Model Output Discussions 18z 31/01/2016

[The Weather Dragon]

Yes - seen it before a million times - some more balanced opinion on here would help avoid major let downs - prolonged cold is as rare as hens teeth. Makes you realise how special years like 2010 are. 

Edited February 12, 2016 by Jonathan Evans

[Alpine glow]

1 minute ago, Blizzardof82 said:

To be fair none are right yet, as the weather hasn't occurred.

I agree.  Also, why so much confidence from the BBC.  Maybe the  GFS is right to line up with ECM, who knows (yet) - I do feel it is the knee-jerk reactions that let this forum down though.  As a long-time watcher, I much prefer it when comments are made on the actual output in a straight-forward way rather than tit for tat between models.

[mulzy]

33 minutes ago, mulzy said:

UKMO broadly similar (maybe even flatter) to the GFS.  Looks like the ECM has called this correctly - let's see what this evening's run will show but don't hold your breath for a turnaround.

 

GEM 12z slightly better but still poor for significant snow from the midweek trough...

 

[snowblizzard]

Just now, Jonathan Evans said:

Yes - seen it before a million times - some more balanced opinion on here would help avoid major let downs - prolonged cold is as rare as hens teeth 

Not quite - there will never be a hen with teeth, but we do very occasionally experience a period of prolonged cold!

[MR EXTREMES]

3 minutes ago, Chris K said:

No. Clearly not. Only earlier today we were told to expect the ECM to back down. Now suddenly we are praising it. You can see why those new to the netweather community may get confused by posts in this thread.

Great to see discussion across the model suites, as it helps people learn differences in charts and what's causing them. However I feel disappointment always seems to follow calls that one model will likely trump another, then the opposite happens...

 

id be very surprised if ecm follows the gfs,

but I hold my hands up I really was taken in by the gfs because of its consistent runs of recent days.

but never know unlikely but the ecm might join the gfs garden path and both be wrong but I'm pretty confident jh charts shown earlier are a more realistic outcome.

[Paul]

11 minutes ago, Chris K said:

No. Clearly not. Only earlier today we were told to expect the ECM to back down. Now suddenly we are praising it. You can see why those new to the netweather community may get confused by posts in this thread.

Great to see discussion across the model suites, as it helps people learn differences in charts and what's causing them. However I feel disappointment always seems to follow calls that one model will likely trump another, then the opposite happens...

Met office have been excellent this winter in my opinion. We just all need jobs there so we can see juicy stuff

 

Is it maybe time we dropped this old chestnut. An open discussion allows people to voice their opinions, the nature of weather and weather forecasting is that stuff changes. If someone gives an opinion that's wrong, big deal? If we start dredging the thread for incorrect opinions and calling people out on them every time, 1.  the thread will become a very bitter place to spend time in, and 2. most people will stop voicing their opinion. Neither of which is exactly helpful when it comes to discussion. 

Yes, differing views may confuse people a tad, but if they want a forecast there are plenty of those available on Netweather (and elsewhere too), this isn't, and never was the place to get a single voice / definitive view of how things may be going as it's it's a discussion thread.

I'm not saying the post above is a particular example of this, but too often of late people are piping up to have a dig at other opinions, and that shouldn't be what this thread is about. It should be about the models, and personal views on what they're showing, and where they're headed.

[coldcomfort]

18 minutes ago, mushymanrob said:

no different in summer.. the trick is not to believe the extreme runs, or check with the noaa anomaly charts to see if they support an fi chart.

Indeed....it seems that despite dozens if not hundreds of Groundhog Days nothing really changes, the most extreme runs get talked up by the most extreme talkers, then when things inevitably start to downgrade it all starts to turn a bit sad really.

[booferking]

That,s more like it GFS climbing back inline again none event next week and very little this weekend its been the same all winter everybody getting hopes up just to be fooled seen it coming.

[Chris K]

Just now, emotional rollercoaster said:

id be very surprised if ecm follows the gfs,

but I hold my hands up I really was taken in by the gfs because of its consistent runs of recent days.

but never know unlikely but the ecm might join the gfs garden path and both be wrong but I'm pretty confident jh charts shown earlier are a more realistic outcome.

In some ways I can understand. There was indeed some consistency from the GFS. But, it always feels like it is laying a mouse trap for us with a nice big cube of cheese.

Shame at the moment it smells like stilton....who knows though, it could change again - but I have my doubts.

[karlos1983]

Well not the most inspiring set of 12z from GFS or UKMO in regards to the snow event next week. 

Would be typical for the ECM to now move toward the GFS 06z output 

[phil nw.]

Yes disappointing although even the 00z UK run wasn't as bullish as the earlier GFS outputs with the Scandi. heights.

We still get the cold for a few days as the north easterly sets in and the best chances of any snowfall looks like being the north and east of Scotland and some eastern coastal areas of England but here probably more likely with elevation such as North York moors.

the ridge then topples midweek and the Atlantic fronts follow in.

Edited February 12, 2016 by phil nw.

[Chris K]

14 minutes ago, Paul said:

Is it maybe time we dropped this old chestnut. An open discussion allows people to voice their opinions, the nature of weather and weather forecasting is that stuff changes. If someone gives an opinion that's wrong, big deal? If we start dredging the thread for incorrect opinions and calling people out on them every time, 1.  the thread will become a very bitter place to spend time in, and 2. most people will stop voicing their opinion. Neither of which is exactly helpful when it comes to discussion. 

Yes, differing views may confuse people a tad, but if they want a forecast there are plenty of those available on Netweather (and elsewhere too), this isn't, and never was the place to get a single voice / definitive view of how things may be going as it's it's a discussion thread.

Too often of late people are piping up to have a dig at other opinions, and that shouldn't be what this thread is about. It should be about the models, and personal views on what they're showing, and where they're headed.

Right, I agree its great to see all sharing their views/ opinions and yes so what if they end up wrong? I am not piping up about it suddenly "digging" to accuse people of posting things that they shouldn't. I've always enjoyed reading posts from everyone and getting all the different views.

It's the mass disappointment and frustration that follows because people rely on them and assuming certain models will always be right over another.

That in itself makes things more bitter in here already. That's my view. 

Edited February 12, 2016 by Chris K

[Paul]

6 minutes ago, Chris K said:

Right, Its great to see all sharing their views/ opinions and yes so what if they end up wrong? That's not the issue for me. I am not piping up about it suddenly "digging" to accuse people of posting things that they shouldn't. I've always enjoyed reading posts from everyone and getting all the different views.

It's the mass disappointment and frustration that follows because people rely on them and assuming certain models will always be right over another.

That in itself makes things more bitter in here already. That's my view. 

Yet if you see tonight, no-one is bitter, no-one is wailing. I think the vast majority of those posting and reading get that nothing is ever nailed on when it comes to snow/cold in the UK,(and warmth/storms in the summer too, among other things!). 

Yes, some people get a bit overboard from time to time, but the vast majority don't, it's sometimes too easy to focus on the negative though I think. Anyway, jumping miles off topic here, so will stop. Feel free to pm if you (or anyone else) wants to discuss further. 

[nick sussex]

A disappointing GFS run and the writing was on the wall as soon as the ridge didn't extend north, all the energy spills eastwards over the top.

As for the trough disruption and any snowfall that's still up in the air, it looks less likely now. Much depends on the flow ahead of the precip. Anything with an easterly component even sse might still be okay.

We'll have to see but would need more trough disruption earlier.

Looking at the GEFS a big change there and it seems a lot of those also were wrong about the ridge near Svalbard. Just shows how jumpy and useless ensembles can be if they have the same initial error as the op run.

Edited February 12, 2016 by nick sussex

[mushymanrob]

36 minutes ago, winterof79 said:

I believe most are referring to the loss of the stalling snow mid week, which the anomaly's wouldn't show.There will still be cold air in place and I don't think it's displacement will be solved on the Friday before.

i beg to differ sir... the stalling front comes about by an amplified ridge, imho (and i might be wrong here) i dont believe that anomaly charts allowed for a ridge as strong as the one needed to stall the front, and they still dont.

[weather eater]

The issue is not the models it is people's faith that runs, any run, any model will verify post a couple of days.  I keep saying this, the models run on data that is constantly refreshing, They are always going to less and less accurate the further they get from zero hour. Consequently what we see is not the future synoptic pattern but an approximation of it gained from old data.  I do not understand and have never understood the fixating people have in wanting to see fancy cold synoptics post day 2, they are pointless 99% of the time. I can see full well why JH and Mushy use the charts that they do. They may lack detail but they are indeed a far better guide to what may occur in the mid range.

 

Edited February 12, 2016 by weather eater

[phil nw.]

Just my two pennyworth.

Everyone is free to post their views on the charts,there's no right or wrong and even the most experienced see things differently sometimes.

The thing to remember is that Op runs change frequently and anything beyond 4/5 days more so. Newer members can get confused because of this but by referring to ensemble outputs you can get an idea if a run is on the cold/mild side. 

Many of us who have been on here for years often say this but of course in Winter the interest is often in the search for snow/cold charts.

This is fine but for sanity don't take anything for gospel especially the selected gefs members that are often posted to show the best Winter pattern as these are often the least likely to verify.

As we have all learned from bitter experience any snowfall for many areas of the UK is seemingly as elusive as ever so take care in particular when viewing these type of charts.

Anyway enough from me let's continue to discuss in a respectful manner and remember it is only weather.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 12, 2016 by phil nw.

[joggs]

42 minutes ago, Chris K said:

No. Clearly not. Only earlier today we were told to expect the ECM to back down. Now suddenly we are praising it. You can see why those new to the netweather community may get confused by posts in this thread.

Great to see discussion across the model suites, as it helps people learn differences in charts and what's causing them. However I feel disappointment always seems to follow calls that one model will likely trump another, then the opposite happens...

Anyway no model is right until the time in question has occurred.

Met office have been excellent this winter in my opinion. We all  just need jobs there so we can see the juicy stuff

 

Maybe pm whoever said"Watch the Ecm backdown".

To ease big disappointments this year,I've read the mo further outlook before viewing the mod suite,that's worked better for me than chasing the downgrades.

[Snowman.]

I mean there's always March right...?

 

 

[chris55]

I'll await ECM 12z and 00z suite before im hanging any hats lol!

[feb1991blizzard]

The ensembles have completely imploded as well.

[nick sussex]

I have to disagree with the use of anomaly charts and the midweek trough disruption issue. Small scale detail as to whether you get suitable disruption to not mix out the cold won't be picked up by the NOAA anomaly charts. These just give a broadbrush view of anomalies against previous climatology.

You can't use an anomaly chart for specific detail. If you're looking at the overall pattern to get a rough idea that's fine but for next week its the NWP operationals which supercedes the anomalies.

 

Edited February 12, 2016 by nick sussex

[Methuselah]

1 minute ago, feb1991blizzard said:

The ensembles have completely imploded as well.

Oh dear, George Osborne's going to have to fold an awful lot of towels!

[March]

46 minutes ago, Alpine glow said:

I agree.  Also, why so much confidence from the BBC.  Maybe the  GFS is right to line up with ECM, who knows (yet) - I do feel it is the knee-jerk reactions that let this forum down though.  As a long-time watcher, I much prefer it when comments are made on the actual output in a straight-forward way rather than tit for tat between models.

The BBC are reactionary school kids compared to the MetO. 

[mulzy]

1 minute ago, March said:

The BBC are reactionary school kids compared to the MetO. 

Indeed, the Met Office did not ramp the event though they do cover themselves by the term "rain or snow"....