Model output discussion - late November

[Mike Poole]

Well no wonder there's no posts about the pub run, when you see the T174:

The Borg have assimilated us. 

Edited November 30, 2019 by Mike Poole

[LRD]

3 minutes ago, Mike Poole said:

Well no wonder there's no posts about the pub run, when you see the T174:

The Borg have assimilated us. 

Hmmm, yeah I feel a model backtrack coming on...

Hope I'm wrong 

[LRD]

Poor for cold is this

Arctic heights placed badly and lows gathering around Greenland. Disappointing after yesterday's promise

Oh well

[North East Blizzard]

4 minutes ago, LRD said:

Poor for cold is this

Arctic heights placed badly and lows gathering around Greenland. Disappointing after yesterday's promise

Oh well

And it will be different again in the morning, no consistency currently. Ensembles will paint an interesting picture. 

[bluearmy]

Nice set of fi ec clusters to end the month as we actually arrive in winter ! 

[Tim Bland]

GFS 18z not too bad at the end

[Cheshire Freeze]

The issue is the EC is prone to over amplification in the N Atlantic locale. With this in mind, I still see little to be cheery about going forward. The GFS toyed with a very good scenario but has seemingly corrected back to where we were 3 days ago.

The Pacific remains unsupportive and all we have to fall back on at the moment is low solar activity. 

I refrained from posting my thoughts yesterday amidst the very good output at day 10 as I knew I'd get jumped on by the usual suspects. 

[ICE COLD]

5 minutes ago, bluearmy said:

Nice set of fi ec clusters to end the month as we actually arrive in winter ! 

Speaking of FI , gfs 18z looks good in FI . Are the clusters broadly similar to this BA ? 

[feb1991blizzard]

ECM ens graph should look decent.

[icykev]

Still up for grabs for me. 9th still seems key

Has looked a promising start to winter for a while, not giving up now, when it hasn't even started.

Models are struggling, so keep going zonal even though heights are trying to dig in.

 

Edited November 30, 2019 by icykev

[LRD]

10 minutes ago, Tim Bland said:

GFS 18z not too bad at the end

Looks great but, only 24 hours ago, a similar scenario was being progged for the 10th/11th Dec. Not the 15th/16th. It might still happen and maybe yesterday things were being modelled too quickly 

[Cheshire Freeze]

2 minutes ago, LRD said:

Looks great but, only 24 hours ago, a similar scenario was being progged for the 10th/11th Dec. Not the 15th/16th. It might still happen and maybe yesterday things were being modelled too quickly 

Yes, charts always look good in FI in winter, more often than not. The issue is it's chasing shadows 90% of the time as it never gets any nearer. 

The most pertinent point right now is that at day 5 it looks as flat as a pancake-

Anything after this is pie in the sky.

[feb1991blizzard]

Have to say although the eps look good, the GEFS don't apart from in the Strat.

[icykev]

4 minutes ago, CreweCold said:

Yes, charts always look good in FI in winter, more often than not. The issue is it's chasing shadows 90% of the time as it never gets any nearer. 

The most pertinent point right now is that at day 5 it looks as flat as a pancake-

Anything after this is pie in the sky.

. . Let's wait and see. I love pie ❄❤

 

[Cheshire Freeze]

2 minutes ago, feb1991blizzard said:

Have to say although the eps look good, the GEFS don't apart from in the Strat.

The thing is Feb, over the past few years we've been burned time and again by the EC products- whether it be the weeklies or the latter stages of the operational. 

[feb1991blizzard]

4 minutes ago, CreweCold said:

The thing is Feb, over the past few years we've been burned time and again by the EC products- whether it be the weeklies or the latter stages of the operational. 

Yes true. The strat does look conducive to a week 3-4 Northerly though, it was the GFS that first sniffed this opportunity, perhaps a too-sooner?

[Cheshire Freeze]

1 minute ago, feb1991blizzard said:

Yes true. The strat does look conducive to a week 3-4 Northerly though, it was the GFS that first sniffed this opportunity, perhaps a too-sooner?

Possibly. I certainly don't see anything conducive to proper winter in the next 2 weeks RE widespread snowfall. 

The GFS has been too progressive with any warming of the strat- it seems to have been showing warming for 2 weeks or so but it is being watered down as it enters hi-res. 

[StretfordEnd1996]

GFS Vs ECM at +192 show different possibilities

In my opinion they aren't ridiculously different to each other - but perhaps the end result would be somewhere in the middle? 

[feb1991blizzard]

1 minute ago, CreweCold said:

Possibly. I certainly don't see anything conducive to proper winter in the next 2 weeks RE widespread snowfall. 

The GFS has been too progressive with any warming of the strat- it seems to have been showing warming for 2 weeks or so but it is being watered down as it enters hi-res. 

Probably agree nowwith first point after todays runs but right at the end of w2 still possible, not sure what to make of strat, wished we had the old GFS back, not saying its accurate but i know how to interpret its strat charts after nearly a decade's worth of practice.

[SMU]

Jeez might as well crank up the david Gray suicide FM some of the posts in here.

[feb1991blizzard]

Very Mel & Kim set with cold clustering towards end.

[Cheshire Freeze]

3 minutes ago, Steve Murr said:

Jeez might as well crank up the david Gray suicide FM some of the posts in here.

Nothing to do with being negative. Everything to do with being objective.

Out of all the 'optimism' and ways in which the GFS is 'wrong' when it shows an unfavourable outcome, how many instances of prolonged cold have we seen since 2013?? The ones that have occurred e.g the 'beast from the east' I've been in complete agreement with you. 

What I will never do is call cold just because it happens to be my preferred outcome!

[inghams85]

5 minutes ago, CreweCold said:

Nothing to do with being negative. Everything to do with being objective.

Out of all the 'optimism' and ways in which the GFS is 'wrong' when it shows an unfavourable outcome, how many instances of prolonged cold have we seen since 2013?? The ones that have occurred e.g the 'beast from the east' I've been in complete agreement with you. 

What I will never do is call cold just because it happens to be my preferred outcome!

Mate your being pessimistic. End of. There is support from the strat and tropics for a northerly then slider scenario. It's not pie in the sky at all

[Cheshire Freeze]

6 minutes ago, inghams85 said:

Mate your being pessimistic. End of. There is support from the strat and tropics for a northerly then slider scenario. It's not pie in the sky at all

Can you show me this support? And explain how it supports what you assert?

There is tentative support for maybe a chance at some blocking later on in December but in the next two weeks there is next to no chance, like I said. As I said a week or so back, there is a chance around the middle of December for another go at something a bit better as strat warming was forecast to come back round towards the Canadian sector. Even that looks on shaky ground as the GFS was being over enthusiastic with the signal.

There is not enough forcing in the Pacific to change things so where do you think this magical wintry nirvana is going to come from?

Nothing at all to do with being pessimistic.

Edited December 1, 2019 by CreweCold

[inghams85]

2 minutes ago, CreweCold said:

Can you show me this support? And explain how it supports what you assert?

It's 10 past 12 and I can't be assed to show you but I can explain. We've just had a record breaking displacement event moving the core of the strat away from Greenland to Scandinavia leaving a vacuum for high pressure in the Greenland locale. Without AAM support this would at the very least support a strong topper scenario. However we have AAM support and an upcoming MJO orbit which at the same time lends to an idea of height rises in the North West. All these factors together and breaking the science down simply implies the ecm scenario is extremely plausible. I'd put it at 60-70% minimum. The gfs outcome has no scientific background support its just throwing out a random couple of runs from its clusters. You are basing on the ecm being wrong because of previous let downs and patterns models take. If I'm wrong about this this is now your turn to explain why I'm wrong and your not??