as the CET may indicate that too. I thought updates and some indepth additions like yours could be added rather than be within the main forecast for ease of reading to all. The idea was for folk to ask either of us if they wanted more indepth explanations like you have just posted. So folks if there is anything you'd like to ask then please feel free to ask or even PM. Beginning of each month I will provide notifications of specific event timings IF they appear to pose a significant impact on the UK or Ireland.

BFTP

Edited November 17, 2010 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[loafer]

I would like to add my thank you for the obvious effort put in by BFTP and RJS.

It is an interesting forecast and whilst I am just an amateur, given the balance of factors discussed on here every day, I certainly think the probabilities favour a cold outlook.

As to OON's point, it is also understandable that people who love snow will love this forecast. Be happy for their delight - there's not alot about.

[Jayces]

A very important part of our forecast scenario as in previous winters is the timing of retrograde motion in Europe, which we believe will begin to develop earlier this winter than last, and possibly turn the weather quite cold even in late November.

Looking good for your first prediction.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

I intend to try throughout this winter identify in detail dates to watchout for moreso as an expansion of the LRF. Just to note that on the model thread some are fearing breakdown, spoilers etc well I want re-iterate the confidence is very high with Roger and I for a cold to very cold December with some very low to severe temperatures.

BFTP

[chionomaniac]

I intend to try throughout this winter identify in detail dates to watchout for moreso as an expansion of the LRF. Just to note that on the model thread some are fearing breakdown, spoilers etc well I want re-iterate the confidence is very high with Roger and I for a cold to very cold December with some very low to severe temperatures.

BFTP

I was under the impression, Fred, that you thought the upcoming cold spell wouldn't get off the ground and be spoilt quite quickly and then something bigger to develop in December. I am sure that you said something along those lines a week or two back.

[weather eater]

I was under the impression, Fred, that you thought the upcoming cold spell wouldn't get off the ground and be spoilt quite quickly and then something bigger to develop in December. I am sure that you said something along those lines a week or two back.

He did, blocking wouldn’t get off the ground and November would remain zonal, blocking would then occur as December progressed.

Trouble with this sort of thing is, that if we get a cold winter this year then many, if not most people, will not notice if the times are out, or even if they are substantially so. Thus it will be wrongly lauded as a great use of their methodology and a great forecast.

When somebody (or bodies in this case) put hard work into such an enterprise it seems a bit churlish to be knocking it. However in this instance Fred in particular, does make a great deal of his and Rodgers method, in a great many of his postings, that of course is fair enough, if that what he wants to do. But given that fact, it is only right that their efforts are scrutinised fully and not just lauded when right and ignored when wrong. Further more, this LRF is different to most other NW LRFs because of that well advertised methodology. In other words it is supposedly scientific and not just guessing.

I have to say in support of OON, I also find the sycophantic style posts on this thread equally as tedious as he does. How about some objectivity instead.

[weather eater]

Putting aside people getting what they want in terms of a cold winter (a least that is a popular hope amongst many members), as this forecast suggests they will - I simply wonder myself does it really matter whether it verifies or not?

On the basis that the methodology is respectable with sound reasoning to underpin it then that is all that matters imo. Whether the predictions are in accordance with target audience wishes or not. No one has to sit an exam or has to earn a living wage to participate on here, a voluntary internet forum, in terms of their contributing a forecast and on that basis no one should have any greater scrutiny than anyone else.

Fred (BFTP) does appear to advertise his forecasts in a lot of his posts but rather than flying a self ego maybe that is just his own enthusiasm in terms of enjoying what he does? I would guess it is fun to collaborate a forecast, based on whatever method that maybe, and no-one needs to spend time justifying themselves or their motives for doing so when what they are doing is voluntary and not as a day job. It would be strange if you made predictions and never said anything afterwerwards!

We all want a cold winter, but if you are going to present a LRF based on a methodology that you claim has some merit then that forecast should be appraised in that spirit. Truth is on NW anyone can make cold winter forecast and get lots of congratulations, and as it has already been pointed out, if they had made a mild and wet forecast, we wouldn’t now have several pages, of all hail the mighty heroes. I have no issue with either Fred or Rodger they provide lots of great input and seem to me to be genuinely nice people. I'm not asking them to justify themselves either, but what I do think is that anyone whose forecast is that well publicised, has so much praise heaped apron it, should be honestly appraised. Voluntary it may be but if you put it out there with a huge fanfare then you should expect it to be scrutinized honestly, other wise why bother. Personally I think it rather symptomatic of the country we now live in that it is deemed unfair to question anyone about their actions, words, theory’s or anything else. Do you not go on the climate thread and question the opinions and views of other members, they are after only amateurs, volunteers, to use your word, its not there day job either. Your statement that “On the basis that the methodology is respectable with sound reasoning to underpin it then that is all that matters imoâ€, is just that, an opinion. Of course anyone is entitled to an opinion, but by the same token anyone else is free to question it. If you are going to put forward a prediction, the merit of that prediction should be judged after the event and not before, what we have seen on these pages is exactly the opposite. As I said in my first post, if it’s a fact that their method is respectable and has sound reasoning behind it then it has nothing to fear from being honestly appraised.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

I was under the impression, Fred, that you thought the upcoming cold spell wouldn't get off the ground and be spoilt quite quickly and then something bigger to develop in December. I am sure that you said something along those lines a week or two back.

Now this will eventually lead to the ridge finally taking strangle hold in Dec as it will have a few goes through Nov but fail.

Hi C

Above is the last sentence of what I said re Nov. W E slightly misquotes me re 'as we progress through Dec'...I never said at any point that the block will build as we progress through Dec. Block will be in place and hold in Dec [now it wouldn't happen overnight so it is fair to say that it would be a couple of days in]. Now this was my particular outlook in early Nov but this winter forecast is a collaberation of RJS and I and so is a blended result, our methods cross over but aren't the same. The outcome is looking much more like the blended forecast and as that is the official LRF then there we go.

I do mention my method or RJS method a reasonable amount because I believe it is credible and real and I don't use computer models at all or anytime and I just re-iterate that...maybe I'll stop that... but if I don't keep it up...who will?

Hope that clears up your point.

I agree too with W E that our LRF and others should be judged objectively on merit and open to scrutiny. We have posted a forecast that many wanted to see but I can honestly say we haven't forecast it on a 'want' basis but on what we believe will occur according to our methods.

BFTP

Edited November 19, 2010 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[Roger J Smith]

This may help people understand something about our collaborative forecast. We have two independent theoretical frameworks that, if we didn't collaborate, might lead to two somewhat different forecast packages. The reason we collaborate is that we have similar theories and found in the past that we were reaching similar conclusions. But as to November turning cold, this was mentioned in my CET forecast for November. I said in late October that I was expecting the month to turn much colder and gave a second half estimate of 3.5 C to bring the monthly down into the 5 to 6 range. So from my perspective, this pattern is unfolding the way I expected. I didn't discuss late November with Blast, but there is a statement about it in the forecast. Now when either one of us gets onto a model thread and discusses what we are seeing there, it may not conform to our LRF because we are talking about a specific model and its performance. I get the concept of not changing LRF in mid-season, but I don't think that implies that we can't discuss weather patterns as they evolve as though there is no LRF, otherwise, you'd have to hold people to day five speculations on day two and that sort of thing. There is no sort of principle established in the weather field where people are held to their original predictions in all subsequent discussions. A model run might get anyone to thinking that something different is evolving. That's just part of everyone's weather experience, it's not something that applies particularly to us or anyone else.

I think also that people should be aware that when we say we collaborate, it's not like we have offices together in some institute and talk daily, we are busy people with many non-weather responsibilities (especially Blast) and this forecast is the result of as much dedicated time as we can manage on our own plus a couple of hourly sessions of interactive chat about the details. So far we've done this three times (I think) and haven't had a case where we came to meeting and found ourselves totally on opposite sides of any trend forecast, but we have had different assessments of some parts of the season. I don't think our methods are identical, if we each issued a forecast, there would be two somewhat different forecasts. So, we're collaborating partly to reduce error, on the principle that two heads are better than one. Sometimes that involves one of us taking a hit, as Fred did last winter when I talked him into going milder than he was thinking for February (he was actually right on there).

Then also there is the point that needs to be underscored, that progress in this field is represented by accuracy in the 65-75 per cent range, not the 90-100 per cent standards that short-range forecasts might be held to. Sometimes there are critics who want to find one fault, then go from that to say "okay your method doesn't work." That isn't on. There are no perfect long range forecasting systems known, and if we can keep putting out non-random forecasts and keep the trend on the right side of normal let's say two thirds of the time, then we're doing as well as anyone could hope (I believe). So that's the context within which I view these things.

This is not the sort of methodology that necessarily relies on persistence -- if something goes off-track at a given time, there is no implied later shift of pattern, the method is index-based and therefore seeks to capture a series of estimates from an implied external set of drivers, so that accuracy verification is likely to show a lack of degradation over time. Naturally if LRFs begin shortly after issuance, they will normally start out accurate because that part can be corrected for short-range input, but if an LRF starts a month after issuance, and it has this sort of foundation, then each part of it is equally likely to verify. This is probably a difficult concept for people used to model degradation issues, but you can see that it is intellectually valid since the whole basis for the forecast is a correlation between external drivers and past weather, something that would not suddenly change two months from now.

Could discuss this further if people find it interesting.

[weather eater]

Now this will eventually lead to the ridge finally taking strangle hold in Dec as it will have a few goes through Nov but fail.

Hi C

Above is the last sentence of what I said re Nov. W E slightly misquotes me re 'as we progress through Dec'...I never said at any point that the block will build as we progress through Dec. Block will be in place and hold in Dec [now it wouldn't happen overnight so it is fair to say that it would be a couple of days in]. Now this was my particular outlook in early Nov but this winter forecast is a collaberation of RJS and I and so is a blended result, our methods cross over but aren't the same. The outcome is looking much more like the blended forecast and as that is the official LRF then there we go.

I do mention my method or RJS method a reasoable amount because I believe it is credible and real and if I don't keep it up...who will?

Hope that clears up your point.

BFTP

Thanks for that blast, I blame my advancing years for my poor recollection. Despite my words of caution, shall we say, as regards your forecast, I do wish you good luck with it. And if it comes off, then I will be willing to eat as much humble pie as you care to throw at me, with relish I must add.

Edited November 19, 2010 by weather eater

[johnholmes]

How good to see folk discussing and not arguing, thanks all 3 above for your input.

Interested in your comment Roger of you feel you(and Fred) are getting scores of around 65% or so. Can you explain any further please as if that is true then for seasonal forecasting to reach that level is highly promising. For 20-30 days over 3 years I was ending up about 65% and am impressed if 3 months ahead is coming in with that level?

I should add that we obviously use different methods.

Edited November 19, 2010 by johnholmes

[chionomaniac]

Now this will eventually lead to the ridge finally taking strangle hold in Dec as it will have a few goes through Nov but fail.

Hi C

Above is the last sentence of what I said re Nov. W E slightly misquotes me re 'as we progress through Dec'...I never said at any point that the block will build as we progress through Dec. Block will be in place and hold in Dec [now it wouldn't happen overnight so it is fair to say that it would be a couple of days in]. Now this was my particular outlook in early Nov but this winter forecast is a collaberation of RJS and I and so is a blended result, our methods cross over but aren't the same. The outcome is looking much more like the blended forecast and as that is the official LRF then there we go.

I do mention my method or RJS method a reasonable amount because I believe it is credible and real and I don't use computer models at all or anytime and I just re-iterate that...maybe I'll stop that... but if I don't keep it up...who will?

Hope that clears up your point.

I agree too with W E that our LRF and others should be judged objectively on merit and open to scrutiny. We have posted a forecast that many wanted to see but I can honestly say we haven't forecast it on a 'want' basis but on what we believe will occur according to our methods.

BFTP

Thanks for your reply BFTP.

I was still sure that you did mention that the Atlantic would be in control for the last 3rd of November so I dug up the first bit of your quote above that you seem to have missed out.

This is a good point. I've been looking at my method and recently mentioned that the change would come and would be swift. Well hats off to ECM as it is IMO more right than wrong. I think the LP will track a little further SE than shown by the ECM but this approcahing storm will be felt most severely in SW UK and Ireland. Worst conditions say 6-8 Nov with gale force S to SE'ly winds for most and even storm force for SW approaches and rainfall will be very heavy indeed and could be of concern with localised flooding especially as there is heavy rain likely over the next few days. The LP will edge into France and a chilly NE'ly flow will develop 8-10 as HP to northern half UK and LP settles in France.

Nov overview I'll split into 3rds generally and I will highlight periods I think are of note.

1st 3rd Milder air sets in with a major depression/storm diving down from the NW to SE with wind damage and localised flooding especially in Ireland and South-West England/S Wales. As LP sinks into France a colder NE'ly flow follows with HP across N Ireland, Scotland into S Scandi. Snow showers could develop in Scotland.

2n 3rd: HP to our WSW and a general W to WNW airflow with LPs crossing east acros northern Scotland. Periods/spells of very wet weather as fronts cross the country and generally cool/cold conditions and colder in usual locations in Scotland etc with PM air being the dominant source. Towards the end of this period a quieter period as HP from the North extends SE following behind a LP and much chillier conditions with frost nights set in. 17-21 approx Atlantic held at bay.

last 3rd. The ridge trying to establish itself gets shoved out of the way as further spells of very windy and pretty wet conditions cros the UK mainly to the north. The ridge will try to rebuild around 25/6 but again will be pushed east out of the way as the Atlantic takes hold. temps cool to average. Now this will eventually lead to the ridge finally taking strangle hold in Dec as it will have a few goes through Nov but fail.

I think an average to cool month but the amount of rain and wind strength being the bits mostly remembered.

BFTP

The thing is, is that your forecast for the first two thirds of November has gone pretty well, so I don't think that you need to be selective about the last third and miss out the bit before your quote, because I still think that your forecast has been reasonably accurate. It will only serve as ammunition to those wishing to shoot you down.

[Snowyowl9]

Interesting read - supports many long range forecasts of a cold December. Would be nice to see cold conditions set in early in the season and hold right through till christmas and beyond, been a long time since this has happened not since 1996 (2008 saw a flip to very mild weather mid Dec, and last year the cold didn't start till middle of the month).

I'd much rather have a cold snowy first half to the winter than a cold snowy second half - its very difficult to see cold snowy conditions sustain through the first half, 1996/97 and 1981/82 (though we saw a mild spell around new year) being two good examples of this, but the last two years have seen a change in fortune for the first half of the winter it seems - a good cold snowy run up to christmas is what I always hope for..

I was just looking at the run up to christmas,comparing last year to 1996,looks like last years was colder snowier and started a few days earlier.

Fascinating forecast which I`ve only just read by the way.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Thanks for your reply BFTP.

I was still sure that you did mention that the Atlantic would be in control for the last 3rd of November so I dug up the first bit of your quote above that you seem to have missed out.

The thing is, is that your forecast for the first two thirds of November has gone pretty well, so I don't think that you need to be selective about the last third and miss out the bit before your quote, because I still think that your forecast has been reasonably accurate. It will only serve as ammunition to those wishing to shoot you down.

Not Intentionally being selective C as you asked about me thinking the block not being in place in Nov, the last sentence confirmms that i didn't think it would hold but would try to develop when I posted it. Nov LRF and winter LRF are two different timed forecasts for different periods. Like I said the winter LRF is a blend of us.

To be honest I not really bothered about being shot down...that will always happen. I got slated for asking this to be pinned...the only reason I asked was so that it could be easily found and checked for verification.

Hope that clarifies that to all but I take your point re the full Nov forecast and openess/pitfalls etc...but again I didn't want to post that in the winter LRF

BFTP

Edited November 19, 2010 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Thanks for that blast, I blame my advancing years for my poor recollection. Despite my words of caution, shall we say, as regards your forecast, I do wish you good luck with it. And if it comes off, then I will be willing to eat as much humble pie as you care to throw at me, with relish I must add.

No humble pie at all, nowt wrong with caution at all. RJS and I just ask for open minds to this.

BFTP

[SteveB]

Many thanks Roger & Fred you your time and effort.

Fred, I don't know if you visit NIA 's website, but if you do, what do you make of there view on cycle24 being like Dalton/ Mauder Minimum. I totally see where you are coming from with your Winter forecasts, with the emphsis on a colder theme.

It only make sense having Winters like we used to get, if you believe our climate is effected by the Sun rather than Man.

[Cal]

RJS/BFTP

JC+SO ... 16 NOV, 13 DEC, 9 JAN, 6 FEB

Full moon 21 NOV, 20-21 DEC, 18-19 JAN, 17 FEB

N Max 25 NOV, 20-21 DEC, 16 JAN, 12-13 FEB

weaker "R" events about four days later than N Max

SC+JO ... 1-2 DEC, 29 DEC, 26-27 JAN, 23 FEB

new moon 5 DEC, 3 JAN, 2 FEB, 3 MAR

S Max ... 7 DEC, 2 JAN, 30 JAN, 26-27 FEB

another cycle of weaker "R" events four days later than S Max

What's all the coding such as JC+SO etc?

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

RJS/BFTP

JC+SO ... 16 NOV, 13 DEC, 9 JAN, 6 FEB

Full moon 21 NOV, 20-21 DEC, 18-19 JAN, 17 FEB

N Max 25 NOV, 20-21 DEC, 16 JAN, 12-13 FEB

weaker "R" events about four days later than N Max

SC+JO ... 1-2 DEC, 29 DEC, 26-27 JAN, 23 FEB

new moon 5 DEC, 3 JAN, 2 FEB, 3 MAR

S Max ... 7 DEC, 2 JAN, 30 JAN, 26-27 FEB

another cycle of weaker "R" events four days later than S Max

What's all the coding such as JC+SO etc?

PM Roger J Smith mate, he will happily oblige and explain as that refers to his research.

regards

Fred

[Yorkshiresnows]

Hi Folks,

I'd just like to add what a great thread this is, ... ... and lets face it, its down to Roger and Fred's willingness to engage and discuss both plaudit and critical comments.

This is a fascinating area of LRF'ing and together with the 'teleconnection' side of things really underscores (in my opinion) what a complicated business forecasting weather ... and climate is.

For what its worth (and just my two pennith worth), the fact that we have seen (on average) a suppressed jet stream over a period of over two-three years ..... coinciding with low solar activity looks more than just chance.

Roger and Fred have been right up there with GP in regards accuracy .... and its all so very interesting. Its becoming clear to me that solar and quite possibly lunar factors do have a role to play.

Keep up the great work guys .... and please keep updating.

Y.S