Model output discussion - another cold spell on the horizon?

[Updated_Weather]

Just now, Kasim Awan said:

We saw the exact same happen around Xmas. It's a strong possibility. 

> Statement of a model bias, or any other statement interpreting the NWP like this does not imply conclusivity. Some I think get carried away in that regard following statements of interpretations on here. 

What is the verification stats of the ECM currently? Isn’t it worse than GFS at the moment?

[pureasthedriven]

2 minutes ago, Anthony Burden said:

Very uninspiring ECM 12z tonight with that scenario not a lot to look 

forward to.Let’s hope it’s on the road with a dead end and no where to go.

 

Very much in tune with Exeter’s afternoon update. Let’s hope both are wide of the mark. Couldn’t give a toss about an average or below average CET month if it’s endless days of murk and cold rain. 

[Froze were the Days]

13 minutes ago, Updated_Weather said:

Tweet from Matt H regarding the two latest runs including ECM - he has said he thinks GFS has this more right and ECM will flip... eventually! Bold statement!

Coming from a non-bias Met man...doesn't mean a lot, but considering we are suppose to be looking at a black hole in the face regarding mslp near Greenland.

Edited January 10, 2021 by Froze were the Days

[Notty]

T+96

ECM - 

GFS - 

GFS(P) - 

Not too disimilar at four days then they go off in all directions thereafter  

Roll on Thursday and we might have a better idea what is coming down the road ...

 

[bluearmy]

Just now, Updated_Weather said:

What is the verification stats of the ECM currently? Isn’t it worse than GFS at the moment?

I don’t think you can use those verification  stats to prove anything .... other than the cfs is more useless than the other models ...

[Kasim Awan]

3 minutes ago, Tim Bland said:

Re point 2 - have you seen the verification stats for the GFS & GFSp ?   Have you viewed the 12z GFSp?

Yes, I can see that there is a cluster supporting a somewhat failed amplification. I'm keeping options for both solutions open. It's a very difficult period of forecasting for several reasons, however the model bias & trends in the large scale (last 4-6 days) have bee positive, plus the model bias I've mentioned.

[Fozfoster]

26 minutes ago, Tim Bland said:

Snow Thursday right down the centre of the UK...

Tim love these snow depth charts you post , keeps us all going but if they came only close to the mark there would be a shortage of shovels in the UK now  . 

[Scott Ingham]

5 minutes ago, Updated_Weather said:

Tweet from Matt H regarding the two latest runs including ECM - he has said he thinks GFS has this more right and ECM will flip... eventually! Bold statement!

Not in this situatiom

Gfs for Greenland heights

Ecm for split energy

I would say based on this and ensemble support the odds are 70/30 on a gfs solution but 30 % is still a percent and could come true

[Kasim Awan]

1 minute ago, bluearmy said:

I don’t think you can use those verification  stats to prove anything .... other than the cfs is more useless than the other models ...

Verification stats are not everything yes - would be interesting to see and compare verification stats when dealing with Scandi high evolutions, Greenland high evolutions, split jet energy evolutions etc etc

[Allseasons-Si]

Even the mighty NAVGEM is going for it @Mark wheeler

[Updated_Weather]

Seems quite a few reliable weather folk

Matt H & John H expect ECM to be an outlier on its ensembles

[Vikos]

What if EC op is an outlier and has no support from its EPS/Scenarios?

[Battleground Snow]

John Hammond thinks it will be an outlier too, let's hope so

[Kasim Awan]

Just now, Scott Ingham said:

Not in this situatiom

Gfs for Greenland heights

Ecm for split energy

I would say based on this and ensemble support the odds are 70/30 on a gfs solution but 30 % is still a percent and could come true

Yes, and using this argument then roughly 1 in 3 times the ECM will be right with it's option of a partially failed / limited Greenland amplification. Difficult to say whether we'll fit that statistic this time!?

[Scott Ingham]

Just now, Kasim Awan said:

Verification stats are not everything yes - would be interesting to see and compare verification stats when dealing with Scandi high evolutions, Greenland high evolutions, split jet energy evolutions etc etc

THIS

verification isnt black and white.

Different models handle different weather patterns bettet than others

[feb1991blizzard]

4 minutes ago, bluearmy said:

The ec op was in cluster three earlier and it looks like it’s still in that same cluster at day 10 on the 12z. We want to make sure that cluster hasn’t grown ! 

the WAA off the esb at day 6/7 is the issue.  Last time we had this, gfs was right and ecm was wrong. But gfs was rock solid, run after run and that’s not the case this time ........

But the GEFS are, and the eps aren't terrible, was that the case last time Nick?

[That ECM]

1 hour ago, That ECM said:

Has there ever been such an interesting, fascinating time to watch output? The volatility run to run is incredible. 18, 10 and to a certain extent 2013 were reasonably signposted. This is on a different level.
 

 

And frustrating.

[Matt H]

8 minutes ago, Updated_Weather said:

Tweet from Matt H regarding the two latest runs including ECM - he has said he thinks GFS has this more right and ECM will flip... eventually! Bold statement!

Yep, John Hammond also in agreement with Matt. Look forward to seeing the ensembles later.

[Scott Ingham]

1 minute ago, Kasim Awan said:

Yes, and using this argument then roughly 1 in 3 times the ECM will be right with it's option of a partially failed / limited Greenland amplification. Difficult to say whether we'll fit that statistic this time!?

Exactly and statistically because nothing is certain nobody should get too high or too low

On to the next runs to see if we have any more agreement

[IDO]

The ecm op has reversed the flow of the tPV over the Asia/Siberia region from about d5-6:

All the features, Arctic high and the lows would feed the tPv as the gfs mean suggests, from Asia to Scandi, but on this run it moves against the flow! This flattens our region.

Would we expect that from an SSWE, or is that just a ghost in the machine? 

[Daniel*]

Not good EPS out to T150 and looking more like OP flatter compare difference with earlier.

> 

 

[nick sussex]

11 minutes ago, I remember Atlantic 252 said:

I don't know your elevation etc, but this not good? snow or rain?

I’m at around 1,200 feet here . My moaning about the ECM is in relation to the U.K. It might get confusing but all my posts are only in relation to cold and snow chances for the UK unless I specifically mention my area here in France.

As a former long suffering UK coldie I always cheer on good cold Synoptics there . I’m very lucky with the Pyrenees close by so am much more laid back about what happens down here . 

 

[Battleground Snow]

1 minute ago, Daniel* said:

Not good EPS out to T150 and looking more like OP flatter compare difference with earlier.

> 

 

What's upstream like?  That's where we need view

[ICE COLD]

Tell ya what this winter has had drama after drama after drama . It’s been great being here but we need the result we all crave , theres gonna be some very unhappy faces if the mean and ens don’t look like this from this morning .

[bluearmy]

Op v mean at day 6 off the esb.  The mean looks a little less progressive