Midlands Ice Age

Not too active on here as its very dull and quite cool around here today!! Oh yes, I am sure that the forecast of us missing any snow has helped as well However I am still not convinced that we will miss out as the less cold weather moves in next week. Keep your pecker up! MIA

At the end of a long series of posts... One thing seems to have been missed in the above reviews,,, That if indeed as the later more progressive model runs are developing less high pressure (I wont call it low pressure just yet) to the North, then this will encourage the low to the SW to move on a more northerly track than was expected, with resultant snowfall further into southern England.. If the high to the north remains then this will encourage retention of the colder drier weather, over southern UK as it will indeed push the low further south.. PS I've just seen the MO and Met and Der reviews.... MIA

Whilst I understand what you are saying.... If you can get down to the physics (maybe chemistry) then that also ought to be possible. Summary - we are no where near there yet from a 'software' point of view. I have spent much time looking at 'the weather' since retiring (It has always been a big interest), and some of the characteristics closely resemble share dealing systems, with apparently 'outside' influence having a large impact. Is this the same as a random 'butterfly' effect in our hobby/ pasttime?. Also, I did spend sometime working on share-dealing and trading systems, which I put to use when I retired. (more good, though some bad), and/but they do also follow 'weekly' trends, which need to be built in the standard share models. Anyway probably enough on this sort of topic before the afternoon fun and games begin. MIA

Derecho... 30 years of modelling, programming , analysis, technology design and implementation has left its scars on me. Twenty years ago we needed more machine power. Now, unless we sort out the assumptions and get them analysed correctly into mathematics we will only magnify the errors as we push ever deeper into being able to look at ever more local detail. Tamara is showing where some of the current assumptions are wrong, or at least give a totally different view. . People on here showed how the stratosphere could affect things greatly. (10 years ago) This was incorporated into the models (though I believe is now possibly over responsive (see below)). The only people to gain by increasing the computing power right now are 1) computer salesmen, and 2) system design specialists who have no further ideas as to how to improve the current models. Incorrect assumptions ALWAYS increase volatility in output. Increased computing power will only serve to show up any design errors. I appreciate that increasing the spread by the changing the input criteria, is one method of reducing any errors. But the initial 'errors' are still present, and will only serve to produce more chaos. I am talking about from where the models are standing today (which is much better than they were 5-10 years ago). Spending hundreds of millions on more computing power right now will not give the same rewards as ensuring some of the 'unknowns' are fully researched and included as regards the accuracy of the models.. 1) Extra notes.... Take today and this graphic taken from the above (to be saved).... The whole of even the western hemisphere has been impacted by the the slope and shape of the high forecast to develop over the Bering Ocean. Changing its inclination or intensity will dramatically change the forecast for the whole Northern Hemisphere via mechanisms previously discussed on here. Both the ECM and GFS have shown this happening over the last week. Both had to withdraw from their positions . Something is not 'spot on'. Will they this time? Can you tell me? I assume that this situations has come about as to their incorrectly handling the totality of the 'telecomms' signals. 2) As to whether the models are accurate from a scientific pov. I cannot make any comments (you are correct). However they have now released documentation on the 'CC' models, which were based upon forecast models (I am told), and for the previous release of them there were still around 25 assumptions which were not yet proven. If they were missing in the 'CC' models then I assume they were not in the forecast models. - In the CC models they substituted parameters. Sorry to mention the XX word banned on here - MODS. So IMO opinion, (FWIW) there is still quite a way to go before we can say that all the assumptions (and therefore the absolutely correct science) built into the models, means that models are correct. Until that happens putting in more computing power will increase chaos (not decrease). that is what my 30 odd years of experience has taught me. MIA Original post: https://community.netweather.tv/topic/99760-model-output-discussion-colder-but-how-cold-and-for-how-long/?do=findComment&comment=5008583

Derecho... 30 years of modelling, programming , analysis, technology design and implementation has left its scars on me. Twenty years ago we needed more machine power. Now, unless we sort out the assumptions and get them analysed correctly into mathematics we will only magnify the errors as we push ever deeper into being able to look at ever more local detail. Tamara is showing where some of the current assumptions are wrong, or at least give a totally different view. . People on here showed how the stratosphere could affect things greatly. (10 years ago) This was incorporated into the models (though I believe is now possibly over responsive (see below)). The only people to gain by increasing the computing power right now are 1) computer salesmen, and 2) system design specialists who have no further ideas as to how to improve the current models. Incorrect assumptions ALWAYS increase volatility in output. Increased computing power will only serve to show up any design errors. I appreciate that increasing the spread by the changing the input criteria, is one method of reducing any errors. But the initial 'errors' are still present, and will only serve to produce more chaos. I am talking about from where the models are standing today (which is much better than they were 5-10 years ago). Spending hundreds of millions on more computing power right now will not give the same rewards as ensuring some of the 'unknowns' are fully researched and included as regards the accuracy of the models.. 1) Extra notes.... Take today and this graphic taken from the above (to be saved).... The whole of even the western hemisphere has been impacted by the the slope and shape of the high forecast to develop over the Bering Ocean. Changing its inclination or intensity will dramatically change the forecast for the whole Northern Hemisphere via mechanisms previously discussed on here. Both the ECM and GFS have shown this happening over the last week. Both had to withdraw from their positions . Something is not 'spot on'. Will they this time? Can you tell me? I assume that this situations has come about as to their incorrectly handling the totality of the 'telecomms' signals. 2) As to whether the models are accurate from a scientific pov. I cannot make any comments (you are correct). However they have now released documentation on the 'CC' models, which were based upon forecast models (I am told), and for the previous release of them there were still around 25 assumptions which were not yet proven. If they were missing in the 'CC' models then I assume they were not in the forecast models. - In the CC models they substituted parameters. Sorry to mention the XX word banned on here - MODS. So IMO opinion, (FWIW) there is still quite a way to go before we can say that all the assumptions (and therefore the absolutely correct science) built into the models, means that models are correct. Until that happens putting in more computing power will increase chaos (not decrease). that is what my 30 odd years of experience has taught me. MIA

I am afraid that we are now getting to the point that it is now the errors and assumptions in the software are causing the greater errors. Until you get those sorted out you will just magnify the errors, and end up with even more chaos. Spoken after 40 years in the software industry. MIA

@Tamara (and Met4).. Would you think that the Met office/ BBC should send out a red alert for the upcoming? (Or possibly not in the BBC's case as would they even understand it?) I must say I am learning more and more from you on these connections with the Tropics. It gives a longer term (1 week or more), that we can view the atmospheric characteristics, and have a good chance of being correct. Like Met4 , and although I am no expert yet, I really find your analysis interesting. Lets hope that you are correct. Despite my 80 years of age I am happy (for the first time really) that despite the advancements in computer technology we are making real progress in being able to forecast for everybody - even in today's chaotic worlds. I have nothing against computers - I spent a whole career working with them - but unless you are absolutely spot on with your assumptions - they can be a long way out. Currently most of your assumptions are not handled by the large beasts at all, because there is no way that they can mathematically be programmed (just yet!). But I am sure it will come now. With many thanks .. MIA

Thanks for this Scott... Below you will find some of my posts from just before Xmas on the latest at that point. The second is the more interesting. All I can say is that the trend of increasing sea ice both in the Arctic and Antarctic has if anything INCREASED over the last couple of weeks - maybe just easing off very recently although I'll do today's update a little later on.. I put together several posts (early Oct - Nov timescale on here) with more details of what may happen, where it was suggested that 2 years would be about correct for any impacts. No one knows as it is the first volcanic eruption of this type we have witnessed in recent history (going back 200 years or more). These impacts were expected to be positive for the first 12 - 18 months (approx 0.1C increase worldwide) and caused by H2O in the troposphere, but then as it was washed away and dissipated up into the strat it would be expected to reverse that trend, and it is currently being investigated by scientists worldwide, but is being ignored by the current news of the record warming in 2023... I must admit that there is no other viable explanation for this sudden increase in worldwide ice... Certainly not repeated by the News channels. I also am at a loss to explain why it is happening. I have picked up my 2 recent posts as discussed above and shown below , but the posts has become too large to include the original posts (2 on Nov 22nd, and particularly the posts on Nov 24th) , so I invite everyone interested to go back and read into the Oct to Nov timescale (if still interested). It certainly is a rare phenomena (-um ?) these days, and will give some people a real headache.. Current charts are still showing the same trends and are even more difficult to explain away. MIA

Good post ECM ... Was producing a post on the old thread but it got locked out. I am using your view of the NH to further my post of last night. Since my post last night, the GFS has 'railed' in the Pacific high somewhat, but it has also aligned it more east west than it was yesterday. This has allowed some of the cold Arctic air to slide further south (southern jet increased) over there, and not directly over the pole. This has enabled the jet to move a bit further south into the Atlantic and produced more 'randomness' in the Atlantic sector...... Meanwhile the ECM and MO have both picked up the signal for the Pacific high, but it is still a very weak affair and it is aligned similarly to the GFS. This has then consequently caused the pull back somewhat (so far) of the high retrogression in the Atlantic. There is a little further to go before we reach the middle ground position, for all the models I suspect. . Also it does show that the Pacific high is unlikely to be a permanent feature as it wanes pretty quickly. It, however, has not significantly affected the forecast temperatures over our side (more generally) - yet. As usual, as I suggested last night could happen, we are ending up in a half way house 'blended' solution which is not without interest for going forward into February, as it enables the possibility of a permanent Scandy to develop over the snowfields there....... It also shows that the signal yesterday on the GFS was real, though as usual, it overestimated the position and strength. All very interesting from a learning of the models point of view. But what has cause the sudden appearance of the Pacific high? MIA

THis is my take, but it facts what we have seen develop so far... I have used the above chart to demonstrate that the whole of the NH, not just our portion of it, is involved in the change, and not because it shows an easterly. Just look AT IT..... What stands out ? It is the huge fully rounded high pressure over the Bering Ocean and the Aleutians. that one cannot avoid. If it is not this shape but a wedge shape then it will not effect what happens, because it will block the low pressures and not force them over the top. This high starts to form at exactly the same time (day 4 or 5) that the atmospheric pattern starts to deteriorate on our side of the globe. I have explained the process before, the high pushes the cold Arctic into North America which destroys any chance that our retrogressing high has of reaching Greenland. This is EXACTLY the same pattern that the ECM had last week for 36 hrs, before it too decided it would not be a driver and reverted back to the other models situation I suggest that exactly the same situation will happen with the GFS, as the models are known to flounder when a strat event approaches.. (however one day it will occur, but I suspect that most models will see it happening at the same time). Has it called it correctly? . I expect that we will find out by Wednesday evening, when it will slowly start to drop the pattern, exactly as the ECM did. If you want some good news then it is that most routes seem to return us (the Atlantic) to a cold scenario, but necessarily blocked, which should enhance the chances of snow. The big (IMO) question is what has led it along this pathway, and is up the wrong path? MIA Original post: https://community.netweather.tv/topic/99706-model-output-discussion-into-2024/?do=findComment&comment=5004313

THis is my take, but it fits the facts that we have seen develop so far... I have used the above chart to demonstrate that the whole of the NH, not just our portion of it, is involved in the change, and not because it shows an easterly. Just look AT IT..... What stands out ? It is the huge fully rounded high pressure over the Bering Ocean and the Aleutians. that one cannot avoid. If it is not this shape but a wedge shape then it will not effect what happens, because it will block the low pressures and not force them over the top. This high starts to form at exactly the same time (day 4 or 5) that the atmospheric pattern starts to deteriorate on our side of the globe. I have explained the process before, the high pushes the cold Arctic into North America which destroys any chance that our retrogressing high has of reaching Greenland. This is EXACTLY the same pattern that the ECM had last week for 36 hrs, before it too decided it would not be a driver and reverted back to the other models situation I suggest that exactly the same situation will happen with the GFS, as the models are known to flounder when a strat event approaches.. (however one day it will occur, but I suspect that most models will see it happening at the same time). Has it called it correctly? . I expect that we will find out by Wednesday evening, when it will slowly start to drop the pattern, exactly as the ECM did. If you want some good news then it is that most routes seem to return us (the Atlantic) to a cold scenario, but necessarily blocked, which should enhance the chances of snow. The big (IMO) question is what has led it along this pathway, and is up the wrong path? MIA

***** SEA ICE IN THE NORTH SEA ****** Thought it worth a post to back up what Aleman and I were discussing above. Believe it or not it looks as if it has just happened in the North Sea, !!!!!!!!!! Was looking at the spread of the sea ice in the Baltic (graph below) whilst I checked the Masie Sea ice map for the Baltic (screenshot below) If you zoom in on the screenshot you can see a lot of 'sea ice' off the west coast of Denmark. (Part of the North Sea) Now I know it has been cold over there but not yet cold enough for sea ice to widely form. They have had a lot of snow however.... I think it must be this which has laid down a layer of slush on the sea surface and which has now frozen over. Also apparent should be a small patch of, I think, natural sea ice off the east coast of Southern Norway,, at the end of the newly laid down sea ice along the Baltic coasts of South Sweden. These situations I have not witnessed before this century. 2010 was the last major freeze in the Baltic. I do not recall this happened even then. Happy times... MIA

I disagree here New.. As per my post above ECMWF had exactly the same wobble last weekend (and days earlier) The real interest is what is causing the 2 models to behave in this way. MIA

IDO.. I think you have hit the nail on the head with that jpg. Going back to the weekend when the ECMWF was having a wobble I produced post which showed that it was the Pacific grossly inflated and rounded high that had thrown a spanner in its works. It caused all the Vortex to move back from Siberia to Greenland for a few runs. I put it down to strat warming. The GFS now seems to have come across the same requirement - with exactly the same results. The question is - what is causing the models to think that the Aleutian high is going to happen? Everything seems to follow on from that movement.. To fit it in, everything else moves around. It would appear that it does not know how to fit it in as it 'jumbles' from run to run. The net result appears to be chaos. Could it be that it too is picking up on the current strat warming? and that is what is causing the model chaos. I am convinced that this is what is throwing the model. MIA MIA.

The GFS looks to me like a game of chess.. It seems to knows where it wants to get to .....(governed by the MJO?) (I also know that this is not how the models work!!) , and it cannot get there without rearranging all the major pieces. Something doesn't look quite right in the way that it moves the prize pieces around the board. MIA

No one up yet this morning? A beautiful day at the moment, but with the temp still below freezing -0.5C and a stiff wind it feels like the Baltic has arrived. Oh wait a minute it has! My pond has surface level ice this morning. Wasn't expecting that just yet. Looks like a coldish frosty, DRY, week , before the colder air reaches us at the weekend. After that... Could be a major blizzard, could be rain, could be a snow to rain to snow...... its up in the air. This winter is more like the good old fashioned 60 - 80's I remember of old! Long may it continue for you guys. These totally Atlantic driven days are really so boring. MIA

Thanks Aleman.. I hadn't forgotten your views, and I do agree with them, but I believe in the Jan Mayen Islands they are talking about the main pack, showing its hand. I am suggesting that that there is a chance it may visit Iceland this year (though still unlikely) MIA

Good balanced post Nick.. We all know that the GFS tends to blow up the lows a bit towards FI. I expect we will end up in a half way house situation, which means nothing will get resolved until the last day. Back to the 60-80;s again. MIA

Following a post that I made in the MAD thread I realised that I had not performed an end of month review of the Arctic volume and thickness . So here I go to correct the situation. Despite the rapid increase in surface ice (extent) , the volume and thickness graphs have not followed suite. This is not surprising as 95% of the NH ice is stored within the Arctic basin and we know that the large amounts of sea ice increases are new shallow ice, and have been recorded outside the basin. However, it is worth exploring in a bit more detail and here is my normal chart for thickness and volume from the DMI - and for end of year So these are not showing much in the way of change . However, below the totals are some large regional changes which can be seen in the graphicals below, (thanks to the ASIF) - for totals and the following for all others within the 'western' basin - and the following for eastern oceans = These show (as we have experienced elsewhere) that the Russian oceans are rapidly gaining ice , whereas the western US oceans seem to be below average, and hence are losing ice.. This seems to be the major difference that the ice is showing this year. More ice than recently in the East, less than the last few years in the West. It applies to all measurements of ice. The real question is why has this happened. It also seems to be leading to more surface ice but will it affect longer term ice figures? MIA

Interesting this John. Ice has only appeared once or twice round the island this century. It happened reasonably regularly last century. It is SW of Svalbard and about 200 miles from the Greenland land mass. Its the little red dot. It is the dot here of Greenland, with ice close by (as you suggest). The famous Peter Wadhams has been keeping data from the island, and has identified 2 conditions for the ice to appear here. 1) During a cold winter - when there is a large flow through Fram (this year?) . It is the most common form/condition by a long way. 2) Late in the freeze season when a strong Arctic anticyclone has formed, and ice gets transferred from the Greenland ice pack to the SE., This year it could happen by combining both causes!! It also happens that it seems to be a regular precursor to Icelandic sea ice. The following is a video of the ices approach in detail - https://seaice.de/AMSR2_Central_Arctic_SIC-LEADS.gif MIA

Can I breathe out yet? Only I don't feel too good now. MIA

Had a few snow grains land on the windscreen of the car parked in Acocks Green about 45 mins ago. Wouldn't have seen it if I hadn't been in the car. So has also reached Brum. Good news is that even this light it is at least snow, MIA

I think that I might qualify in that category Well just look at my name.... Of course I am. Maybe not reaching the south coast... but the M4 will be OK. Seriously though?...... I am waking from my 50 years of snoozing... My alarm clock went off early this morning when the sea ice extent figures from JAXA appeared and we have the highest amount of sea ice for the last 21 years. It is now greater than it was in the 2000's. There is enough cold air in the Arctic at the moment for everyone to share. PS... I have no idea why....... especially when apparently worldwide temps are so high. Even the Antarctic extent has rapidly caught up with its averages!!. MIdlands Ice Age Original post: https://community.netweather.tv/topic/99706-model-output-discussion-into-2024/?do=findComment&comment=5000985

This would tie in with the longer trek across the North Sea for here compared to the SE. The convergence zone off Denmark is also very hopeful and reassuring that we may pick up a good streamer later on. Against that we have the higher heights reducing the amount of water vapor. Are the '850's stil expected to drop to -10C? MIA

I think that I might qualify in that category Well just look at my name.... Of course I am. Maybe not reaching the south coast... but the M4 will be OK. Seriously though?...... I am waking from my 50 years of snoozing... My alarm clock went off early this morning when the sea ice extent figures from JAXA appeared and we have the highest amount of sea ice for the last 21 years. It is now greater than it was in the 2000's. There is enough cold air in the Arctic at the moment for everyone to share. PS... I have no idea why....... especially when apparently worldwide temps are so high. Even the Antarctic extent has rapidly caught up with its averages!!. MIdlands Ice Age