Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Further Cold Spell In February? 0-180 Charts Only

1235»

Comments

  • #202
    Su Campu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,279 ✭✭✭Su Campu


    darkman2 wrote: »
    I don't accept that. You have to use a bit of intuition aswell. I saw that chart and my eyes lit up like a Christmas tree (well, not really but you know what I mean) whereas you go straight to the thickness values which are not all that relevant in that situation. I don't really want to go back over this because it's probably not going to happen now anyway but where it a situation where a cold front was moving south with cold air rushing in behind then there is more validity to your obsession with thickness values. In the case highlighted it's a warm front moving into a cold air mass. There is always an element of compensation for some criteria that may be marginal in a situation like that. That's where I differ with you on that. But we won't know because it probably ain't gonna happen now.

    But you didn't say it was marginal, you said a certain classic snow event if it came off, and said there were sub-528 over the northern half of the country when in fact there were not. And you still don't accept that.

    Anyway, this is hijacking the thread.


  • #203
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    That was fun but the 18z has arrived. :D

    Model shows a waft of -8 over the country Sunday but not for the first time this winter I must ask...where is that pesky Moisture when the cold is around???? Not that different from the 12z I must say.

    Over to Darkman.

    gfs-2-108.png?18

    gfs-1-108.png?18


  • #204
    Nabber
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,855 ✭✭✭Nabber


    A case of snow today gone tomorrow.
    Febuary has been great for potential that never was. This one is still 120hrs away, any one have the stats on accuracy this winter on cold for ireland on the models past 72hrs? 120 has been all but consistently wrong on predicting cold for Ireland


    GFS 120hrs
    192794.bmp


  • #205
    lucernarian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    Su Campu wrote: »
    Regarding 850-1000 thicknesses, 1300 m is not enough. We'd need below 1290 m. And again I warn against using the hirlam thickness charts on weatheronline when it comes nearer the time as they are grossly incorrect (as are the theta-e values).
    Although they were empirical observations, 130dm is the crucial number when I've looked at potential rain/snow situations. E.g. the December 2009 event. I can accept there's differences in the airmasses involved but certainly, 130dm has brought snow in the past. Whether it sticks to the ground or not is another matter:p

    I'm not sure if the hirlam comment was for me but I don't really use that model. NAE and GFS are my preferred ones for short term modelling.


Advertisement