caneman wrote:tolakram wrote:Some of the model verification graphs are free, like this one from Weatherbell. Unfortunately this is 500mb skill, not skill at predicting tropical cyclones.
http://models.weatherbell.com/verf/ecmwf_gfs_nh_f120.png
A google search of CMC Model Verification will quickly take you to the Canadian weather site with model verification graphics.
The following graphs, based on the root mean square error (RMSE) of the 500 hPa geopotential height forecasts against the North American radiosonde observation network, give an idea of how well a numerical model forecasts the overall synoptic pattern of the atmosphere over North America.
https://weather.gc.ca/verification/monthly_ts_e.html
http://i.imgur.com/6HExuEs.png
Lower numbers are better, so you can see the euro and the UKMET both doing quite well while the GFS and CMC are more tangled but generally the GFS does better. This is 5 day performance which is what is typically scored. Going to the one day performance ...
http://i.imgur.com/ImwCgEC.png
CMC is doing quite well at 24 hours, tangled in with bot the Euro and UKMET. The GFS not doing quite so well but the range here is quite small.
Another way to look at this is via an error growth chart, which gives a slightly better visual of accuracy, unfortunately the latest month available is June.
http://i.imgur.com/ntR5z9j.png
The last study I know of comparing models and tropical cyclone prediction performance had the GFS ahead of the Euro due to the fact that the Euro regularly misses tropical cyclogenesis while the GFS tends to produce more false storms. If both models show something then usually it's a clear sign something will develop, unfortunately the Euro has been doing it's fair share of false spinups this year.
Finally, someone has done the research. I wouldnt have known where to look. Thank you. I suspected this to be true as I see hits and misses and flip flops from all models. All models have their strengths and weaknesses. The King Euro crap is tiresome, boorish and flat out childish and in many cases unfounded. It keeps me from visiting here regularly. Maybe a mod can post this as a sticky? That way if someone decided to make statements without fact, they can be deleted and directed to an area for accuracy. Thanks again.
I know you hate that. But there are already way too many stickies. You have to scroll have a page to get to relevant topics imho.
