Roger J Smith

I realize that average temperatures don't rise very much from month to month in England, but still, people need to keep in mind when talking about the mean temperature for the first ten or fifteen days of a spring month that the "normal" or average for that period will be lower than the overall monthly mean. Just using rough figures, I would assume that if the mean April temperature was 8.5 degrees, then the mean first half of April temperature would probably be around 7 and the mean second half would be around 10. So at the moment, when you're looking at what it would take to achieve various CET predictions, you're looking at a prediction for the second half of April and whether that is above or below normal relates to 10, not 8.5, if you see what I mean. Mr Data could no doubt fine tune my half-monthly estimates to add some precision to this point.

From the GFS I would estimate the (partial) April CET will rise to around 8.5 by the Easter weekend and then edge up through the 9-10 range towards the end of the month. Given the chance, I would stay with 10.2 for now. While FI may be unreliable, the error could go either way and if it went positive, you'd be looking at record warmth at times later this month.

I'd say everyone's still in the game here, the April CET will probably be sitting at about 6 or 6.5 by next Tuesday, then it's obviously going to turn warmer mid-month, the question being, really warm or just back to normal warm? So by the 20th the CET will probably be anywhere between 8 and 11. Then it all depends on how long the warmth lasts. Lots of fun watching it all unfold.

I'd like to add my thanks to all those who worked on this particular comparison thread as well as all other model evaluation threads on NW. It has broadened my understanding considerably, and at the same time led to some conclusions of my own, which I'll share here for whatever use they may be (slim to none? we'll see) ... From the forecast competition, I have come to the conclusion that the GFS is generally the best bet, although it pays to compromise with the GEM or the ECM when they vary considerably from it. The most important factoid I can offer is that the models generally show marked degradation in accuracy nowadays between day 6 and day 8. In other words, you're further ahead in a competition situation to wait out day 7 and use day 6, it improves the forecast by more than the arbitrary score bonus you lose which amounts to about 2-3 C degrees in the scoring system or 12 hours in the timing of pressure or precip events. If you see what I'm getting at, the state of the art for longer term medium range forecasts is now about 6 days from this experience. After that, the improvement is not worth waiting for in scoring terms as John has things set up. And I think that's a valuable perspective on how to use 5-7 day forecast models. The other rather significant point I could offer here is that the present operational status of the GFS and other models seems to point in the same direction as my research -- there is something "out there" introducing new energy cycles that our very impressive modern technology cannot easily solve or forecast, because it has not yet begun to arrive in the system. I think you'll see from first principles that if energy from outside the system is guiding weather systems, but this energy has a life cycle of about 10-15 days, then its first significant appearance in the "time zero" condition will be around 5 to 7.5 days ahead of the event. This may further explain what my research has been pointing towards, events in the magnetic field that can only be predicted from a cause-and-effect theory, and not from an empirical model. So all of this research rather tends to reinforce my notion that my own research is on the right track and I really hope that sooner or later this concept will "turn on the light bulb" in the profession in general -- some sort of super model that goes out to day 5 or 6 using the current equations and techniques, then shapes the further development more and more from the theoretical base of timing, could open the door to an accuracy level in the 7-15 day period or further, similar to the current 5-6 day accuracy. In other words, no more Fantasy Island as we now understand that term. Well, there's no doubt that this is somewhat of a vast leap forward in conceptual thinking and I wish there was some easy way that I could demonstrate this. I tried to do that in December with a map 30 days in advance that some agreed was about as accurate as the usual 5-6 day GFS type forecast. I will try to work out some way of operationally testing out this idea in general in the next few months, but severe blocking like we had in Jan-Feb tends to throw a monkey wrench into my technique, so I have been thinking of going at this in the easier summer to autumn part of the year, getting some experience to refine the method, then seeing if a working 7-15 day adjusted GFS might be within reach. If so, there's no telling how far the thing could be pushed before longer-range trends degraded the accuracy. Big idea, long post, and probably a fairly long pause before anything else happens. I'm working on this whenever I can, though. One thing for certain, I have made more progress by stumbling into NW by accident than I could have foreseen a year ago when I was trading insults with Bill Farkin on the Beeb site. That was then, this is now.

Resistance is futile, the space warming devices are locked and loaded. But they won't be working until about the 10th.

I don't know if perhaps I am totally misunderstanding comments made above, but there is no possible way that the UK experiences more tornadoes than the USA on any comparative scale, whether it would be events per square km, events seen by people, or events in total. In fact, I would estimate the relative chance of a point in the central U.S. seeing a tornado in a given period as 100 to 1,000 times greater than the chance of a point in the UK seeing one. There might be more of a 1:1 ratio if you took areas outside the main tornado zone such as the New England states. I'm sure nobody would advance an argument comparing intensity, but this argument regarding frequency has been advanced here before and also on other UK weather sites, and frankly I find it entirely inconceivable. The U.K. is roughly the same size as Kansas or Missouri so you could easily check out the statistics and verify that the frequency is far greater in the central United States. A state like Kansas or Missouri can expect to have several hundred tornado reports in the average year. Even in Ohio or Michigan which are not in the main part of "tornado alley" there are probably ten times as many tornadoes per year as in southern England. The part of the argument that does resonate with me is that tornadoes are more frequent than some people imagine in more temperate climate zones. They also occur largely unreported in the wide open spaces of the Canadian prairies and in sparsely populated northern Ontario. I remember coming across an obvious tornado damage trail with rotation of fallen trees about a mile from a summer camp where a heavy thunderstorm without wind damage had been experienced the previous night. Nobody in the camp had any idea that a tornado, probably an F2 from the size of trees down, had come that close to where 200 people were gathered.

Here's an odd factoid about April CET, if I can believe the tables I am using (copied from HH Lamb's book in 1981 then updated from the metO website for recent years) ... With all this talk of global warming, there has not been an April CET above 10 degrees since 1987, and yet there were four in the 1790s (between 1792 and 1798). What does it mean? Too many people driving SUVs in the George Washington era, that's what. And you can quote me. I would say that England is overdue for a warm April, so let's say 10.2 and see just how badly wrong that can go. But seriously, I see a lot of signs of a warm April, such as a lot of cold air just about everywhere but the eastern Atlantic. The whole northern hemisphere can't be cold at the same time, right? This last couple of days seems to foreshadow a warmish month, the blocking pattern seems subdued if not overwhelmed, and subdued is good enough for warming. Anyway, 10.2, and I look forward to reading those hilarious "what it will take" estimates from Mr Data towards the end of the month (10.2 - 35.7 etc). Look for particular warmth around the Easter weekend, by the way. That's when this 10.2 might get established then hold on for any last minute cooldowns.

Just updating the graph presented above to include December: 5.7....................................XXX.................................5.7 5.6...........................................................................5. 6 5.5.........................................................................5.5 5.4.............................XXX......................................5.4 5.3..................XXX.............XXX........XXX...............5.3 5.2..........XXX........................................................5.2 5.1..............................................(Mar)..................5.1 5.0........................................................................5.0 4.9.......................XXX...........................................4.9 4.8........................................................................4.8 4.7........................................................................4.7 4.6........................................................................4.6 4.5........................................................................4.5 4.4...............................................DDD..................4.4 4.3..........DDD...................................(Dec)............4.3 4.2..............................D/o.....................................4.2 4.1.................DDD..................DDD.......................4.1 4.0................ooo..................................................4.0 3.9........................ooo........DDDooo......................3.9 3.8.......................................................................3.8 3.7................OOO.DDD..................ooo.................3.7 3.6..........ooo....................ooo....(Feb)...................3.6 3.5.......................................................................3.5 3.4.......................................................................3.4 3.3.......................................................................3.3 3.2..........OOO......OOOOOO...................................3.2 3.1....................................OOO....OOO..................3.1 3.0.......................(Jan).........................................3.0 2.9.......................................................................2.9 2.8.......................................................................2.8 2.7..........................................OOO......................2.7 The mildest Decembers relative to normal occur in years 1 and 7, so since the data is set up in such a way that "year 7" is fairly similar to "year 1", checking the opposition dates for Mercury we find that mild Decembers are more likely to come when Mercury reaches inferior conjunction in the second half of the following February (after an earlier case in the previous late October). This basically suggests that any blocking near the UK in December from a December or January inferior conjunction will contribute to colder weather in December. Note in particular how the usual condition where December is a degree or so milder than January almost disappears in years 2-3. I think there may be more information locked in these files and available through a more detailed analysis by dates, so if I discover anything of interest from that research I will post it here as part of the 2006-07 winter forecast.

After posting the above, I thought it might be interesting to compare the three-month averages for the seven cases. These appear below in numerical form, the reader will see there is .....4.02.....4.34.....4.08.....4.28.....4.00.....4.11.....4.02 (mean temps Jan-Mar, C) not much variation here, but a slight tendency for the overall mean to be influenced by the January mean, which probably makes sense from a feedback perspective. In other words, there is nothing evidently at work here on a longer time scale than the postulated effect that moves fast enough to affect monthly temperatures, or if so, it is quite weak and probably has something to do with cyclogenesis around 60-65 N (which would be inhibited by the postulated blocking).

22 March 2006 CET temperatures and the Mercury block effect Having recently input the monthly temperatures for the CET series for Jan, Feb and March, the following graph illustrates the existence of the postulated Mercury blocking effect in these temperatures. Although I have used the entire period of record here, the first and second halves of the data for each month look similar to one another, with a warming of about 1 degree generally from the first half (about 1659-1832) to the second half. The data are arranged so that Mercury's orbital period is normalized into 6.6 year segments. Since the conjunction dates repeat every 46 years, the way this was done in practical terms was to repeat a series of (7,6,7,6,7,7,6) year segments throughout to get means for years one through seven of a repeating cycle. Within these data points, a range of about 17 days can be found from earliest to latest conjunction dates. To review briefly what has been stated in this thread before, the postulated Mercury block concept is as follows: a large arctic high develops in winter at high latitudes and moves retrograde from Eurasia to North America so that it passes near the NMP around the times of Mercury's inferior conjunction (the date where Mercury overtakes the earth). This date is about 17 days earlier each successive year, so that after six or seven years a new series begins. The way the dates work here, the first year in the seven-year series has a Mercury inferior conjunction in late February. So, as you go through the seven-year series, the timing for this block to pass through northwest Europe is roughly around early February at the beginning of the cycle, moving back through January then December in points two, three and four, and then impacting the data from a later series towards the end (late March then early March conjunctions for points five and six). The current winter was a "year six" and in the more complex cycle, is a year 26 so that next winter is a "year one" in the data. The graph below shows the actual values arranged in this complex 6.6 year cycle: 5.7....................................XXX.................................5.7 5.6...........................................................................5. 6 5.5...........................................................................5. 5 5.4..........................XXX...........................................5.4 5.3................XXX..........XXX.....XXX..........................5.3 5.2..........XXX...........................................................5.2 5.1..............................................(Mar).....................5.1 5.0...........................................................................5. 0 4.9.....................XXX................................................4.9 4.8...........................................................................4. 8 4.7...........................................................................4. 7 4.6...........................................................................4. 6 4.5...........................................................................4. 5 4.4...........................................................................4. 4 4.3...........................................................................4. 3 4.2............................ooo..........................................4.2 4.1..............................................(Feb)......................4.1 4.0...............ooo.......................................................4.0 3.9.....................ooo..............ooo.............................3.9 3.8...........................................................................3. 8 3.7................OOO......................ooo.........................3.7 3.6..........ooo....................ooo..................................3.6 3.5...........................................................................3. 5 3.4...........................................................................3. 4 3.3...........................................................................3. 3 3.2..........OOO......OOOOOO.......................................3.2 3.1....................................OOO....OOO......................3.1 3.0.......................(Jan).............................................3.0 2.9...........................................................................2. 9 2.8...........................................................................2. 8 2.7..........................................OOO..........................2.7 Mean date of inf.con. ..............2/15..1/30..1/13..12/28..12/11..3/15..2/26 Note then for the date of inferior conjunction, the cases with a December date refer to a winter where the Mercury block can be expected to form early (in November) then move past Greenland in December (of the previous year to these data points). What do we see in the data, besides the upward drift of temperatures from January to March? For January, a year two is often milder than normal; this timing generally sees the Mercury block over the eastern Atlantic at lower latitudes in early January, then rapidly retrogressing across Greenland later in the month, to give the southwesterly rebound that we are currently seeing, around the end of the month. A year six may be colder than average, presumably because with that timing, the Mercury block is most likely to be near Sweden as it was at times this winter. The rest of the January data seem in general to be unmarked by this effect, although there are quite a few cold Januaries in the year seven data as well (this data point collects only about 60% of the numbers of years compared with the rest, so is somewhat less reliable). In February, the trend is towards a mild month when the block has moved past earlier in the winter (year four is the mildest). In the year four case, the next block in the series would normally be over Russia somewhere, to arrive near the UK in March. So these cases have no Mercury-related reason for cold blocking high pressure, and the statistics show an upward trend. Later, as the late February or March block develops, the mean temperature falls by almost a degree, which is fairly significant for this long a series. As I say, the more recent half of the data look similar (just all data is a little warmer). For March, coldest cases come in year three, when a late April or May blocking episode is indicated for Greenland. This means that the formative stages of this spring blocking pattern would be over Europe in March, especially late March, and given the orbital dynamics of Mercury, at a fairly high latitude then. By the current data point, year six, the indications are for a milder March. It would be interesting to look at the individual cases and see if there were a lot of mid-month reversals as this March and also 1947 indicated. In this data, 1947 is also a year six. Of course, the first week of this month was so cold that the overall CET is not likely to reach even this long-term average of 5.69 degrees (for year six). However, the Mercury effect is not postulated to be more than 10-15 per cent of the overall variability in the astro-climatology model. Although the second half of the data resemble the long-term average, I noted that for March the warming effect seen in year six over the long term can be seen more in years five and seven as well in the more recent data. This may indicate that with the NMP moving north through the period of record, the track of the Mercury block has shifted north and so the rebound effect is now stronger than it perhaps was in the 17th and 18th centuries. In fact, it may be that these particular processes are the actual cause of the atmospheric circulation changes associated with the modern warming. In other words, perhaps we should be looking for a cause for "global warming" in a more case-by-case breakdown, which would perhaps indicate that one type of weather pattern has become relatively more frequent, or stronger, while other types remain similar to past centuries. This is certainly the way many of us perceive the modern climate if indeed it has shifted at all -- some types of weather occur more frequently than they used to, or with more warming effect, or less cooling effect. In general, these sets of data give some indication of a general relationship between the postulated blocking effect of Mercury and the actual outcome in terms of monthly mean temperatures. However, it is a rather faint signal, probably in the range of 0.3 to 0.5 degrees in its overall effect on the mean temperature. I will post December figures in a day or two after I input them, but of course these will be shifted one data point to the right (the first December in the series will be a year 2, with a blank for year 1 in that part of the data).

My current revised CET estimate is 5.7 C.

Latest map (on a rather large scale) from Australia's weather service. Please note, the general link for all your down-under weather info is at bom.gov.au (bom = bureau of meteorology and sheep-dipping, Bruce) Okay, I can't download this as an image so block copy it: << http://www.bom.gov.au/weather/national/charts/synoptic.shtml >>

16 March 2006 _ 0615h Update for the faithful few ... the "Mercury block" has indeed reappeared as a strong high close to the NMP with a massive sprawling extent across Greenland and much of northern Canada. In 72h it is progged to extend a 1050 mb high south into Manitoba and this whole air mass will remain q.s. for some time over North America. Meanwhile, the retrograde high over northern Scotland appears to be the result of several different factors working together. First, the Mercury block likely has a second component caused by the field split at Mercury, so this is the second or trailing portion (at least in part). Also, the S-3 field is now over eastern Europe and both S-VI and S-VII have passed their eclipse positions to the NNW of the loop centre, moving SW. The disturbance moving across the UK today is the S-VI energy component. The high therefore also has some support from rotation in the S-3 field. And the J-4 field in this vicinity is also supporting high-latitude high pressure development but not with any retrograde motion. This may explain some of the current model confusion, since part of this high is about to retrogress, part is due to move southwest then south, and part is quasi-stationary. After today's event which appears to have good support for snowfall development in southern Scotland, northern England, north Wales and later Ireland, the model solution that may work best is the GEM, with one more strong cold outbreak around Monday-Tuesday, then the GFS may have a handle on events later next week. Around Thursday-Friday, the upstream S-2 field should have strong low pressure rotating counter-clockwise into the eastern Atlantic, and this should lift the remaining northerly block and shatter it altogether around Wednesday 22nd. Therefore, look for some cold and a turn towards rather mild conditions next week.

Well, I've got some weather right here. Rain at times mixed with snow this morning, still raining now but milder at 6 C, winds around this area S 30-40 mph at least, some areas 40-55 mph, and an even stronger W wind appearing on the west coast of Vancouver Island about to hit this area in an hour or two. B) Heavy snow coming in for the two NW members in the Rockies.

Good idea, but to have any real idea which models are performing better than others, you would need about three months of data at the very least. It may be the case that some models handle certain situations better than others, so that there wouldn't just be one "superior" model but the forecaster should be attuned to which models handle given situations better than others. Here's my subjective opinions of these models based on about a year of fairly regular 7-day forecasting (which I do off-site more regularly than here) -- GFS -- Like NW, I regard the GFS as the least of all evils. It is often the most accurate of the lot. I have come to suspect that it has an inherent bias to overdevelop Scandinavian highs and extend them too far across the North Sea too quickly. A case in point will be available for review Friday-Saturday. GEM -- This model has proved itself to be better than the GFS over most of North America. Therefore its solutions for the western Atlantic are always worth holding up for comparison. Although the GEM has a reputation for being too progressive over Europe, this tendency has shown signs of reducing since October. I can think of three situations this past winter where the GEM had a better solution than the GFS. Therefore would say always be cautious about differences such as this weekend's depicted warming. UKMO -- I find that it often sides with the GEM when there is a model discrepancy, but I would admit limited contact with it so far, and I plan to consult it more in the future. So no qualified opinion on it yet. EURO -- Hit or miss. Either it goes off on a tangent that is off-side with other models and proves to be wrong, or it spots a trend early and develops it faster. ALL THE REST -- Seldom improve on these three, in my admittedly limited experience looking at them. Can't remember a major outlier in them succeeding. MY RESEARCH MODEL -- Coming up fast from behind, you may be using it by 2010 at the rate things are going. Not computerized therefore remains a subjective adjustment technique using GEM or GFS, as preferred. Has one demonstrated 30-day map forecast success (30 Dec 2005) as well as one documented 28-day verbal forecast (23-24 Oct 2005). I am working on parameters for at least systematic placement of highs and lows with subjective detail added.

4 March 2006 _ 2230h With reference to the previous post, I have noted that the satellite imagery updates on the link, so my comments made at the time of posting refer to the image as it appeared then (0245z). Anyone looking at this thread beyond 6-7 March 2006 should note that if the link is still updating (let's say to 30 April or whatever) then the discussion will no longer be supported by the image that appears. Looking ahead to Tuesday-Wednesday, the northern max lunar event occurs with ideal upper support for storm development. Also in the research model, the J-field energy loop will have very strong dynamics around 12-15z Wednesday 8th. All fast-moving inner loops (in the counter-clockwise rotation of a J-field) will be aligned and moving across a zone predicted to be southern England to northern France at this time. I will post detailed analysis closer to the event, but based on a blend of GFS model guidance and research guidance, I am currently predicting a moderate severe storm risk with hail, wind gusts to 55 knots, and heavy thunderstorms with rain of 20-40 mm in some parts of southern England on Wednesday morning and mid-day. Flood risk from snowmelt contribution to runoff may be fairly high in parts of Wales and the Severn valley. Since the above satellite image (previous post) updates, check it at any time Monday or Tuesday to see the developing storm around 20-30 W. The J-field elements for this storm are largely out of view here at present. These will flow back through the magnetic field on Monday and be assembled into the warm frontal complex ahead of the developing S-field deep low near 45W that occurs Monday as S-V overtakes S-VI. While this low will move NNE under that energy regime, the warm fronts will loop back towards Ireland in the developing J-field energy regime further east. In other words, the European J-field will capture energy from the western Atlantic S-field and use that to feed rapid or even explosive development Tuesday around 15 W. The end result will be a very strong frontal system embedded in a low of about 980 mb which slides east across Ireland Tuesday night and England on Wednesday.

4 March 2006 0330h First of all, the March astronomical agenda: DATE>>>00.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.08.09.10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.19.20.21.22.23.24 Mar01--................................................................................ ...................................... Mar02---....................................................SpO......................... ..................................... Mar03---................................................................................ .................................. Mar04---......................................................JO........................ ................................... Mar05--...............A................................................................ ................................... Mar06---..............................MaC............................................... .................................. Mar07---................................................................................ ..............N.MAX.............. Mar08---................................................................................ ...................................... Mar09---................................................................................ .................................... Mar10---...............................................................................S C.............................. Mar11---......NO........................................................................ ................................ Mar12---..........Merc.IC............................................................... ................................ Mar13---...........apogee....RC......UO................................................. ............................ Mar14---................................................................................ ................................... Mar15---.FULL........................................................................... .................................. Mar16---................................................................................ .................................... Mar17---.................................................SpC............................ ................................. Mar18---................................................................................ .................................... Mar19---.......................................................................JC....... .................................... Mar20---................................................................................ .................................... Mar21---.................A.............................................................. .................................. Mar22---..............................................................................Ma O................................... Mar23---..S.MAX......................................................................... ................................... Mar24---................................................................................ ................................... Mar25---......SO........................................................................ ......................VC........ Mar26--...NC........................................................................... ..................................... Mar27---.............RO...........................................UC.................... .................................. Mar28---..........................Perigee............................................... ............................................. Mar29---.........................................NEW.................................... ........................................ Mar30---.............................................................SpO................ ..................................... Mar31---................................................................................ .............................JO........ (next event in Apr) CURRENT FIELD ANALYSIS OVER ATLANTIC SECTOR The J-4 field has continued to be rather active near its timing line at 4.0 (meaning the J-4 field system is looping around an extensive area of the Atlantic and Europe centered on the timing number 4.0 located midway between timing lines 3 and 4. This is approximately from northeast Greenland to southwest Norway to central Germany to Greece. J-IV recently passed its transit and this accounts for the low pressure northwest of Norway. This feature has been expanding as the edge of the Mercury block retrogresses away to the west, allowing the J-4 system to operate without the restriction seen at times in Jan and Feb from the block. Similarly, J-III energy has looped around to its eclipse position in s.e. Europe while J-II energy phased in with the central UK trough yesterday, to be followed by J-I energy southern England today. More active and better aligned energy peaks come on Tuesday and Wednesday, with J-II, J-III and J-I passing transit at about 12 hour intervals. This will factor into the intensity of the system currently depicted on the models for Tuesday night. Note from the agenda that this is also the N Max lunar event, so a strong energy peak is phasing in here. The S-3 field is analyzed to be over eastern Europe near timing line 4 now, so its larger cyclonic loops are responsible for some of the NE to SW energy transfer seen with the recent northerly and its heavy snowfalls. On 28 Feb S-IV, V and VI all reached a similar angle to the energy system, shortly after eclipse (which places them at the top of these loops, the opposite effect to that seen in the J-fields). This will really help you visualize how dramatic this new theory is in its ability to explain complex and difficult atmospheric processes. The S-2 field is currently upstream over eastern North America. Compare the following two images, the first being a satellite image taken today at about 02z over eastern Canada, and then below that, a diagram showing the S-moon system as seen from above the north pole of Saturn at this time. Each element can be seen in this cyclonic rotation, and if you care to check back on the website at "weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca" you can follow the further progress of these energy systems. Some additional features will be spotted on this image, these are elements of the J-3 field over eastern North America. Compare the above to this diagram -- ................................................................................ ....................................... ................................................................................ ....................................... ................................................................................ ....................................... ................................................................................ ....................................... ................................................................................ ....................................... .........................................................x...................... ....................................... .........................................................5...................... ....................................... ......................................................................x......... ....................................... ......................................................................4......... ....................................... ................................................................................ ....................................... ..............................................x.........O....x.................. .................................... .............................................2.........Sat...1.................. .......................x............ ................................................................................ ...........................7........... ...................................................x............................ ....................................... ...................................................3............................ ....................................... ................................................................................ ....................................... ................................................................................ .....................................x.. ........................................x....................................... ....................................8... ........................................6....................................... ........................................ ................................................................................ ....................................... Although the convention is to number the moons with Roman numerals, for clarity I have used numbers here. The orbital distances are shown to scale here. The periods of these postulated energy rotations within the S-field systems (S-2 is illustrated in the satellite image) are roughly .96 days for 1, 1.38 days for 2, 1.88 days for 3, 2.74 days for 4, 4.52 days for 5 (Rhea, which often gives a strong signal), 15.96 days for 6 which is Titan, the largest of these satellites and therefore the strongest signal, 21.32 days for 7 (Hyperion), and 80 days for Iapetus. The usual appearance of these waves or energy packets can be summed up as follows, but remember that if two or three are aligned then there is often a flare-up of extra energy including enhanced thunder and lightning. For 1 (Mimas) -- fast moving cells that rarely form a pressure wave as such For 2 (Enceladus) -- similar to above, alignments with 1 in summer trigger severe weather For 3 (Tethys) -- ragged waves of about 1-2 mb which flare up when aligned with 2 For 4 (Dione) -- Well-organized waves of about 2-4 mb which flare up when aligned with 3 or 5. For 5 (Rhea) -- capable of producing separate lows, rapid motion around the loop for such pressure systems on a 500-800 km radius. Pressure gradient dependent on energy budget but in the range of 10-30 mbs For 6 (Titan) -- often found as a large swirl of cyclonic cloud that may be a well-developed low except when moving south around the loops' western sides, in these cases, the Titan energy systems often look like diffuse polar lows and in fact may be one of the causes of polar lows. In Canada, the S-VI loop usually runs through northern Quebec into Hudson Bay and advects mild air into Baffin Island. For 7 (Hyperion) -- Large open waves when at a southerly point in the large orbital loop, 5-10 mb low forms, often a severe weather producer, strong low energy source when moving north, often hard to diagnose in far north of loop because energy may be overshooting the system or mixing with arctic easterly flow, then fairly easy to spot when moving south, usually a strong cold front preceding a 2-4 day northerly. For 8 (Iapetus) -- Very weak signatures, this is not a very sizeable moon and is distant from Saturn, two reasons why its effects are lower in scale, but due to the slow movement around a large loop, fairly easy to find and monitor. Usually some kind of enhanced cloud structure that forms slight waves on fronts, rather than anything very energetic. It is an especially powerful S-field event when Rhea overtakes Titan every 6 days or so. When this is around the south to southeast portions of the loops, in other words when the mutual alignment is near transit, these storms can be very powerful in the right atmospheric context, like eastern North America. The next such event comes on 6 March around 09z when Rhea overtakes Titan just before transit. Watch for these intense lows near the bottom of the loops over southeast Europe and near Newfoundland. One thing to remember, the loops are aligned to timing lines so the transit points are not the southern extreme of the loop but more like SSE of the centre of rotation. A similar point obtains for the eclipse positions which are NNW of the centre of rotation. This point should be recalled when comparing the diagram with the satellite image.

6.5 degrees sounds about right. That seems to imply a fairly mild month once you get this arctic air mass off the premises. As Mr Data points out, anyone going for a mild month will have to overcome a monthly -1.0 anomaly implied by a prediction of normal weather from Sunday onward. I think the rest of the month will be a little milder than normal about two thirds of the time, and quite cold a few days here and there. It all averages out to 6.5. Whether you want to call that cool, near normal or mild, up to you. It's damned cold today.

In general terms, once this current cold spell ends early next week, I believe that most of the spring of 2006 will feature above-normal temperatures, although perhaps not by a great margin given the recent rise in normals being used. I think one of the key elements of the circulation will be development of high-latitude upper-level highs near northern Scandinavia and northwest Russia. This will create a situation where the flow pattern over the British Isles is often SE to S at upper levels, and where active Atlantic storms are directed more towards Iceland and then west of Svalbard (Spitsbergen). Although this flow pattern will not lock in for weeks at a time, it will be a constant re-appearing theme like the winter blocking high was. This will not be a continuation of the winter pattern in my perspective, because that blocking will rapidly break down and shift far to the west into northern Canada. This blocking will develop from a Bartlett type situation later in March. This prediction would imply some very nice spring weather for many areas and a rather dry pattern in general. However, with this set-up, you are bound to get some troughs that dig in from the west and drop to the southeast, leading to some short periods of wet and cool weather with winds that become more E to NE, then N to NW as these features develop and decay. In this pattern, you can expect some fairly strong warm spells in March and April, and summer heat at times in May. In numerical terms, I would expect each month to come in 0.5 to 1.0 degrees warmer than the established 1971-2000 CET average, which really means about 1.5-2.0 degrees warmer than longer-term averages. Rainfall will generally be near 70% of normal through the period. There are bound to be some isolated heavy rainfall events from thunderstorms by late April or May in a pattern like this. I would expect these to be concentrated on the Welsh mountains, northern Midlands and southern Pennines. Also in this kind of pattern, you could expect one or two outbreaks of much colder air when the blocking shifts further east. This will be the reason that the generally warm season does not break records, with a few days here and there that return to below normal values and bring snow to some areas in strong northerly outbreaks. I have not had time to look at specific periods to give any predictions of when these colder spells would occur (after the current one), but I observe that there has been a cold outbreak roughly every month since around 24 November, with a mean period of 32 days. If that kept up, the next one would come in the first few days of April. Before that cold spell, there could be another one in mid-March. So to sum up, the prevailing weather type warm and dry, some intervals that are cool and wet or cold and windy with local snow showers. Let's hope the warm/dry comes on the weekends, or at least your days off.

27 Feb 2006 _ 0610h First of all, just a brief review of how the astro-climatology model performed during the winter season. The main feature predicted was blocking high pressure over northern Europe, retrogressing in February and March towards Greenland. I believe this has largely verified but the implications for the forecast have been somewhat diluted by two or three periods when the northern blocking was overwhelmed by the stubborn mid-Atlantic zonal flow. The current synoptic pattern has returned to what might be called full blocking, and in fact the most active winter weather event of the season may take place in the next week. Being Canadian, I have never thought of March as a spring month but if you want to call snow falling after midnight Tuesday spring rather than winter snow, be my guest. The main thing is from a research perspective, the large-scale features were fairly similar to what the model predicted, and this is encouraging -- I am always doing more research on the second-order variations. In terms of lunar events, the blocking pattern tended to produce long periods where these were reduced to very weak events, but in the more active SW to W flow periods I was able to calibrate the model making some minor adjustments to timing line and latitude features of the model. Currently working on a spring (March to May) forecast, generally looks warmer than average. Update on the current situation from the astro-climatology perspective follows. Strong cyclogenesis off Norway today will rapidly trough SSE to around Holland by tonight. Three retrograde energy centres in the S-field reach alignment at this trough position at 00z on 28 Feb and this should be reflected in some thunder developing in various portions of this complex around 00-03z as well as strong gusty winds anywhere to the west of the trough axis, i.e. from northern Isles to near East Anglia. This system also gains energy from the new moon which occurs 28 Feb at 0032 GMT. J-field energy rotation peaks occur in succession from late 28 Feb to mid-day 01 March and this should be reflected in further thunder-snow activity in southeast England as well as a NE-SW drift in echo enhancement (while the echoes drift NW-SE) on 01 March. Because the blocking (in this theory) is associated with Mercury's retrograde motion we can expect a rapid break-down of the block for two reasons -- the block is moving rapidly westward with Mercury's perihelion in recent days, and also tending to move north of due west due to Mercury's rapidly increasing celestial latitude which maxes out around 5 March a week before the inferior conjunction on 12 March. This should all conspire to drag the centre of the blocking high across Greenland into the northern Canadian arctic. There may be another stratwarm episode around 5 March as this block will be straining the northern limits of the earth's magnetic field. From a theoretical perspective, watch for this block to continue W then SW and build a strong ridge across west-central Canada into the central US around 12-15 March. Given that the block will be subject to this rapid forcing WNW and away from Ireland and the UK, the zonal flow should begin to re-assert itself quite strongly as soon as this weekend. The current GEM depicts a number of weak boundary waves running along the Channel Thursday and Friday, followed by a much stronger system Saturday pushing into central England. These are supported in the theory by strong lunar events 3 to 5 March, culminating in the strongest event in the monthly cycle, N Max which occurs around 7 March 18z. Although the GFS has not picked up on this progression of waves, it does generally agree that there will be boundary-related snow potential followed by a strong warming event Monday and Tuesday. If there is one "unexpected" thing to watch for given this theoretical perspective, I would say look out for signs of a stronger boundary wave train and snowfall across southern UK Thursday and Friday in advance of a more active warm frontal sequence on the weekend.

I have sunny skies, only 4 C which is cooler than normal, and a very low humidity of 20% with dew points near -10 C. Since "Lady P" is travelling in eastern Canada and I wonder if somebody who reads this happens to have her e-mail contact, as I have only her PM contact, please forward this information -- very strong winds in eastern Canada have been gusting as high as 120 km/hr in Quebec, and about to hit the places where she was expecting to travel tonight. On top of Mount Washington NH, USA, winds were recorded at nearly cat-3 hurricane force, 120 mph gusting to 140 mph from the west. Although winds won't be that strong below the mountain tops, it looks like about 60-80 mph winds approaching large sections of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia tonight.

Well, wouldn't want anyone to think I'm not aware of the rather obvious fact, a theory such as mine is a tough sell given the general taboo on astrology which, as I explained in the theory sessions, I fully share. The postulated interactions are clearly in the electro-magnetic rather than gravitational realm, with the possible exception of the lunar events where the gravitational component must be something more to do with wave interference than straightforward "mass over distance squared" types of interactions. Making things more frustrating for me is the fact that this theory is a lot easier to follow from weather patterns in North America, especially near the Great Lakes and northeast United States where "timing line one" is almost always active rather than periodically blocked out like the UK has been since about mid-November. I should mention that there is a 60-page scientific paper available to anyone who wants to devote a month of their spare time to reading the evidence for the theory. Just PM me if you would like a copy. It costs me about five dollars a pop to mail them to the UK so I would need to recover those costs if I had a lot of requests. Meanwhile there is one copy already on British soil and I'll speak to that lucky man later to see if he's willing to forward his copy at what I presume would be a much cheaper rate. Perhaps he could even drop it into your mailslot one day. The scientific paper shows clear evidence of temperature signals with the same time periods as the relevant astronomical periods, so it's either cause and effect or some giant cosmic hoax. Either way, it can be used to predict weather events, I'm not fussy about whether it's real or just set up by God to have a little fun with us.

10 Feb 2006 _ 1810h SEVERE STORM ENERGY POTENTIAL With the strong possibility of intense low pressure developing on Tuesday west of Ireland and moving across Scotland Wednesday, I have been looking at the energy levels from my research model in some detail. First of all, on the subject of the persistent blocking this winter that seems to emanate on a regular basis from high pressure over Russia. This was predicted in general terms in my LRF and is theoretically based on the motion of Mercury through the SSMF complex. At this time, Mercury is 30 days from transit or "inferior conjunction" as it races to catch up to the earth. Because of the elliptical orbit of Mercury, it will soon be at its perihelion, so it is now moving faster than average. It is also rapidly rising from its latitude minimum (4 degrees below the earth's orbital plane) two weeks ago, and therefore the blocking associated with it should swell, move more WNW than the default WSW implied in the model, and on the basis of timing analogues, should be most conspicuous in terms of Iceland-Greenland high building in the next two weeks. With that in mind, in the 1947 situation, the Atlantic was more firmly blocked off than we've seen this winter, but only by a slight margin. This persistent weak blocking ridge near 5-10 W appears to be a Mars-field feature that is also drifting north in long-term harmonics. Normally, Mars fields alone cannot do much more to a flow pattern than to provide persistent anomalies that fade in and out with the passage of more energetic components in the model. This has been seen on occasion this winter, for example with the 17-20 Jan mild spell which I analyzed as a throw-off from an upstream S-field. The S-fields at present are at their forward maximum in cyclonic rotation, which is leaving a lot of energy potential over the central Atlantic and southeast Russia. At present, the J-4 field has become active after appearing blocked out (only shadow energy in terms of weak mid-level cloud bands could be detected through much of Dec and Jan). In the 1947 analogue, the J-field energy seemed to explode in the western Atlantic as we're seeing in today's prog run, but the tendency without a blocking ridge near the UK was for the energy to be forced south of Ireland and across France, hence the persistent NE flow in Feb 1947 and the accumulating snowfalls. Otherwise the circulation is quite similar, including the weather across N America this winter, but with some alteration of the pattern that I presume is caused by the 600 km northward shift in the NMP since then. Very strong energy peaks occur 13-14 Feb from the dominant drivers of the current energy regime, the lunar-geomagnetic over timing line 3 which is about to fall into a high-energy trough and fast-jet situation, and from the J-field. As J-IV transits early Monday with J-I in phase, the first of two strong lows hits the developing block as it reaches southern Iceland. The J-IV energy will continue northeast but will lift out of the surface flow and may pressure jump to the q.s. low near Svalbard. The J-I energy will be seen as a long trailing front over western Scotland and Ireland that begins to decay as warmer air rushes in from the new circulation being developed near 25W by the stronger energy peaks to come. These are associated first of all with the full moon on 13 Feb (04z) and the RC event around 22z, a combination which is always a strong energy source in my experience with hundreds of cases over timing line one (where weather never stops happening). At just the right time from a development point of view, J-II passes J-III late Monday, then catches up to J-IV, while J-I approaches and passes both J-III and J-II in turn through late Tuesday and early Wednesday. A strong inner loop energy peak then occurs around 18z Wednesday with all components directed NNE to NE from the rotation centre. This complex should push this developing storm to very strong levels over the British Isles. From the conventional meteorology perspective, this can be described as follows: strong low pressure, forming in a forced jet stream energy max at about 50N 25W, Tuesday 14th, will advance steadily east through the circulation around a deep low near 55N 15W that will fuel a series of fronts in a very strong gradient at both surface and mid-levels, resulting in potential for very strong SW to W winds across much of Ireland and southern half of the UK Tuesday into Wednesday, possibly in the range of 50 to 80 mph. Rainfall potential will be moderate since the event is highly occluded and most of the potential for warm frontal rain occurs well in advance of the high-energy phase of the complex. Rainfall is likely to be 10-20 mm for most areas but could reach 30-50 mm in parts of Wales and north central England. There is potential for 5-10 cm snow during the system passage over parts of Scotland. After this complex storm passes, it will be absorbed into the SE flow ahead of the developing blocking high over Russia. This suggests one of two possible outcomes late next week, in terms of UK-Ireland weather. Either the flow will remain intense and a second series of waves will develop at a somewhat lower latitude, or the block will swell rapidly enough that a northerly gale will develop behind the circulation, backing to NE with time, and plunging Britain into the deep freeze with real snow potential. I would not be surprised if it's option B since the energy peaks indicated for 18-23 February suggest slower development in the western Atlantic. Snow cover over Iceland could be a factor here as well, since any developing ridge would gain some potential from this. An exciting week of weather lies ahead, and there is some chance that the resulting storm could be even stronger than the current progs indicate.

Update 7 Feb 1910h The J-field energy cluster has developed to near severe levels across northern England since 1700h. Using the diagram in the previous post, the J-III energy is associated with the low centre east of the Shetlands. The J-II energy centre is in eastern Scotland. The J-I energy centre is across northeast England. J-V and GRS energy can be seen on radar as developing squall line type features near north Wales and south Lancs. The entire system should move ESE (north) through SSE (south) as it develops, although short-term motion of J-V and GRS will be more E for an hour or two. Given the upper dynamics and this very well aligned J-field energy peak, I am expecting severe weather to develop along the leading edge of the pre-frontal squall line, most likely in areas bounded by Manchester, York, Birmingham and Lincoln in about an hour to two hours. This severe cluster would be expected to move more SE then S with time due to J-field rotation. Expected risks are wind gusts to 60 mph, hail, and a slight risk of a weak tornado, as well as briefly torrential rain.

6 Feb 06 _ 0330z update The developing low and frontal system expected to impact the weather across Scotland Tuesday night and northern England Wednesday morning will see a dramatic series of J-field energy peaks, which is one reason I think this system may produce some very strong wind gusts and convective wintry precip. The system gains energy from the N Max event on 8 Feb at 12z. Leading up to this time, various elements of the J-field, which rotates clockwise, come to transit in a series that allows for progressive build-up of energy in the system. Here I am using the solar rather than terrestrial transit, placing the times about an hour or two earlier due to the angle between the Sun and the earth as seen from Jupiter. J-III transits on 7 Feb at 00z, followed by J-II at 06z, J-I at 18z, then J-V at about 2030z followed by GRS at about 2100z. This leads to a complex series of overtake-alignments just past the transit axis of the system which should be slowly crossing the UK during 7 Feb. The most energetic part of this event will be around 21z Tuesday to 06z on Wednesday 8th. At some time around 21z Tuesday I will give the map positions of these five energy centres as shown by radar and satellite. The general shape of the event should resemble the following diagram as of 8 Feb 00z. .............................................................XXX................ ............ ............................................................XXXX...(III)........ .......... ..............................................................XXX............... .............. ..................................................................XXX........... .............. ...................................................................XXX...(II)... .............. ..................................................................XXX........... ............... ...................................................................XXX..(I)..... ............... ....................................................................XXX......... ................. ....................................................................XX...(V+GRS) ............ ..................................................................XX............ .................. with the southern energy moving S.S.E. while further north the motion is E.S.E., so that the energy should fan out over the following 3-6 hours in the same general pattern as the developing cold front. Apply the diagram above to east central Scotland for a predictive map, although I will update the actual positions from satellite and radar at around 21z Tuesday.