Modell-iskola
Nekem leginkább az jött le, hogy a NOAA-n belül is már kezd égõ lenni(sõt ahogy olvasom, már kormányzati szintekre jutott az ügy), hogy a GFS-t oda-vissza veri az ECMWF 
Úgy érzem, következõ 1-2 évben jelentõsen fogják változtatni a GFS-t
Úgy érzem, következõ 1-2 évben jelentõsen fogják változtatni a GFS-t
Egy érdekes cikkre akadtam nemrég, ami a numerikus modellekrõl ír:
Link
""Is the GFS model really worse than the ECMWF?" OK, I went there. Forecasters amateur and professional have long-claimed the U.S. GFS model was more inaccurate than the ECWMF. The graph above proves it, and it is the basis for the business model of the ECWMFs institution, which sells the data at exorbitant prices (the GFS data is free -- a quarter of a million dollars will buy you the rights to use redistribute the ECMWF 25-day forecast, but not their weekly or monthly forecasts which go as far as a year out). Although that makes for a compelling reason to keep their secrets to themselves, they have recently started working with the U.S. government to help determine whats wrong with the GFS.
Last month, a breakthrough was discovered: When the GFS is run with the ECWMF Initialization data (see above), the accuracy improves dramatically (you can read the AMS presentation here). Unfortunately, implementing that is not as easy as youd think - outside of the cost of using the ECWMF data, it only runs twice a day, so the GFS would no longer be able to run at 06Z & 18Z (midnight & noon). I suppose one other option is that we fix our initialization data, but I havent heard much about that option taking shape. It would probably be a big undertaking. In any case, Im thrilled that we now know whats wrong with the GFS."
Ezek szerint nem is annyira a GFS modellben, hanem inkább a kezdeti feltételek elõállításában van a hiba az amerikaiaknál. Ráadásul, ha az ECM-et nem õriznék 7 pecsét alatt, ez elõbb is kiderülhetett volna. [esõ] (Bár lehet naivság azt hinni, hogy csak ezen múlott a dolog.)
Link
""Is the GFS model really worse than the ECMWF?" OK, I went there. Forecasters amateur and professional have long-claimed the U.S. GFS model was more inaccurate than the ECWMF. The graph above proves it, and it is the basis for the business model of the ECWMFs institution, which sells the data at exorbitant prices (the GFS data is free -- a quarter of a million dollars will buy you the rights to use redistribute the ECMWF 25-day forecast, but not their weekly or monthly forecasts which go as far as a year out). Although that makes for a compelling reason to keep their secrets to themselves, they have recently started working with the U.S. government to help determine whats wrong with the GFS.
Last month, a breakthrough was discovered: When the GFS is run with the ECWMF Initialization data (see above), the accuracy improves dramatically (you can read the AMS presentation here). Unfortunately, implementing that is not as easy as youd think - outside of the cost of using the ECWMF data, it only runs twice a day, so the GFS would no longer be able to run at 06Z & 18Z (midnight & noon). I suppose one other option is that we fix our initialization data, but I havent heard much about that option taking shape. It would probably be a big undertaking. In any case, Im thrilled that we now know whats wrong with the GFS."
Ezek szerint nem is annyira a GFS modellben, hanem inkább a kezdeti feltételek elõállításában van a hiba az amerikaiaknál. Ráadásul, ha az ECM-et nem õriznék 7 pecsét alatt, ez elõbb is kiderülhetett volna. [esõ] (Bár lehet naivság azt hinni, hogy csak ezen múlott a dolog.)
Havazás előrejelzés
Utolsó észlelés
Térképek
Radar
Aktuális hõmérséklet
Aktuális szél
Utolsó kép
Indul a MetNet előrejelzési verseny sorozatának 41. sorozata
MetNet | 2024-11-02 11:38
Szabályzat