I do not quite know how to express this.
 

Hi. When some private companies sought cheap publicity again by
forecasting an 'Arctic' winter most of us poured a good deal of scorn on
them. And probably quite rightly so too. That was in the Autumn of
2004 though.
I wrote this winter off as mild in February 2004 and said so in this
group.
The Office though are not so easy to dismiss until their Forecast for
this month. Published in this group on 31 January 2005 it forecast cold
and snow.
Immediately the models I use (GFS,UKMO,ECMWF) began to become more
zonal, a process which has continued to today. I immediately (on 01
February) said that serious cold was an unlikely scenario, and promptly
got a minor and (I hope) good natured telling off by Will.
I am not aware of the Office specifying their methodology, so I am not
sure why they made such a wild mistake. I admit my methods are crude
and simplistic but at least I state them. (Basically similarites and
cycles). Not brilliant but at least made clear to people when I used to
issue winter forecasts.
Of course this month is not over yet, and the Office may yet be nearly
correct.
Yours with a degree of sorrow.
Paul
--
'Wisest are they that know they do not know.' Socrates.
Paul Bartlett FRMetS
www.rutnet.co.uk Go to local weather

I do not quite know how to express this.
 

Of course this month is not over yet, and the Office may yet be nearly
correct.
Yours with a degree of sorrow.

Oh dear looks like 9 mild February's on the trot then!

I only have data from 1960 but even the run of mild February's in the
1970's can't match this recent run.

Year Feb (1961-90 mean 2.8c)
1971 3.8c
1972 3.2c
1973 3.5c
1974 4.4c
1975 3.3c
1976 3.3c
1977 3.6c

1997 5.2c
1998 6.5c
1999 3.9c
2000 4.9c
2001 3.6c
2002 5.6c
2003 3.0c
2004 4.2c
2005 ???

That mean of 2.8c looks really cold now when you compare it to my
1989-2004 mean of 4.1c.
Quite amazing when you consider my 1961-90 mean temperature for March
was only 4.6c!!

Weston Coyney weather station (North Midlands) 220 metres asl
--
Graham

I do not quite know how to express this.
 

"Paul Bartlett" wrote in message
...
I wrote this winter off as mild in February 2004 and said so in this
group.

Paul, you wrote off this winter 12 months ago?

Victor

I do not quite know how to express this.
 

"Paul Bartlett" wrote in message
...
Hi. When some private companies sought cheap publicity again by
forecasting an 'Arctic' winter most of us poured a good deal of scorn on
them. And probably quite rightly so too. That was in the Autumn of 2004
though.
I wrote this winter off as mild in February 2004 and said so in this
group.
The Office though are not so easy to dismiss until their Forecast for this
month. Published in this group on 31 January 2005 it forecast cold and
snow.
Immediately the models I use (GFS,UKMO,ECMWF) began to become more zonal,
a process which has continued to today. I immediately (on 01 February)
said that serious cold was an unlikely scenario, and promptly got a minor
and (I hope) good natured telling off by Will.
I am not aware of the Office specifying their methodology, so I am not
sure why they made such a wild mistake. I admit my methods are crude and
simplistic but at least I state them. (Basically similarites and cycles).
Not brilliant but at least made clear to people when I used to issue
winter forecasts.
Of course this month is not over yet, and the Office may yet be nearly
correct.
Yours with a degree of sorrow.
Paul
--
'Wisest are they that know they do not know.' Socrates.
Paul Bartlett FRMetS
www.rutnet.co.uk Go to local weather

It was sad to hear last year that you were withdrawing from issuing
further winter forecasts.
But alas, this winter has certainly borne out your foresight.
Would you already write off the chances for a cold winter for 2005/06?
I still think it's too early to write off all winters for the foreseeable
future as being mild.
As recently as the winters of 95/96 and 2000/01, we've had cold ones north
of the border. And the South of England isn't a million miles away.
To me it seems there's a combination of climate change and a run of bad
luck, rather than just the former.
Alex

ºººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººº
Wishaw, North Lanarkshire, Scotland
N55º47'14", W3º55'15". 360ft/117m amsl
http://www.alex114.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
ºººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººº

I do not quite know how to express this.
 

Paul,

What did you give for the winter of 1996 - inc. December 1995?

D.

I do not quite know how to express this.
 

"Paul Bartlett" wrote in message
...
Hi. When some private companies sought cheap publicity again by
forecasting an 'Arctic' winter most of us poured a good deal of scorn on
them. And probably quite rightly so too. That was in the Autumn of 2004
though.
I wrote this winter off as mild in February 2004 and said so in this
group.
The Office though are not so easy to dismiss until their Forecast for this
month. Published in this group on 31 January 2005 it forecast cold and
snow.
Immediately the models I use (GFS,UKMO,ECMWF) began to become more zonal,
a process which has continued to today. I immediately (on 01 February)
said that serious cold was an unlikely scenario, and promptly got a minor
and (I hope) good natured telling off by Will.
I am not aware of the Office specifying their methodology, so I am not
sure why they made such a wild mistake. I admit my methods are crude and
simplistic but at least I state them. (Basically similarites and cycles).
Not brilliant but at least made clear to people when I used to issue
winter forecasts.
Of course this month is not over yet, and the Office may yet be nearly
correct.
Yours with a degree of sorrow.
Paul
--
'Wisest are they that know they do not know.' Socrates.
Paul Bartlett FRMetS
www.rutnet.co.uk Go to local weather



Paul you've been on the "Bishop's Finger" again, haven't you? Anyhow
regardless of that. yes you are right and as I have said many a time that
just one real potential sniff of being cuaght with their pants down and UKMO
always 'over eggs the pudding'

I do not quite know how to express this.
 

Whether it's the Met Office, or Metcheque, TWO or whatever.

They all take a lot of stick when they get things wrong.

Now i heard that during the earlier times of weather forecasting,
people expected them to get it wrong.
Today, people expect them to get it right

For their defence:
Don't shoot the messenger
Chaos Theory

Maybe it's time for people to get more informed.
People can learn to read synoptic charts, and they can learn loads from
internet websites
So that people themselves can apply a bit of common sense themselves
and not be completely
dependant on what the forecasters are saying.

For example: if the forecast on the tv or in the paper says it's going
to snow in your area tonight
but at 10pm your check the outside temperature sensor and it's reading
8c and the temp is not
dropping very fast, then it would be a fair bet to say that snow is
looking unlikely on that night

Gotta bear in mind that some tv weather forecasts that are done locally
for example are not always
presented by real meteorologists. It's a read off the auto-cue job

I do not quite know how to express this.
 

Hi Paul, is was indeed meant to be a "good natured" rebuff. I just found it
ironic that the first time for years the Met Office went for a very cold spell
that up would pop your good self and say it was a load of rubbish - effectively.
Your reasoning as far as I can see is that recent Februaries in this
pathetically mild modern era have been mild so why not this one ? Fair enough.
But the Office bases its forecasts on a combination of model ensembles, SSTs,
patterns etc. and for them to go cold it had to be something special. As you say
the models changed on the 1st Feb *after* issue (sometime before 31st when the
decision was made) , so using *hindsight* you were able to criticise.

Thanks for referring to my explanation as to why northern blocking is less
frequent nowadays (in your earlier post). We see an example now typical of this
modern era with the customary deep lows in the Norwegian Sea well to the north
and our old friend Mr Azores (I hate that guy :-)) high well entrenched further
north than normal.

I laugh now when people talk about how cold it is outside when the temperature
is 2 deg C, (one day the temperature was 7 deg C and someone remarked how bitter
it was !!!) strewth you and I have experienced many winter days when the
temperature did not rise above 0 deg C.

As for companies like Metcheque and TWO, all I can say is that they are
publicity seekers and nothing else. In time their clients will see that and go
elsewhere unless they change their ways.

Finally, I thank my lucky stars that I now live on high ground, at least up here
I have some hope of some half-decent winter weather (at the expense of summer
sun and heat of course !). There are some places on lower ground in the
southwest who have hardly had a frost yet let alone any snow !

Ah well I have my pictures from Xmas Day to cheer me up in these grim times.

Best wishes Paul, and keep up the good work,

Will.
--

" Visit Haytor meteorological office at
http://www.lyneside.demon.co.uk/Hayt...met_office.htm "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A COL BH site in East Dartmoor at Haytor, Devon 310m asl (1017 feet).

mailto:
www: http://www.lyneside.demon.co.uk

DISCLAIMER - All views and opinions expressed by myself are personal
and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Paul Bartlett" wrote in message
...
Hi. When some private companies sought cheap publicity again by
forecasting an 'Arctic' winter most of us poured a good deal of scorn on
them. And probably quite rightly so too. That was in the Autumn of
2004 though.
I wrote this winter off as mild in February 2004 and said so in this
group.
The Office though are not so easy to dismiss until their Forecast for
this month. Published in this group on 31 January 2005 it forecast cold
and snow.
Immediately the models I use (GFS,UKMO,ECMWF) began to become more
zonal, a process which has continued to today. I immediately (on 01
February) said that serious cold was an unlikely scenario, and promptly
got a minor and (I hope) good natured telling off by Will.
I am not aware of the Office specifying their methodology, so I am not
sure why they made such a wild mistake. I admit my methods are crude
and simplistic but at least I state them. (Basically similarites and
cycles). Not brilliant but at least made clear to people when I used to
issue winter forecasts.
Of course this month is not over yet, and the Office may yet be nearly
correct.
Yours with a degree of sorrow.
Paul
--
'Wisest are they that know they do not know.' Socrates.
Paul Bartlett FRMetS
www.rutnet.co.uk Go to local weather

I do not quite know how to express this.
 

In message , Will Hand
writes
Hi Paul, is was indeed meant to be a "good natured" rebuff. I just found it
ironic that the first time for years the Met Office went for a very cold spell
that up would pop your good self and say it was a load of rubbish -
effectively.
Your reasoning as far as I can see is that recent Februaries in this
pathetically mild modern era have been mild so why not this one ? Fair enough.
But the Office bases its forecasts on a combination of model ensembles, SSTs,
patterns etc. and for them to go cold it had to be something special.
As you say
the models changed on the 1st Feb *after* issue (sometime before 31st when the
decision was made) , so using *hindsight* you were able to criticise.


My purely subjective view is that medium-range numerical weather
prediction has become less reliable over the past year or two. This view
applies to all the models that I regularly monitor.

What is interesting is that several of the well-known models a few days
ago were predicting a significantly cold spell for the beginning of this
coming week. As we all know, it now seems that this will not happen.
Assuming that the models are independent of one another this might
indicate that there is some flaw in the understanding of the underlying
physics, or perhaps in the modelling of the processes. I am far from
being an expert in numerical weather prediction so I may well be talking
total rubbish. Nevertheless, my attention is captured when several
models produce similar, fairly extreme, predictions which eventually
turn out to be well wide of the mark. Only 2 or 3 days ago we were being
warned of much colder weather for this weekend. Now it seems that, at
least in this neck of the woods, temperatures this weekend will be above
the early February average.

Personally, I hope this unreliability in medium-range NWP persists. A
lot of the fascination would go out of the weather if it became reliably
predictable a week in advance :-)

Norman.
(delete "thisbit" twice to e-mail)
--
Norman Lynagh Weather Consultancy
Chalfont St Giles 85m a.s.l.
England

I do not quite know how to express this.
 

I think someone mentioned a few weeks ago, it would have been
interesting to see what the models would have predicted if we had them
back in 1946/47 and 1962/63 ?

Also, what we've seen in Italy, Spain and Algiers over the last couple
of weeks proves that given the right pressure patterns, cold and snow
is still possible.

Yes, this year has once again been dissapointing, as far as winter
snow is concerned, partly due to having our hopes raised time and time
again. Infact the models have been like someone trying to hold the end
of a long pole steady, you just can't do it. I would'nt say they have
been completely wrong, but the detail in the final positioning of
highs and lows has made a consideralbe difference to what weather we
finally got. Again, once we deviate from the normal westerly pattern,
we have problems almost on a daily basis.

I'm sure that one year in the not to distant future we will have our
turn, global warming or no global warming and that will be a shock to
many in this country.

Keith (Southend)

***********************
Weather Home & Abroad
http://www.southendweather.net

On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 10:57:12 GMT, Norman Lynagh
wrote:

In message , Will Hand
writes
Hi Paul, is was indeed meant to be a "good natured" rebuff. I just found it
ironic that the first time for years the Met Office went for a very cold spell
that up would pop your good self and say it was a load of rubbish -
effectively.
Your reasoning as far as I can see is that recent Februaries in this
pathetically mild modern era have been mild so why not this one ? Fair enough.
But the Office bases its forecasts on a combination of model ensembles, SSTs,
patterns etc. and for them to go cold it had to be something special.
As you say
the models changed on the 1st Feb *after* issue (sometime before 31st when the
decision was made) , so using *hindsight* you were able to criticise.


My purely subjective view is that medium-range numerical weather
prediction has become less reliable over the past year or two. This view
applies to all the models that I regularly monitor.

What is interesting is that several of the well-known models a few days
ago were predicting a significantly cold spell for the beginning of this
coming week. As we all know, it now seems that this will not happen.
Assuming that the models are independent of one another this might
indicate that there is some flaw in the understanding of the underlying
physics, or perhaps in the modelling of the processes. I am far from
being an expert in numerical weather prediction so I may well be talking
total rubbish. Nevertheless, my attention is captured when several
models produce similar, fairly extreme, predictions which eventually
turn out to be well wide of the mark. Only 2 or 3 days ago we were being
warned of much colder weather for this weekend. Now it seems that, at
least in this neck of the woods, temperatures this weekend will be above
the early February average.

Personally, I hope this unreliability in medium-range NWP persists. A
lot of the fascination would go out of the weather if it became reliably
predictable a week in advance :-)

Norman.
(delete "thisbit" twice to e-mail)