It seems to me that whereas a few years back these setups would be a
'dead cert' now it's touch and go right up to the wire.

-----------------------
What does seem odd is that, especially with the GFS model, always , almost
without exception, it downgrades the degree of cold between T+144 and T+0.
I've yet to see a colder or the same outcome than the one first predicted
even at the high resolution. It is in fact such a regular occurence that
cold weather enthusiasts program that into their expectations. Begs the
question why the model isn't adapted to get it right .

Dave

"Dave Cornwell" wrote in
. uk:

It is in fact such a
regular occurence that cold weather enthusiasts program that into
their expectations. Begs the question why the model isn't adapted to
get it right .

I'm not necessarily sure it's something in the model that can be altered
during it's progress - more alter the output prior to dissemination to the
public.

Richard

"Richard Dixon" wrote in message
9...
"Dave Cornwell" wrote in
. uk:

It is in fact such a
regular occurence that cold weather enthusiasts program that into
their expectations. Begs the question why the model isn't adapted to
get it right .

I'm not necessarily sure it's something in the model that can be altered
during it's progress - more alter the output prior to dissemination to the
public.

Richard
--------------------
If a certain set of data consistently produces an outcome that rarely occurs
and the objective is to produce an accurate outcome, I would have thought
that some sort of "tweak" would be considered. I don't really understand the
exact process though so not sure why it happens so often.
Dave