"Keith Darlington" wrote in message
...
Good morning Col.
Your point has been well taken here. And I agree with what you say. The
forecast was in no way reliable. A good case for gloating on your part would
only have been fair. I was also in two minds whether to post your posting, as
arranged, or leave it. Due to spring cleaning this weekend I've only now got
back to the forecast.

Since I wouldn't have a clue as to how to even *start* preparing a forecast,
I don't really consider it appropriate for me to gloat

For some time I've been watching the results of previous forecasts and not been
pleased with the outcome. The problem was the periods of stagnation due to
blocking situations. My forecasting method worked on the continued movement of
day-to-day pressure situations. When a blocking occurred and stagnation set
in, my forecast didn't see it and continued merrily turning out day-to-day
movements. I've been working on changes in the routine for some time and came
up with two systems which (I think) have solved the blocking problem.
Naturally, I want the better of the two systems to show itself by experience.
And that's what I'm doing at the moment. Two forecasts of the daily charts
have been running since the end of last month and I hope to have the new routine
going towards the end of April.
So Col, if you don't mind, I would like to redeem anything I might have had,
by doing a new forecast with a similar type of support information. Perhaps
you could suggest a date and give me a chance to gloat.

OK this is the obvious choice, how about election day, May 5th?

I know it's not as far ahead as the other prediction but still way beyond
the point at which I would consider such a detailed forecast to be feasible.

Good luck!

Col
--
Bolton, Lancashire.
160m asl.
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co.uk
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co....rPictures.html

Crazy horse!

I see your point, but it is not as easy as that. Weather situations pass
by in a forward motion, and indeed NWP relies 100% on this forward
movement. I do have historical charts which solve a good part of the
forecast quality-problem for individual dates, but I do like a long run
of forecasts to see if there is any fading at some point. I suppose it
will have to take its time to the end.

schrieb:

Why not try running the program in reverse, and see if you can identify
some of the weather events that have occurred recently ;-)

Crazy horse!

I see your point, but it is not as easy as that. Weather situations pass
by in a forward motion, and indeed NWP relies 100% on this forward
movement. I do have historical charts which solve a good part of the
forecast quality-problem for individual dates, but I do like a long run
of forecasts to see if there is any fading at some point. I suppose it
will have to take its time to the end.

schrieb:

Why not try running the program in reverse, and see if you can identify
some of the weather events that have occurred recently ;-)

Crazy horse!

I see your point, but it is not as easy as that. Weather situations pass
by in a forward motion, and indeed NWP relies 100% on this forward
movement. I do have historical charts which solve a good part of the
forecast quality-problem for individual dates, but I do like a long run
of forecasts to see if there is any fading at some point. I suppose it
will have to take its time to the end.

schrieb:

Why not try running the program in reverse, and see if you can identify
some of the weather events that have occurred recently ;-)

Crazy horse!

I see your point, but it is not as easy as that. Weather situations pass
by in a forward motion, and indeed NWP relies 100% on this forward
movement. I do have historical charts which solve a good part of the
forecast quality-problem for individual dates, but I do like a long run
of forecasts to see if there is any fading at some point. I suppose it
will have to take its time to the end.

schrieb:

Why not try running the program in reverse, and see if you can identify
some of the weather events that have occurred recently ;-)

Titanic sank on April 14-15, 1912, en route to New York City from
Southampton, Eng., during its maiden voyage. The vessel sank with a loss
of about 1,500 lives at a point about 400 miles (640 km) south of
Newfoundland.

As the good captain said about running things in reverse:

Glug.. glug.... glug.


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Titanic sank on April 14-15, 1912, en route to New York City from
Southampton, Eng., during its maiden voyage. The vessel sank with a loss
of about 1,500 lives at a point about 400 miles (640 km) south of
Newfoundland.

As the good captain said about running things in reverse:

Glug.. glug.... glug.


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Titanic sank on April 14-15, 1912, en route to New York City from
Southampton, Eng., during its maiden voyage. The vessel sank with a loss
of about 1,500 lives at a point about 400 miles (640 km) south of
Newfoundland.

As the good captain said about running things in reverse:

Glug.. glug.... glug.


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Titanic sank on April 14-15, 1912, en route to New York City from
Southampton, Eng., during its maiden voyage. The vessel sank with a loss
of about 1,500 lives at a point about 400 miles (640 km) south of
Newfoundland.

As the good captain said about running things in reverse:

Glug.. glug.... glug.


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG