Cold hunt - models and chat

[Ice Day]

Well on the GFS Op at 204, the Canadian Vortex is lifting out finally increasing the chances of some height rises there? Or this could just be the Pub Run being an idiot!

 

 

[andymusic]

2 minutes ago, PolarWarsaw said:

Why? 

It’s used as general guidance for patterns. If our weather had turned out like the EC46 had suggested EXACTLY for the last 3 months we would all be buried and waiting for spring. We can’t even give reliable forecasts for weather systems 1 day in advance, let alone worry about month forecasts. 

EC46 is one of many that are practically useless for macro forecasting. The way this winter has gone, the fact it’s moved away from a cold solution has probably just increased our chances!

well it got the hlb wrong all these weeks maybe it's just as wrong with those charts right now - so we'll see eh!

[Pembroke Dangler]

1 minute ago, FetchCB said:

How accurate has it been this winter? 

Wouldn’t it be ironic that the ec46 shows less favourable extended output and then the nwp flip to cold Synoptics week 2,3 etc bit like reverse psychology lol

[feb1991blizzard]

4 minutes ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

 

No real HLB until late Feb into March?

BFTP

Problem is the Euro trough has gone, and now the decent bit (week 4) is mean +ve Greenland heights but with am Atlantic trough.

[Mike Poole]

3 minutes ago, feb1991blizzard said:

Gutted about the EC46.

Far too much significance is placed on this product, in my opinion, especially since we can't see it, it's consistency was being lauded earlier in the month and we are now finding out for the current period it was consistently wrong.  Still think if you concentrate on the high anomalies there is a strong case for  blocking, and that could deliver in shed loads in February. 

Lesson learnt, if it's on Meteociel it's worth commenting on, and forming a view based on, other stuff we get to see a bit of  is interesting, but danger of forming out of context views. Real danger of cognitive bias overweighting the things that we think are special over those we can see for free.  Just my view, of course.

[Kentish Snowman in Yorks]

3 minutes ago, andymusic said:

well it got the hlb wrong all these weeks maybe it's just as wrong with those charts right now - so we'll see eh!

I thought the EC46 has only ever showed HLB from this week onwards?  Not that it's correct about that but I don't think it has been wrong for weeks?

[feb1991blizzard]

5 minutes ago, Ice Day said:

Well on the GFS Op at 204, the Canadian Vortex is lifting out finally increasing the chances of some height rises there? Or this could just be the Pub Run being an idiot!

 

 

Yes, it will just be our luck, a canadian high, the vortex actually moves too far away after staying in the wrong place all winter.

[feb1991blizzard]

2 minutes ago, Mike Poole said:

Far too much significance is placed on this product, in my opinion, especially since we can't see it, it's consistency was being lauded earlier in the month and we are now finding out for the current period it was consistently wrong.  Still think if you concentrate on the high anomalies there is a strong case for  blocking, and that could deliver in shed loads in February. 

Lesson learnt, if it's on Meteociel it's worth commenting on, and forming a view based on, other stuff we get to see a bit of  is interesting, but danger of forming out of context views. Real danger of cognitive bias overweighting the things that we think are special over those we can see for free.  Just my view, of course.

we need to see the current GLOSEA5

[MATTWOLVES 3]

7 minutes ago, PolarWarsaw said:

Why? 

It’s used as general guidance for patterns. If our weather had turned out like the EC46 had suggested EXACTLY for the last 3 months we would all be buried and waiting for spring. We can’t even give reliable forecasts for weather systems 1 day in advance, let alone worry about month forecasts. 

EC46 is one of many that are practically useless for macro forecasting. The way this winter has gone, the fact it’s moved away from a cold solution has probably just increased our chances!

Very true, any experienced forecaster worth his weight in gold will tell you that forecasting the weather behind 5 days is going some, so I fail to see how long range models  can grasp it, like you say for 6 weeks we have been blocked, which just ain't been the case, now it's flipped just watch the blocking take a grip. Be interesting to see if met use it to influence tomorrow's update though!!!!!

[Ice Day]

3 minutes ago, feb1991blizzard said:

Yes, it will just be our luck, a canadian high, the vortex actually moves too far away after staying in the wrong place all winter.

Indeed, if nothing else the massive variances on modelling after day 7 is encouraging that the models are all at sea with next week onwards.  I mean, look at this dog's dinner for 234!

[kold weather]

GFSP broadly the same as the 12z ECM, not nearly as sharp and elongated as the ICON, but I think that is fairly realistic looking position IMO

[feb1991blizzard]

3 minutes ago, Ice Day said:

Indeed, if nothing else the massive variances on modelling after day 7 is encouraging that the models are all at sea with next week onwards.  I mean, look at this dog's dinner for 234!

Dogs dinner or not, if we were to see more runs like that, i would be much more encouraged, at least its not a million miles away from a proper cold spell there.

[Ice Day]

The GFSP has the low slightly further south and more elongated, precip charts for 72 and 78  Belting charts for Southern Ireland, Wales and the Midlands.  The South East looking more marginal, probably good for Suffolk and Norfolk?

 

[Duane S.]

15 minutes ago, Mike Poole said:

Far too much significance is placed on this product, in my opinion, especially since we can't see it, it's consistency was being lauded earlier in the month and we are now finding out for the current period it was consistently wrong.  Still think if you concentrate on the high anomalies there is a strong case for  blocking, and that could deliver in shed loads in February. 

Lesson learnt, if it's on Meteociel it's worth commenting on, and forming a view based on, other stuff we get to see a bit of  is interesting, but danger of forming out of context views. Real danger of cognitive bias overweighting the things that we think are special over those we can see for free.  Just my view, of course.

Very true Mike.

Putting the accuracy issue aside, it is what it is, a simple weekly pressure anomaly forecast. And when it is reasonably neutral (wks3/4), is going to lead to far more speculation and hypothesis than give definitive answers. With no accompanying clusters, we are left to draw our own conclusions. Which amounts chiefly to educated guesswork.

Edited January 28, 2019 by s4lancia

[Don]

51 minutes ago, karlos1983 said:

Weeks 2/3/4

Pick the bones out of that then

Hmm....Not dreadful i.e. it's certainly not pointing towards a February 1998 scenario.

Edited January 28, 2019 by Don

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Running into cold air and looking at the general set up the track always looked ‘south’ adjusted for Thurs/Fri.....still time for changes but my view remains....north Midlands looking northern boundary...

 

BFTP

Edited January 28, 2019 by BLAST FROM THE PAST

[MattStoke]

5 minutes ago, Ice Day said:

The GFSP has the low slightly further south and more elongated, precip charts for 72 and 78  Belting charts for Southern Ireland, Wales and the South Midlands.  The South East looking more marginal, probably good for Suffolk and Norfolk?

 

Amended it for you.

People up here had better make the most of the few wet flakes we might see tomorrow.

[bluearmy]

20 minutes ago, BLAST FROM THE PAST said:

 

No real HLB until late Feb into March?

BFTP

 

24 minutes ago, feb1991blizzard said:

Gutted about the EC46.

I did say it might be a bit meh ..... it’s much better than I expected

28 minutes ago, igloo said:

i have to say i doesnt  look great the dreaded icelandic low looks to be in charge for febuary but as we have seen for the past 6 weeks it hasnt been very good has it

Mean slp always shows an Icelandic low at that range - it’s climatology. Look at the anomolys to see where the higher and lower slp is likely 

15 minutes ago, feb1991blizzard said:

Problem is the Euro trough has gone, and now the decent bit (week 4) is mean +ve Greenland heights but with am Atlantic trough.

Perhaps but it’s not showing a high anomoly to our south ....you cant take the output literally 

14 minutes ago, Mike Poole said:

Far too much significance is placed on this product, in my opinion, especially since we can't see it, it's consistency was being lauded earlier in the month and we are now finding out for the current period it was consistently wrong.  Still think if you concentrate on the high anomalies there is a strong case for  blocking, and that could deliver in shed loads in February. 

Lesson learnt, if it's on Meteociel it's worth commenting on, and forming a view based on, other stuff we get to see a bit of  is interesting, but danger of forming out of context views. Real danger of cognitive bias overweighting the things that we think are special over those we can see for free.  Just my view, of course.

See matts tweet in the relevant thread ....you aren’t correct mike 

[ukpaul]

GFS mean for Thursday. Very consistent. Not even thinking of shifting.

[kold weather]

So the Mexican stand off continues with the models, with the GFS operational going further north, and the GFS ensembles are mixed but also more north than south, but the GFS para and the 18z ICON have both gone south, and the ARPEGE also looks south as well.

[feb1991blizzard]

1 minute ago, ukpaul said:

GFS mean for Thursday. Very consistent. Not even thinking of shifting.

Not sure i would use a mean for PPN charts tbh, the band is always going to be much thicker than in reality.

[Mike Poole]

37 minutes ago, bluearmy said:

See matts tweet in the relevant thread ....you aren’t correct mike 

So where's the Greenland high it predicted about now, Nick?  Admitted it is easier to form a view on model output you can see as per accuracy, but I'm not convinced by the snippets of ECM46 we see in here.  And as for tweets, serious weather forecasters shouldn't do them, much to complicated to dissolve down into 144 characters or whatever it is now.  I wonder why some feel the need. 

I just think that those who promote this product should also note it's limitations.  Convince me it's a bit better than CFS?

Edited January 28, 2019 by Mike Poole

[ukpaul]

5 minutes ago, feb1991blizzard said:

Not sure i would use a mean for PPN charts tbh, the band is always going to be much thicker than in reality.

At this range there is little scatter. Four or so of the perturbations have it further south but a similar number take it further north.

I would have posted the Panel GEFS to show that but that isn’t possible - or is there a way of doing that?

Edited January 28, 2019 by ukpaul

[kold weather]

10 minutes ago, ukpaul said:

GFS mean for Thursday. Very consistent. Not even thinking of shifting.

What I think is more telling is the GFSP has shifted south, the higher resolution version of the GFS (supposed to be better...and to be fair was one of the first models to clock the possible southward swing of the LP.)

That literally leaves the GFS against every other model. now its not impossible the GFS is right, however when we add into the mix the known bias the GFS OP has with pushing energy far too fast north and east, it begins to look like the GFS may be going up the wrong path here. Those bias also are true for the ensembles members.

PS - also a known bias is the GFS ensembles don't create enough variations compared to the OP (or something along that line), its on the NOAA site, very interesting read if I  can find it!

Edited January 28, 2019 by kold weather

[feb1991blizzard]

1 minute ago, ukpaul said:

At this range there is little scatter. Four or so of the perturbations have it further south but a similar number take it further north.

I would have posted the Panel GEFS to show that but that isn’t possible - or is there a way of doing that?

Not sure if you can, see your point but dont forget there will be different intensities, subtle changes from member to member will make a difference, trust me this will be further South, much weaker, more fragmented, and thinner, i have seen it too many times before.