[Model Discussion Thread - 15th Jan]

Definite upgrade on the 12z out to 144 compared to the 0z. Tantalisingly close to an easterly at 144:

Much more amplified compared to the 0z with the azores high backing west, much less flat.

[Model Discussion Thread - 15th Jan]

Interesting ECM at 120:

Trough is digging south through Scandi, Azores high a bit further west and ridging further north compared to the 0z. More chance of heights building between the UK and Greenland. Let's see where this goes...

[Model Discussion Thread - 15th Jan]

Definitely more amplification and ridging towards Greenland on this run so far.

[Model Thread - 14th Jan - Mk2]

The UKMO looks quite good in my opinion. Sticking with its general support for the ECM.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

My heart says ECM but my moneys on the gfs

Too much consistency from the gfs really, I mean every single run shows the same thing

Also worth remembering that the so called change was initially modelled for this Sun (15th)

I'm still hopeful for Feb though

The same can be said about the ECM and it's consistency over the last several days.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

18z turns out to be flatter and less amplified than the 12z by FI (t200+).

So 18z stays solid. The uncertainty continues...

The ECM does have its support from some of the smaller models this evening, and as other have said the UKMO somewhat backs it. As long as this GFS is showing such a different evolution, we aren't going to have any degree of certainty.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

Funnily enough, by t180 the 18z is marginally better than the 12z as the azores high shifts further westwards, wheras it was still lodged across southern England on the 12z:

18z:

12z:

But that is straw clutching...

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

18z out to t132 looks even more flat than the 12z.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

ECM ensembles not quite as good as previously:

http://www.knmi.nl/exp/pluim/vijftiendaagse/index.html

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

Well I suggest you read the forecast and make up your own mind - the ECM ensembles members this morning were all cold or very cold for De Bilt, the METO did not even mention the possibility or 'low probability' - one of their favourite phrases - of cold E/NE winds from next weekend.

I have read it, and I have made up my own mind - that the Met were (at the time of writing) sitting somewhat on the fence due to the complete divergence between the ECM and its ensembles and the GFS. I cannot state with any kind of certainty that they are disregarding any model and it's ensembles - a claim which you have consistently made today with regards to the Met IGNORING the ECM ensembles.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

Absolutely, the METO mid and extended forecasts updated daily have been superb for the last couple of years after previously attracting derision - not least from myself.

They have access to what has been described as 'super' data and today they chose to ignore the ECM ensembles and support the GFS output by implication in calling a changeable period from next weekend with rain. I don't see any rain on the ECM charts from T168 or weather that would be changeable by most peoples defintion of the word.

Let us see what the 18z brings, though it hardly matters in compared to the 0z runs tomorrow. Those who ha- ve written the GFS off - I will put the humble pie in the oven for the time being.

You keep talking with absolute certainty that the Met have ditched the ECM and followed the GFS for their extended outlook - do you have any evidence to back this up other than your own personal interpretation of what was written in their outlook?

Many other people interpret their outlook as one of hedging their bets, not siding wholly with either the ECM or GFS - whereas you claim with absolute certainty that they are ignoring the ECM ensembles.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

FI, but a fantastic chart to round of the ECM:

Low to the SW, cold easterly airflow, very cold 850's. ECM is a cold run throughout and it is sticking to it's guns overall. However, there is still a lot of uncertainty between the Big 3 models, so we are yet to see whether this will verify.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

The problem is, its at T168 and 192, we've seen cold repreated at that distance for numerous runs now but thats it, it seems to stop there. It is a nice run though, I just feel we need some forward progression. Im personally frustrated at talking about cold at +t144 now, things keep getting pushed back further and further. Im not meaning to be negative, because the run is good. But something in a nicer timezone would be great.

It is sticking to the same time frame, re the onset of cold, as it has been for the last few days.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

As you were at t192:

I really don't see any big climb down from the ECM. Minor differences to the 0z, but it's still sticking with the same theme that it has done for the last few days.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

T168 is fine but its been put back...My moneys on the GFS to win this by a country mile and its 18z will confirm the ECM backtrack tonight.

ECM will continue to show T168 charts...expect it to backtrack in its T00 tmw

Regards

Regards

Please explain your reasoning if you're going to make such bold statements. The ECM is pretty much sticking to it's gun so far. I see little change out to t168 compared to the 0z.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

And t144 is on target. Atantic wedge ridging upto Greenland meeting artic High wedge, SW ejecting into SE Europe.....looking good

BFTP

Yep, ECM sticking to it's guns out to t144:

Ridging up to Greenland, amplified pattern as it was on the 0z.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

Those are for two different times, twelve hours apart, there should be notable differences.

Yep just noticed that myself. apologies.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

The ensembles at 144 hours have a similar slight upgrade to the op. http://176.31.229.22...21-1-144.png?12

6Z mean - http://176.31.229.22...-21-1-150.png?6

I'm not going to overstate this because it isn't huge but there are more positives there than there were on earlier runs.

The 6z mean you've posted is actually the 12z mean for 19th jan, 7pm.

[Model Discussion Thread - January 13th]

http://www.wetterzen...s/Rtavn2161.png

OOOOh, some sleet showers into Scotland by +216!

Come on guys, some misleading posts here, this run is a world away from the ECM!

You are failing to spot trends. That chart you posted shows more ridging into Greenland than the 06z did at the same time frame. But the GFS is still quite far off the ECM, but it's taken a step forward.

[Model Output Discussion - January 12th.]

http://www.wetterzen...s/Rtavn1381.png

The major difference between the 2 seems to be the low ejected from the US which refuses to head NE up the western side of Greenland as per ECM. Without that there is no scope for pressure rise up to southern greenland and therefore the pattern remains flat...ECM must change in line with GFS tonight...surely

Must it? Both ECM and the GFS are sticking doggedly their outputs, no one can yet say who is which is wrong and which is right.

I actually think there has been a very subtle shift in the 12z towards the UKMO and ECM. More troughing into Scandi, slightly more of a NW-SE tilt, slightly more ridging of heights towards Greenland. The pattern looks less flat. But still some way off what the ECM is showing at the same time frame.

[Model Output Discussion - January 12th.]

No but I think you are siding with the ecm but the meto are not, so IB is correct as things stand.

So are you suggesting the meto are siding with the GFS? They're on the fence in my opinion.

[Model Output Discussion - January 12th.]

Funnily enough, after a few encouraging signs, the 12z looked a lot better in FI!

A poor end to the 18z, even compared to the 12z! The high never retrogresses, the trough that started to dig into Scandi almost evaporates and the high builds back across us!

Oh well....at least there were some more encouraging signs within t168.

[Model Output Discussion - January 12th.]

We're slowly getting there. PV breaking up more quickly than it did with the 12z as the arctic high exerts more influence. PV splits and a trough moves SE into Scandi more quickly, with the UK high retrogressing towards Greenland:

Compare with 12z:

[Model Output Discussion - January 12th.]

Subtle and small differences up to 168 on the GFS.

The 18z shows the arctic high exerting more of an influence over the PV over Greenland, forcing it to break up into 2 separate 'lobes':

Compare this with the 12z for the same time where the arctic high is exerting less influence and the PV is more intact around Greenland:

The quicker the PV breaks up over Greenland, the quicker the high over the UK will retrogress or build a ridge up towards Greenland and the quicker we see a switch to NW/N winds.

A small step, but in the right direction.

[Model Output Discussion - January 12th.]

And before this forum melts down into complete ramp, we must see where this run sits within the De Bilt esembles, it could be a complete outliar for all we know

I don't think anyone is in a particularly ramping mood at the moment due to all the uncertainty between the models. Very good run from the ECM though which should help keep hopes alive that things could turn a lot colder towards the end of the month.