Model output discussion - 7th January onwards

[Man With Beard]

8 hours ago, karlos1983 said:

If you find it please share ?

https://weather.us/model-charts/euro/england/m46_temperature-850hpa/20190128-0600z.html

I think this is it. If you switch to surface temperatures - minus 14 in Birmingham at 12pm!

(This may self update in a hour to the latest run) 

[frosty ground]

The ECM run is so different to yesterdays 12z run later on (as you would expect) that its hard to take any one souloution to seriously (unless you have access o the Ensembles etc).

My preference is for yesterday's 12z run but the 168 chart looks like it could deliver 

 

 

[Singularity]

ECM fits theoretical expectations by far the most of the 00z det. runs and EPS of the ens runs.

GFS & GEFS have had a positive NAM/AO bias for several weeks now. FV3 mostly not but with a few lapses for reasons I can only imagine.

 

So... ECM 00z may be a bit fast to build the blocking highs but aside from that it’s the most believable solution based on everything we know at this time (yes, the usual caveats apply!).

[Tim Bland]

It’s a confusing picture this morning! I wouldn’t like to write a 10 day forecast this morning! Can’t see much support from other models for the ECM Unfortunately.  GEM looks closer to GFS but ICON looks good...

[frosty ground]

2 minutes ago, Tim Bland said:

It’s a confusing picture this morning! I wouldn’t like to write a 10 day forecast this morning! Can’t see much support from other models for the ECM Unfortunately.  GEM looks closer to GFS but ICON looks good...

Meeting in the middle usually applies in these situations.

[January Snowstorm]

As I mentioned a few days ago the lack of proper heights to our North meant caution was needed. And so it appears to be the case as the models are all over the place and none show proper heights to our North (Inc ecm)

[karlos1983]

1 minute ago, January Snowstorm said:

As I mentioned a few days ago the lack of proper heights to our North meant caution was needed. And so it appears to be the case as the models are all over the place and none show proper heights to our North (Inc ecm)

This must be pretend then......

ECM

Edited January 15, 2019 by karlos1983

[Yarmy]

1 minute ago, January Snowstorm said:

As I mentioned a few days ago the lack of proper heights to our North meant caution was needed. And so it appears to be the case as the models are all over the place and none show proper heights to our North (Inc ecm)

 

(Not saying this is what will happen, btw)

[January Snowstorm]

1 minute ago, karlos1983 said:

This must be pretend then......

ECM

It's one run and completely different to its previous run so here's hoping but I wouldn't bet on it

[Met4Cast]

Very, very little support from the GEFS for the ECM Run

ECM Det has a fair amount of support from it's ENS with varying E/NE'ly from low pressure to the South or high pressure to the North. It's very much GEFS vs EPS this morning. 

[shaky]

Icon continues with the slider and does not back the gfs on the 06z!!

[Glacier Point]

Wowsers, GEFS and EPS couldn't be more different in the North Atlantic through day 10. Some crunching of gears coming up for one or both of them soon.

Tempting to identify downwelling -U wind anomaly signal as the culprit here.

[karlos1983]

Just now, January Snowstorm said:

It's one run and completely different to its previous run so here's hoping but I wouldn't bet on it

Your post said no models showing heights to our North JS, which is very misleading to anyone not sure on how to read the charts. 

At least there is some credibility in the ECM, as the Monthly update from last night fits in with that solution. 

[frosty ground]

Icon brings some PPN in land

 

 

[Eskimo]

1 minute ago, frosty ground said:

Icon brings some PPN in land

 

 

Would be a sleety mix on low levels but anywhere 200m+ Midlands north would see snow I'd imagine. Would still be a mess. 

[winterof79]

8 minutes ago, Glacier Point said:

Wowsers, GEFS and EPS couldn't be more different in the North Atlantic through day 10. Some crunching of gears coming up for one or both of them soon.

Tempting to identify downwelling -U wind anomaly signal as the culprit here.

Hi Stuart

Did I read that the current forecast downwelling didn't occur so far down last Feb?

Like you say this could lead to new issues for certain models

Edited January 15, 2019 by winterof79

[Snowy L]

ECM a bit different to last night but its still following its 46 day model broadly. Have to favour the model that agrees with its long range charts.

[ArHu3]

EC oper is even slightly milder than the median and mean day 9 and 10

 

https://www.knmi.nl/nederland-nu/weer/waarschuwingen-en-verwachtingen/weer-en-klimaatpluim

[Weathizard]

Quite remarkable really to see the difference between the GEFS and EPS, been said many times before I know but I really don’t think I’ve ever seen such a stark difference in ensemble suites, there’s pretty much absolutely nothing like the ECM At day 7/8 in the GFS.

You’d back the ECM all day on this one, want to see the UKM back it up strongly on the 12z though to feel more confident about it

[Altostratus]

The UKMO hasn't changed that much since its run yesterday pm and its difficult to see where that will lead as the key period is post 144hr. The ECM certainly isn't without support - look at the GEM op and many of it's ensemble members as well as the JMA. The ECM mean is also rock solid. You'd have to assume the higher resolution models have a better handle on this and you'd be a brave person to bet against the ECM suite. 

[ArHu3]

Just now, Weathizard said:

Quite remarkable really to see the difference between the GEFS and EPS, been said many times before I know but I really don’t think I’ve ever seen such a stark difference in ensemble suites, there’s pretty much absolutely nothing like the ECM At day 7/8 in the GFS.

You’d back the ECM all day on this one, want to see the UKM back it up strongly on the 12z though to feel more confident about it

EC is absolute king of the models at 168h though but sometimes even the king is wrong. I hope not this time

[January Snowstorm]

The ecm has shown a different outcome at 216hrs for every run. A lot of them showing cold solutions but completely different routes in getting there. I don't see how that tells us to have complete confidence in it being right this morning. You would imagine at least one model would support it. Not saying it's wron just maybe caution is advised until models converge on the way forward 

[weirpig]

Purely for fun  Icon 6z  slidergate!

 

[sunnijim]

The GFS reminding us of New year resolutions to change this or that and looking at a myriad of amazing solutions to the uninspiring drudgery, only for the back end of January to see the 'safe' option settled on again, the bloated Azores High taking more than a passing interest in our shores.

The six pack and a clear path to early retirement has to be for others to prove possible first before jumping on board properly, I doff my cap toward you ECM and UKMO.

[booferking]

1 minute ago, January Snowstorm said:

The ecm has shown a different outcome at 216hrs for every run. A lot of them showing cold solutions but completely different routes in getting there. I don't see how that tells us to have complete confidence in it being right this morning. You would imagine at least one model would support it. Not saying it's wron just maybe caution is advised until models converge on the way forward 

But you can take confidence in 216hr you just answered it yourself the majority led to cold solutions we are going cold baby.