[Dave.C]

On a slightly more serious note - what exactly is the point? I learnt a long
time ago that most of the time anything more than T+120 is a waste of time.
But like big L and others I look. Now tonight's 12Z GFS T+quite a long time
was showing something extremely cold. Six hours later the 18Z is showing
something extremely mild for the same time frame. Now I didn't and wouldn't
believe either but how can predicted solutions change so radically in six
hours? Where did the new data come from? Why doesn't the very expensive
computer apply some kind of smoothing at that range? It all seems like a
complete waste of money. A bit like most TV soaps - crap but can provide
entertainment!

Dave.

[lawrence Jenkins]

"Dave.C" wrote in message
k...
On a slightly more serious note - what exactly is the point? I learnt a
long
time ago that most of the time anything more than T+120 is a waste of
time.
But like big L and others I look. Now tonight's 12Z GFS T+quite a long
time
was showing something extremely cold. Six hours later the 18Z is showing
something extremely mild for the same time frame. Now I didn't and
wouldn't
believe either but how can predicted solutions change so radically in six
hours? Where did the new data come from? Why doesn't the very expensive
computer apply some kind of smoothing at that range? It all seems like a
complete waste of money. A bit like most TV soaps - crap but can provide
entertainment!

Dave.



Dave the GFS reminds me of Gary Linekers famous remark.
" football is a game of 22 players and in the end the Germans always win"

The GFS is a game of many fantastic very cold scenarios and in the end the
mild one wins.

Now Topkarten = German? Hmmm....

[BlueLightning]

I wouldn't remember where all the links are, it's been so long.

There is a good reason why i don't look at them. I'm done with
rollercoasters, and promises of whatever that does not arrive at long
range.

Slightly entertaining to watch the mood swings on weather forums though

I happen to think that yuletide is overhyped in every way. Including
the bloody weather !

It's a day where it's getting dark at 3:30pm, and most people stay
indoors. and a lot have been drinking. So be honest, who pays attention
to weather then anyway

[Col]

"Dave.C" wrote in message
k...
On a slightly more serious note - what exactly is the point? I learnt a long
time ago that most of the time anything more than T+120 is a waste of time.
But like big L and others I look. Now tonight's 12Z GFS T+quite a long time
was showing something extremely cold. Six hours later the 18Z is showing
something extremely mild for the same time frame. Now I didn't and wouldn't
believe either but how can predicted solutions change so radically in six
hours? Where did the new data come from? Why doesn't the very expensive
computer apply some kind of smoothing at that range? It all seems like a
complete waste of money. A bit like most TV soaps - crap but can provide
entertainment!

Anything beyond 10 days is strictly for amusement purposes.
If only to marvel at how you can get one run with a huge low sitting
on top of the country, only to replaced with a massive high on the
next run, then back to the low on the next!

Between 5 and 10 days treat with extreme caution, if the runs stabilise for
for a few days then it can be a predictor of a change in type at a timescale
beyond which the Met Office would mention.

Col
--
Bolton, Lancashire.
160m asl.

[Keith (Southend)G]

I wouldn't look much beyond 5 days ahead atm. The main thing is it
doesn't look like any westerlies are going to last for long as blocking
seems to be the theme this winter (so far), wait to see how things
shape up after Christmas.

Keith (Southend)
http://www.southendweather.net

[Adrian D. Shaw]

Felly sgrifennodd Dave.C :
It all seems like a
complete waste of money.

But if they had shown the same thing over a 24 hour period or more, you'd
begin to think that something was up. If you don't ever do the runs, you
won't spot it.

Wasn't our cold spell in November spotted a long way out by such models?

Besides, the computers are there; we need them and their software to do
other forecasts, such as T+120, which I'm sure you think have some worth.
So it's not hugely expensive to do longer runs.

Adrian
--
Adrian Shaw ais@
Adran Cyfrifiadureg, Prifysgol Cymru, aber.
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, Cymru ac.
http://users.aber.ac.uk/ais uk

[John Hall]

In article ,
Dave.C writes:
On a slightly more serious note - what exactly is the point? I learnt a long
time ago that most of the time anything more than T+120 is a waste of time.
But like big L and others I look. Now tonight's 12Z GFS T+quite a long time
was showing something extremely cold. Six hours later the 18Z is showing
something extremely mild for the same time frame. Now I didn't and wouldn't
believe either but how can predicted solutions change so radically in six
hours? Where did the new data come from? Why doesn't the very expensive
computer apply some kind of smoothing at that range? It all seems like a
complete waste of money. A bit like most TV soaps - crap but can provide
entertainment!

Don't forget that what you are seeing is just the so-called "operational
run". The mean of the ensemble of runs should show much more stability
from one run to the next and be a much better guide. (I've used "run" in
two rather different senses there, but hopefully haven't been too
confusing.)
--
John Hall

"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)

[Dave.C]

Yes, I agree entirely about up to T+120. In fact how many of us could come
up with a decent forecast for just two days ahead with a barometer,
hygrometer and thermometer and looking out of the window! We do need
modelling but luckily the wise on here sense the point where chaos starts.

Dave
"Adrian D. Shaw" wrote in message
...
Felly sgrifennodd Dave.C :
It all seems like a
complete waste of money.

But if they had shown the same thing over a 24 hour period or more, you'd
begin to think that something was up. If you don't ever do the runs, you
won't spot it.

Wasn't our cold spell in November spotted a long way out by such models?

Besides, the computers are there; we need them and their software to do
other forecasts, such as T+120, which I'm sure you think have some worth.
So it's not hugely expensive to do longer runs.

Adrian
--
Adrian Shaw ais@
Adran Cyfrifiadureg, Prifysgol Cymru, aber.
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, Cymru ac.
http://users.aber.ac.uk/ais uk

[danny \(west kent\)]

Dear oh dear .. I will keep saying this until it enters some of you guys
Coconuts.
It is pointless looking at the GFS operational. The ensembles are there for
the public to see and is the best out there right now ... it is the true
picture.
Here it is .. BOOKMARK it, ADD IT TO FAVOURITES, but do not bother looking
at the one operational run. Got it?!
http://www.wetterzentrale.de/topkarten/fsavnmgeur.html


"Dave.C" wrote in message
k...
On a slightly more serious note - what exactly is the point? I learnt a
long
time ago that most of the time anything more than T+120 is a waste of
time.
But like big L and others I look. Now tonight's 12Z GFS T+quite a long
time
was showing something extremely cold. Six hours later the 18Z is showing
something extremely mild for the same time frame. Now I didn't and
wouldn't
believe either but how can predicted solutions change so radically in six
hours? Where did the new data come from? Why doesn't the very expensive
computer apply some kind of smoothing at that range? It all seems like a
complete waste of money. A bit like most TV soaps - crap but can provide
entertainment!

Dave.

[danny \(west kent\)]

As John so correctly pointed out.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Dave.C" wrote in message
k...
On a slightly more serious note - what exactly is the point? I learnt a
long
time ago that most of the time anything more than T+120 is a waste of
time.
But like big L and others I look. Now tonight's 12Z GFS T+quite a long
time
was showing something extremely cold. Six hours later the 18Z is showing
something extremely mild for the same time frame. Now I didn't and
wouldn't
believe either but how can predicted solutions change so radically in six
hours? Where did the new data come from? Why doesn't the very expensive
computer apply some kind of smoothing at that range? It all seems like a
complete waste of money. A bit like most TV soaps - crap but can provide
entertainment!

Dave.