Since 1998 or so, when I first got into this hobby?

(Ensembles. It's what they're for. If the op isn't well supported, as per the 0z ECM in this case, then you note that fact.)

And that is what I just don't get , if the OP has little or no support from the rest why on earth would anyone say , the OP's have a better handle on it ? 

 

---

And as basing comments on one op run (and ignoring the ensembles) is in fashion, have a look at the GFS(P), which is in effect an op run too. It shows the UK bathed in -8s by 168, with -10s soon to follow, plus that North Sea trough as shown in the ensemble mean.

http://www.meteociel.fr/modeles/gfse_cartes.php?ech=168&code=0&mode=1&runpara=1

 

yes, the ensemble for Aberdeen show how far out the 06z gfs run was this morning. Just unbelievable or  trend setter but we will know in due course. Some very odd runs in the ops so frustrating indeed 

Martin

---

 

But OPs are going to be far better at handling little features like this than ensemble members.

Can you tell me why ? ...........genuine question 

---

What's the betting, for the gfs & ecm 12z op's to go the cold route, just as the ens flip milder!!

All that compute & AI, and the weather for a week off is still pretty much best guess, unless it's a flat zonal pattern.

It's a good job I don't take it too seriously otherwise I would loose my sanity.

 

Can you tell me why ? ...........genuine question 

Higher resolution I would guess. However normally they would see some support.

---

FWIW I also use sigma or SD on the ensembles to see where the greatest deviations are. If interest at 204hrs the greatest spread is on the strength and position of high pressure in the Atlantic, with much tighter agreement on the AH and euro low.

---

 

No, when they are entirely unsupported by all other evidence would be a better answer.

I fully understand why, given past experiences, it is sensible not to dismiss a milder option. It’s more justifiable to somewhat dismiss an unsupported option.

I would love the 06z GFS op run to come to fruition. That doesn’t make me think it is more likely.

Ever seen photos of the 1908 dump in this NE corner? Well, if memory serves correctly it came about off a similar set-up as shown 8-9 days out on the op run. As you say unlikely to come off given the uncertainty of where exactly the cold air is going to settle, but food for thought.

 

Ever seen photos of the 1908 dump in this NE corner? Well, if memory serves correctly it came about off a similar set-up as shown 8-9 days out on the op run. As you say unlikely to come off given the uncertainty of where exactly the cold air is going to settle, but food for thought.

https://twitter.com/74frankfurt/status/968858869702250496/photo/1 

http://www.silvercityvault.org.uk/index.php?a=ZoomItem&i=97082&WINID=1612092850743 

---

 

Almost all posts are IMBY, Nick as you've just proved ! It's only natural as we know our own region best. Anyway when was the last time Durham went three years without a flake of snow? 

Believe it or not, my intention was to write "here" - that was a genuine typo: I was being unashamedly IMBY!

---

 

Higher resolution I would guess. However normally they would see some support.

How big is the difference between the Control and OP?

---

 

https://twitter.com/74frankfurt/status/968858869702250496/photo/1 

http://www.silvercityvault.org.uk/index.php?a=ZoomItem&i=97082&WINID=1612092850743 

we can but dream! Or just head to Gartly moor!

 

How big is the difference between the Control and OP?

I’m not sure of the exact difference in resolution but I know there is one (others will probably know). I believe the starting input data are the same.

---

 

But OPs are going to be far better at handling little features like this than ensemble members.

Maybe, but in fact that LP isn't 'a little feature' is it? It's the remnants of the complex LP that is forming now and drifts into the British Isles later in the week. Therefore the ensemble mean is indeed a better represention of the likely placement of the centre.

---

Always a worry when the ECM doesn't play ball. Even if its ensembles are ok, it still leaves a nagging doubt that its assumed high resolution op is picking up something the members aren't. GEM is good and a model that's been performing well recently. GFS for me, has always been Vyvyan (young ones) of the group. In isolation, the op briefly flirts with cold before jumping back up again. A sign similar to ECM finding something not right? Maybe. The Para has been consistently showing large northern blocks in various places, its supposed to replace the op in the future so you'd consider it to be of a better standard.

With all the information at hand you'd think cold was favoured, but until the creases get ironed out I'm not overly confident. I'm going to continue to read what the pros take on it is and go from there.

I haven't had time to go through all posts but I don't get why the ECM 00z operational isn't going for anything cold -I mean zero cold - maybe one cooler day but how come? Seems to go very mild by 240z with exceptionally warm southerly's? 

ECM @ 240z@ - Long fetch southerly and uppers of +8c

GEM@ 240z: Long fetch northerly with uppers down to -10c

---

The GFS  / GEFS resolution has been discussed many times before.  

The current GEFS is running with the same FV3 core as the latest GFS. IME it is now an excellent model and comparable to ECM ENS. 

With the inclusion of the FV3 dynamical core, GEFS resolution has increased from approximately 33km to 25km, and the number of individual forecasts input into the ensemble has increased from 21 to 31. These changes will allow models to run at a higher resolution of detail and provide better accuracy. Additional upgrades include extending the forecast length from 16 to 35 days, along with improvements to the physics. GEFS attempts to quantify the amount of uncertainty in a forecast by varying the known inputs to multiple forecasts, thereby generating a range of possible outcomes.

https://www.noaa.gov/media-release/noaa-upgrades-global-ensemble-forecast-system

 

Edit: Also I'm not sure why so many people use the CFS for the month ahead when GEFS35 is now available. The latter has been performing VERY well this winter and has been offering a high degree of consistency. 

 

---

The GFS  / GEFS resolution has been discussed many times before.  

The current GEFS is running with the same FV3 core as the latest GFS. IME it is now an excellent model and comparable to ECM ENS. 

With the inclusion of the FV3 dynamical core, GEFS resolution has increased from approximately 33km to 25km, and the number of individual forecasts input into the ensemble has increased from 21 to 31. These changes will allow models to run at a higher resolution of detail and provide better accuracy. Additional upgrades include extending the forecast length from 16 to 35 days, along with improvements to the physics. GEFS attempts to quantify the amount of uncertainty in a forecast by varying the known inputs to multiple forecasts, thereby generating a range of possible outcomes.

https://www.noaa.gov/media-release/noaa-upgrades-global-ensemble-forecast-system

 

Yes, I couldn’t remember the resolutions and knew someone else would before I found it. 

---

 

Yes, I couldn’t remember the resolutions and knew someone else would before I found it. 

No probs. I'm sure you'll get another chance to find it in a day or two. 

 

---

 

I’m not sure of the exact difference in resolution but I know there is one (others will probably know). I believe the starting input data are the same.

Ok, thanks Michael and Brian 

---

 

No probs. I'm sure you'll get another chance to find it in a day or two. 

 

---

 

I’m not sure of the exact difference in resolution but I know there is one (others will probably know). I believe the starting input data are the same.

The starting point is indeed the same. The Control and the GEFS are run at a lower resolution - it used to have horizontal grids 4x larger.

---