Cheshire Freeze

Yes I'd quite happily take that winter again just for that one event. Had a couple of good storms too...none of this static rubbish we've had to endure this year.

Never rely solely on the interpretation of others...It sounds harder than it is to interpret NWP output, once you get the hang of it the first thing you will end up doing is looking at the models and forming your own conclusions. This forum then acts as a subsidiary to cross check the views of others and perhaps supplement your own views with the views of some of the seasoned members on here (and there are a fair few). Yes, there have been a fair few trolls over the years but most members on here are well meaning, even if they only profess to possess a rudimentary handle on all things NWP!

Conversely you have to remember that using teleconnections also relies on using data which is a projection to some extent. I've seen plenty of instances where promising background signals have faded into obscurity along with the stellar model output. November 2016 being a case in point, just 3 months ago. I don't think people aim to disappoint the majority as for one that line of thinking comes across as slightly paranoid and secondly, people cannot control weather or the atmosphere- they can merely comment on what is unfolding and how they expect it to unfold going forward. Their point is just as valid as the so called 'positive' people whom you suggest seem to have more weighting on this forum. Just because it's something that you personally don't wish to hear, it doesn't mean that they are trolling or being negative nellies. Soundbites like 'this is an unusual pattern for the models' and 'blocks won't be pushed aside so easily' and 'reverting to climatological norm' are fine but add nothing to the debate nor do they embellish any of the analysis of what we actually physically see represented in the modelling in front of us. Perspective and balance is sorely lacking sometimes in this thread. Being able to analyse model trends involves taking the rough with the smooth and not shutting your mind off to the less desirable outcome just because it's not what you want to see.

Come off it, so because Steve Murr says it, it must be true? Some statistics maybe? The other modelling has slowly been coming round to the ECM over the past 24 hours. Yes, it underestimated uppers for this weekend somewhat for a couple of runs, but I'm pretty sure it was the first model to spot the long draw SSE'ly for next week and now we get a failed retrogression attempt, an attempt the ECM has never been interested in. All models have their flaws and the only reason that UKMO gets less flak is because it stops at day 6!

By day 10 it would definitely feel like spring...some actual warm uppers spreading northwards along with it. Best to keep an open mind and not discount anything. Anyway, I'm still of the opinion any warm up will be fairly brief, even if the first Greenland high attempt fails

Some unsavoury attitudes towards Warren on here this afternoon...Not nice to see given he's only commenting on this run & what he sees infront of him. Reminiscent of some of the crap that has been thrown at me for going against expectations in the past. It was obvious early on when it started aligning to the ECM around days 5/6 that it would be more of a slog to get heights to Greenland (not to say it's impossible on this run, mind).

It's not that stupid, the source of the air is actually Africa!!

It has stepped towards the ECM at 144 The ECM chart is above...GFS very similar..

GFS following earlier ECM at 144 ECM leading the way with the progression it seems

Some nice Greenland ridges in there at 240/252 hrs Improves further as we lose ridge to east

Very nice last frame indeed...Some bitter cold heading our way after that little Atlantic low clears through and heights rise once more behind.

So close to a snowmaker Mucka, so close By the very end of the run it still looks like it wants to 'go there' RE cold from the N/NE. Late Feb/early March Cold from the NE is so fun...convective goodness!

And both models have backed the Canadian vortex off ever so slightly 120/144 hours. Still waiting on the 144 UKMO chart though. Tense viewing from here now... Can we get upstream to play ball?

Yes, it was the Friday that week but sheeeesh I've never seen snow like it. Torrential would be an understatement. Remember getting back home after hours stranded on a bus from Stoke, looking at the old BBC radar and seeing the lime greens having been right over us. What a late afternoon/early evening that was! Must have had about 10cm which fell in the space of about an hour and melted after just as quick! I was in Chester on a uni field trip for most of the day and remember being sat in the pub at dinner, noting that where the forecasts had been for snow to rain, they had now changed to a huge swathe of snow across the Midlands. Very unexpected, especially at that intensity. Seem to remember it died out fairly quickly to the N of here. Yes @I remember Atlantic 252 the forecasts were initially well out! I will never lump 2006-2007 winter in with the truly crap ones for that event alone. Not been topped in intensity since here.

It's plausible...it retrogresses the HP but just a little too much...There were a few GEFS perts like that in the 12z suite

That's GFS low res for you...no way that low behaves like that if that was being modelled within hi-res. All academic anyway as it's the trending we're interested in at those timeframes.

Well this is nice to see ; )

Well sometimes I can see myself, other times I can't. Sometimes people show up, sometimes people don't (the same people that is). No idea what is wrong.

I think even the ECM would get there eventually. I think the easterly and then Greenland heights are two separate evolutions- it's just it had looked initially like we may go seamlessly from one to the other. As often is the case where the UK is concerned, it very rarely pans out like that.

JMA also goes down the subsiding high route so it is some form of trend this evening. I think it's because rather than a tendency to split, the trop PV is shown to displace instead...at least initially. Upstream developments will become even more critical than usual in instances like these

To me it's a no brainer. It has been a fairly well mapped out progression for a while. My only doubts have been over timing, I initially thought back end of Feb into March...but as ever we'll see.

From the hemispheric view it's a chart that would lead to people thinking spring had sprung...only to be plunged back into ice and snow a few days later. Trop vortex draining completely draining to Siberian side.

So which route do you want to take ECM?? Euro high or Greenland high... Choice is yours And no, you can't choose both.

Yes, the Scandi high sinking rather than retrogressing was a cluster in the GEFS. I'd say a minority but a significant one at that. This run wants to try and raise N Atlantic heights regardless. Looks caught in two minds...two conflicting signals?

Pert 18 is probably one of the best structured Greenland highs you'll ever see EDIT: just seen Mucka has already picked up on this pert!