I have undergraduate and graduate degrees in meteorology and developed numerical prediction models for the National Weather Service so I will chime in. The ECMWF model has been slightly ahead of the other national centers on statistics such as the 500mb anomaly coefficient but like most stories in the media that people feast on that doesn't tell the whole story. The extent of the National Weather Service's obligations is much wider than ECMWF. The National Weather Service is currently soliciting bids for a new infusion of computer power (and I am working on the procurement) so don't believe what you read about not getting upgrades - it simply isn't true.
As previously posted, the prudent thing to do is look at the National Hurricane Center's forecast as the results of many models go into that forecast. On any particular day, any model can be good or bad. Often, different model forecasts are closer to each other than the real world. And, by the way, ECMWF has made many improvements to their forecast model, both resolution, physics, and the generation of initial conditions, as have the other national centers, since 2006. 2006 is an eternity ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bagboy
I don't pretend to be any kind of a weather expert. That said, I lived in coastal SC for 12 years and here for 6 years. And as I stated earlier, I tend to pay attention to depressions and named storms. In my experience, the European model (ECMWF) has been consistently the best and most accurate storm forecast model. It was updated in 2006 with the most advanced technology available. Our National Weather Service begs for the funds to upgrade their system to no avail.
I agree, the cone of uncertainty is what we should pay attention to, but a little research will prove the European model is the standard bearer in tropical storm forecasting.
|