johnholmes

We each have our favoured way of describing how the models are portraying how the weather will pan out. Provided each poster shows the charts to back up their suggestions I see no problem. Each must accept the other method and simply move on, no need for any digs at someone for what they are using. I stick to the anomaly charts for beyond 5 days, my preference, not everyones' cup of tea but to me they give in 7 or 8 times out of 10 a decent idea of what is and what is not possible. The latest ECMWF-GFS output is fairly solid in its upper air pattern, it fits the 6-10 NOAA from last evening. They have not been entirely consistent for sure whilst NOAA has but with all 3 suggesting similar patterns and even suggesting similar anomalies the upper air pattern 6-10 possibly out to 15 days looks reasonably secure as shown in the charts below. http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/predictions/610day/500mb.php http://mp1.met.psu.edu/~fxg1/ECMWF_0z/hgtcomp.html

cloud clearing after some rain about 1h ago, a low so far of 8.1C with a SW breeze amend it fell to 7.7C at 0753

that chart is interesting with the amount of surface highish pressure across much of the chart. I wonder what the avergae one for early November looks like?

not peculiar to UK at all, see my earlier post re definition of meteorological winter in the northern hemisphere

How you can call the NOAA chart a 'pretty slack' flow is not apparent to me mate? Strong flow with anticylconic curvature across the Atlantic into a diffluent trough in the UK area. Ripe conditions for unsettled weather in that time scale with the probability of at least one severe gale in western/northern areas at least.

the WMO and Met O definitions of northern hemisphere winter are quite clear, 1 December to end of February.

very interesting Paul and thank you. Just a quick glance and it is around post 144h that really marked differences start to develop it seems, at least on this run?

another fascinating piece of research-thank you that is probably very true, 5-10 days of severe cold and dislocating snowfall for large parts of lowland Britain would certainly tend to be remembered by most of us, even if our bit of the world fared less well in terms of snowfall.

It is almost impossible to say just how accurate forecasting will become in the next 40 years. I know some of you are fairly sceptical of data that shows how much better, for instance, UK Met is than 40 years or so ago but it is true. 1974 was the era of a Fax chart totally hand produced using the 'thickness chart, again hand drawn, to try and predict where approximately the main low and high centres might be in 24 hours time. From the thickness lines one could then make a fair stab at where the active fronts might be.The actual Fax chart would then be completely filled in. In the early 70's the TV forecasters, George Cowling, Jack Scott and Bert Ford, before the days of Ian, John and Michael would then tell the tv audience what weather to expect tomorrow. A VERY far from detailed outlook might then be suggested for the 24 hours after that. Now we have fairly accurate forecasts in a fair amount of detail routinely out to 3 or 5 days ahead. The statistics do show that 5 day forecasting now is as accurate as the 24 hour one 40 years ago. Okay some of you will quibble at this but that is the overall idea of how much weather forecasts have improved in that time. I have always suggested that the next 20-40 years will see much slower improvements in short scale forecasting accuracy for the first 5 maybe even out to 10 days this century even. But they will improve. Whether accurate detail on when/where/how much rain will fall on any particular location at 5-10 days is something I am not sure about. I find it hard to see just what large improvements needed in 3 dimensional meteorology can solve the incredibly difficult job of working out the atmosphere's humidity profiles in enough detail to be able to do that. What is for sure that even when Paul hands over the baton to his successor, long may that be in coming, Net Weather and other amateur web sites will still be full of incredibly enthusiastic amateurs with I hope a sprinkling of ex professionals making such sites a hugely interesting place to chat about the weather. And as ever the amount of knowledge displayed by so many of you with no formal training will continue to surprise and delight old ex forecasters like me. I will watch it from on high, or perhaps trying to see it from below!

I doubt anyone in the meteorological world, amateur or professional is 'closed'. By the very nature of how science areas work the professional side may well be slow to adopt ideas that we as amateurs embrace sooner. Sure UK Met were much slower to adopt some ideas seen on this web site but then it seems a bit pointless when, having researched the idea they now embrace it and move forward, they still get criticised for not being detailed enough. I do remember when I first became a forecaster that UK Met with its research side into so called long term forecasting, in those days 1 month ahead, used nothing more than how that research team felt the jet stream would behave. So in 40 years or so the science has moved on a good deal. It will continue to do so, albeit slowly, too slow for many of we amateurs no doubt. But I return again to my main comment about LRF outputs. Beyond 12-15 days and no one, amateur or professional, has enough data or knowledge to do other than predict in very general terms what the weather patterns will be on a seasonal basis. To suggest they can would be dishonest. Equally those who suggest that, for example, heavy snow and severe frosts are likely giving specific dates some 10-12 weeks in advance are 'pretending' to have greater knowledge and certainty than is really available to them. But it is fun to read their wintry prospects as most on here want to read that cold not mild is the most likely output. I do not pretend to understand some of the theories propounded by some folk but do not decry their predictions unless as stated before they start to use specific dates or time intervals for many weeks even months in advance. Only by trying out new theories will science, including meteorology, advance. Where would we be without the occasional Eureka from the bath or wherever otherwise?

Yes you get the feeling looking at the various outputs when looking at the northern hemisphere range that the major trough/ridge pattern does seem to be setting up differently to how it has been for quite some time. All 3 of the anomaly charts I use daily do show some degree of meridionality developing. Whether this is being created by the +ve height anomaly that has been shown over the past 3 days on 6-10 and 8-14 outputs in the Alaska region I am not sure. One thing missing at the moment is the large +ve anomaly east of Russia/east Pacific area that was so often present during much of last winter.

welcome to Net Wx or at least to posting, glad you found the courage to post as it can be quite daunting I am sure for the first post. So long since I cannot remember mine. Enjoy all available on here be it the forum or the data and forecast areas. As you point out there are differences between the current operational model and the new one running in tandem. We all hope, as I am sure NOAA do that the newcomer is a big improvement and able to give ECMWF a run in the accuracy stakes.

The sun now coming out after rain earlier, the low was at 0820 with 12.2C

nope, my honest opinion

I hate to pour water on the enthusiasm for the OPI, at this stage before any peer related test but to expect the small sample available to be sure of a 'cold' winter is asking for jam on it really. The reality is that, IF other factors are favourable, then OPI values of -1.5 or lower do 'seem' to give a better chance of cold winters. Factual is, out of 14 winters that rate cold for at least 2 out of the 3 winter months (December to February) 6 were cold. OPI did not indicate 5 out of 14 including the very cold one of 1981/82 (mean=2.6C). I do admit to the theory being very interesting but further work does need to be done as those involved with it readily admit. Of course if this October, probably around -2 or a little below turns up a cold winter when, at the moment, none of the professional models, suggest anything like this, that really will make folk sit up!

October Weather Summary for my station Fifth warmest in 18 years and with generally very mild nights largely responsible, rainfall a bit below the 11 year average. Mean=12.8(11.3) Avge Max=15.7(14.6):- warmest day=3rd with 21.3 and coldest day=7th with 10.7C Avge Min=9.9(7.9):- coldest night=12th with 3.4 and warmest night=18th with 15.3 Rainfall=35.8mm (42.7), wettest day=13th with 7.4mm; 19 days with 0.2 mm or more and 11 with 1.0mm or more. 3(5) mornings with fog at 9am, no thunder, no frosts and no snow or hail.

welcome to another comic for Net Weather.

how many have been -2 or below? Can anyone post the years please?

re 'covered all bases' or 'vague', just what on earth do you expect anyone writing a long range forecast to do? It is impossible at 15 days to do more than suggest the weather type so how on earth at 3 months can anyone do more than suggest a weather type? Indeed anyone who does start putting dates of severe frost and heavy snowfall is, best I don't use the word, but it is as much use as a chocolate fireguard. IF any of it turns out correct it is simply luck no more.

for skiers=winter predicted to arrive, at altitude say over 4000ft, during next week. Wengen/Lauberhorn forecast as an example below http://www.meteocentrale.ch/en/europe/switzerland/weather-wengen/details/S067281/ all based on GFS output of course.

summer continues! A low of 13.4C, patchy shallow Cu and sunshine with a very light SSW breeze

I think you are correct Steve, it shows just how much folk have learnt since then.

my summary of NOAA this evening and EC-GFS is below The most interesting development is the ridge and +ve heights in the Alaska border region. This was first tentatively shown on Wednesday, has been amplified and increased since and is now starting to show on the 8-14 outlook. No real idea what effect this may have but it must have some effect I would have thought. Will keep watching it. Links to 3 main outputs below. Note that NOAA does not mirror the ridge and +ve heights over northern Europe shown on both EC and GFS. This difference has only occurred today so for now I would discount EC-GFS in that area. http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/predictions/814day/500mb.php note that EC does show a similar idea re heights and ridging on the Alaskan border. NOAA make no comment about this feature, rather surprisingly? http://mp1.met.psu.edu/~fxg1/ECMWF_12z/hgtcomp.html Nothing in any of these charts over the past few days suggests that any major cold outbreak is likely in the 15-17 day time scale, beyond that I do not pretend to know.

I was out of my depth then, I think Steve M was also part of it, no doubt Paul will find the video when he gets time.

2009 showed -3.15 I thought?