On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 6:04:17 PM UTC, Col wrote:
On 22/01/2016 09:32, dawlish wrote:
On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 9:22:58 PM UTC, Col wrote:
On 21/01/2016 21:02, dawlish wrote:
**It'll do what it says on the tin** 😀

Thanks for the detail.

--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl
Snow videos:
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3QvmL4UWBmHFMKWiwYm_gg

No worries Col. When my forecasts are more detailed and are correct, you don't comment anyway. People generally only comment when they are wrong, which they are, around 20% of the time, so I promise there will be future commenting opportunities! 😌

Well what do you expect me to say, who's a clever boy then for getting
it right?

Actually I don't think I normally comment when you say you are wrong,
but a do recall a couple of occasions when you claimed a correct
forecast and I effectively 'challenged' it.

But just saying 'zonal' is next to useless as it covers a pretty broad
swathe of weather types.
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl
Snow videos:
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3QvmL4UWBmHFMKWiwYm_gg

No, Just judge a forecast at outcome, right, or wrong. You know what zonal means, I think, as does everyone on here. What I don't see are the 'indications' of a SSW event that apparently have been there in the models. That's fiction, I'm afraid, unless it was the single outlier of the gfs that Will felt the need to comment upon. Models tonight show zonal at the end of the month, with an outside chance of Northerly pushing further south than is currently shown. I doubt it will, however. Much more likely that zonal will predominate.

Helpful? Probably not.