Norman wrote:
Graham wrote:


Was the beast form the east just another fantasy

I fancy Monday to Thursday dry, sunny and very cold a messy breakdown on
Friday with perhaps some more sleet (may as well make it 5 sleet days this
month) then back to the wet and windy stuff by next weekend.

Ah well the beast retreats yet again without as much as a fight LOL


Graham

What is interesting is that the two main medium range models (ECMWF and GFS)
homed in on the easterly blast at around the same time and persisted with it
for a couple of days then discarded it at about the same time. Bearing in mind
that these two models run completely independent of one another (I think!) that
seems a remarkable coincidence. Perhaps they were both led astray by some
inaccuracies in the analysis fields though those would have had to persist for
a couple of days to produce the observed results. Or perhaps the is a common
flaw in the physics of the two models. It's well outside of my field of
expertise but I find it hard to believe that both models threw a wobbly for a
couple of days at the same time without there being a link.

-----------------------------------------
I've thought for some time that the computers are bigger, can do more
number crunching, but nothing has led me to believe the atmospheric
modelling from the data has advanced much. In fact could the additional
power be over complicating things?