theweatheroutlook

Remove ads from site

Essan
  • Essan
  • Advanced Member Topic Starter
28 January 2015 10:31:36

I think this deserves a thread of its own.  Written from an American perspective but just as applicable to Britain ...

http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/27/7921541/weather-science-is-imperfect-but-thats-ok


 


Andy
Evesham, Worcs, Albion - 35m asl
Weather & Earth Science News 

Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job - DNA
Solar Cycles
28 January 2015 11:08:49


I think this deserves a thread of its own.  Written from an American perspective but just as applicable to Britain ...

http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/27/7921541/weather-science-is-imperfect-but-thats-ok


 



Originally Posted by: Essan 

The main issue is that we're no nearer now to producing an accurate forecast beyond +96hrs then we were some 40 years ago, no fault of the metrologist as it just shows that our weather and climate are just too dynamic to forecast beyond a certain timescale.

lanky
28 January 2015 14:28:42


The main issue is that we're no nearer now to producing an accurate forecast beyond +96hrs then we were some 40 years ago, no fault of the metrologist as it just shows that our weather and climate are just too dynamic to forecast beyond a certain timescale.


Originally Posted by: Solar Cycles 


IMO the problem isn't the models but the accuracy of the input data and the sizes of the "cubes" of atmosphere it is  possible to get data for and for the models to process in a reasonable timescale.


You can look at the ensemble sets to see that a slight variation in the input data makes a huge difference to the synoptics after just 2-3 days so it's no great surprise that the boundary of the heavy snow area in the NE USA was just a few miles out. The forecast for New England was spot on but I haven't seen much about that


I think saying accuracy beyond 96 hours is the same as it as in 1975 is pretty harsh. Just in recent memory, the snow in the Midlands and North (but nothing in the south) we had just around last Christmas was pretty well nailed about a week out before the little low pressure had even been formed. I don't think that would have been possible in 1975.


The problem is the failures to be 100% spot on every time and everywhere are much more widely commented on than the successes


 

Martin
Richmond, Surrey
Solar Cycles
28 January 2015 15:12:36


 


IMO the problem isn't the models but the accuracy of the input data and the sizes of the "cubes" of atmosphere it is  possible to get data for and for the models to process in a reasonable timescale.


You can look at the ensemble sets to see that a slight variation in the input data makes a huge difference to the synoptics after just 2-3 days so it's no great surprise that the boundary of the heavy snow area in the NE USA was just a few miles out. The forecast for New England was spot on but I haven't seen much about that


I think saying accuracy beyond 96 hours is the same as it as in 1975 is pretty harsh. Just in recent memory, the snow in the Midlands and North (but nothing in the south) we had just around last Christmas was pretty well nailed about a week out before the little low pressure had even been formed. I don't think that would have been possible in 1975.


The problem is the failures to be 100% spot on every time and everywhere are much more widely commented on than the successes


 


Originally Posted by: lanky 

It's not harsh though Lanky as these are the sort of timescales   when chaos rules, more so during a UK winter. Up until those timescales forecasting has come on leaps and bounds with our very own MetO leading the charge on this.

TomC
  • TomC
  • Advanced Member
28 January 2015 15:46:23


 


IMO the problem isn't the models but the accuracy of the input data and the sizes of the "cubes" of atmosphere it is  possible to get data for and for the models to process in a reasonable timescale.


You can look at the ensemble sets to see that a slight variation in the input data makes a huge difference to the synoptics after just 2-3 days so it's no great surprise that the boundary of the heavy snow area in the NE USA was just a few miles out. The forecast for New England was spot on but I haven't seen much about that


I think saying accuracy beyond 96 hours is the same as it as in 1975 is pretty harsh. Just in recent memory, the snow in the Midlands and North (but nothing in the south) we had just around last Christmas was pretty well nailed about a week out before the little low pressure had even been formed. I don't think that would have been possible in 1975.


The problem is the failures to be 100% spot on every time and everywhere are much more widely commented on than the successes


 


Originally Posted by: lanky 


 


That's right the models at medium and long range have improved a lot on the last 20+ years. The general synoptic pattern can now be predicted reasonably well (depending on the pattern ) out to about 14 days. The high resolution 5 km models only run out to about 36 hours, the time scale over which the weather for a particular place can be forecast. You only have to look at the time history of the verification statistics for any of the main forecast models.

Remove ads from site

Ads