wxman57 wrote:Of course, that MJO long-range forecast is made by the same model that many have said can't be trusted even out to next week - the GFS. If you can't believe it as far as next week's general warmth in Texas, you can't believe it's MJO forecast.
You are right sir! But that is mostly true when the MJO is incoherent. Not completely true when there is a defined wave even without the models one can conclude that there is a pretty good chance it propagates in principle alone. The models are probably wrong on intensity though currently.
***
Snippet from the HPC today
IN THE WEST... A DEEP UPPER LOW IN THE LOW LATITUDES WELL SW OF
CALIFORNIA IN THE SHORT TERM WILL GRADUALLY FILL AND MOVE INTO THE
SW STATES. THE GEFS ENSEMBLE MEMBERS ARE GENERALLY QUICKER THAN
THE ECMWF MEMBERS TO MOVE THIS WEAKENING SYSTEM INLAND... WHICH
GENERALLY FIT THEIR BIASES. PREFER TO SIDE WITH THE SLOWER ECMWF
SOLUTION BASED ON BETTER VERIFICATION OF SW CLOSED LOWS WITH THE
ECMWF ENSEMBLES OVER THE GEFS ENSEMBLES. RELATIVE MEASURE OF
PREDICTABILITY VALUES PER THE GEFS MEMBERS WERE VERY LOW NEAR
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EARLY NEXT WEEK INDICATING LOW CONFIDENCE
WITHIN THE GEFS SYSTEM. ON THE CONTRARY... THE NORMALIZED STANDARD
DEVIATION AMONG THE ECMWF ENSEMBLES IMPLIED BETTER THAN AVERAGE
/30 DAYS OF RUNS/ PREDICTABILITY IN THE SAME LOCATION. THIS
SEPARATION SHOULD SLOWLY RESOLVE ITSELF OVER TIME AND GENERALLY
WOULD SEE A SHIFT IN THE GUIDANCE ONCE IT IT GETS WITHIN SEVERAL
DAYS OUT /F132 OR SO/. INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT THE 00Z CANADIAN
LIED SQUARELY IN BETWEEN THE GEFS AND ECENS MEANS. THE EFFECT
DOWNSTREAM OF A SLOWER MOVEMENT OF THE UPPER LOW EASTWARD INTO THE
SW WOULD BE LOWER HEIGHTS IN THE EAST WITH MORE NORTHERN STREAM
FLOW.
FRACASSO